Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0
On the first day of his second term, President Trump suspended all entries at the U.S. Southern Border for asylum seekers. Since then, the Administration has implemented sweeping restrictions that shut America’s doors to people fleeing persecution. These policies violate federal law, erode constitutionally protected due process, exacerbate the asylum backlog, and give those seeking safety an increasingly narrow path to protection.
Left unchecked by Congress, these policies will have dire consequences for both asylum seekers and the integrity of our legal system. Asylum seekers—especially those without access to counsel—are at grave risk of being returned to harm.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The Administration can maintain order at U.S. borders and effectively manage migration without sacrificing fairness and adherence to the law. With more trained asylum officers, a streamlined legal process, legal representation for asylum seekers, and more effective coordination between relevant agencies, the U.S. can establish a safe, orderly, and humane asylum system.
Browse the Featured Issue: Asylum Under Trump 2.0 collection
Judge Us by our Treatment of Child Refugees
Over the Labor Day weekend, I read the personal memoir of a World War II child refugee. A Long Way Home, by Bob Golan was published in 2005, although it was written from the contemporaneous notes of a 12 year boy whose family was driven from their home in Poland at the outbreak of World […]
Welcoming the Children to New York
On a hot, dusty summer day in the South Bronx, a small crowd gathered at a local church and community center, spilling into the street to escape the muggy air inside. By 8:30 AM, an hour and a half before our second Youth Assistance Fair of the summer was set to start, over a hundred […]
What Does a Week in Artesia Look Like?
AILA Member Megan Kludt headed down to Artesia to donate her time and knowledge, seeking to help the women and children jailed and facing an expedited deportation process. Here, in her own words, are a few snapshots from her days so far, for the full blog, see: http://immigrationartesia.blogspot.com
Avoid the NOID! How to Prevent Asylum Office NOIDs
Practice pointer on how to prevent Notices of Intent to Deny (NOIDs) issued by the USCIS asylum offices, based on a review of example NOIDs provided by the membership. Special thanks to the AILA Asylum and Refugee Committee.
CA7 Says Knowledge Exception Argument to Material Support Bar Was Not Preserved
The court found petitioner failed to preserve his strong argument under §212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI) that the BIA erred by assuming that “knowledge of kidnapping and violence is per se sufficient to preclude one from invoking the knowledge exception.” (Khan v. Holder, 9/4/14)
CA1 Upholds Asylum Denial for Somali Petitioner
The court denied the petition for review, upholding the IJ and BIA’s adverse credibility determination for the Somali petitioner seeking asylum who used various, inconsistent bases. (Ahmed v. Holder, 9/2/14)
DOJ OIL September 2014 Litigation Bulletin
The DOJ OIL Immigration Litigation Bulletin for September 2014, with articles on the BIA’s decision in Matter of A-R-C-G- and the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Rendon v. Holder, as well as circuit court decisions for September 2014 and monthly topical parentheticals.
CA6 Vacates and Remands, Finds Petitioner Timely Retracted His False Asylum Testimony
The court vacated the BIA’s decision that the petitioner’s voluntary confession of false asylum testimony was not retracted because it was untimely, and remanded for the BIA to determine his eligibility for cancellation of removal. (Ruiz v. Holder, 8/29/14)
CA8 Denies Petitions to Review Asylum Denial for Burmese Petitioner
The court held the BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying the Burmese petitioner’s motion to remand and motion to reopen, citing numerous inconsistencies in her asylum claim relating to harm allegedly suffered in the Burmese army and in Thailand. (Lee v. Holder, 8/28/14)
CA9 Finds Indian Petitioner Eligible for Asylum Based on His Imputed Political Opinion
The court found the petitioner eligible for asylum and withholding, holding that mixed-motive analysis applies to cases governed by the REAL ID Act and that the petitioner’s imputed political opinion was at least one central reason the Indian police targeted him. (Singh v. Holder, 8/26/14)
BIA Terminates Removal Proceedings for Respondent from Bosnia-Herzegovina
Unpublished BIA decision finding that respondent’s willful misrepresentations of his military service in the Army of the Republika Srpska were not material, as they could not have influenced the decision to admit him as a refugee and grant his adjustment application. Courtesy of Paul Djurisic.
BIA Says Guatemalan Victim of Domestic Violence Is a Member of a Particular Social Group
The BIA held depending on specific facts, “married women in Guatemala who are unable to leave their relationship” can constitute a cognizable particular social group for asylum or withholding purposes. AILA submitted an amicus brief on this case. Matter of A-R-C-G-, 26 I&N Dec. 388 (BIA 2014)
CA9 Holds Substantial Evidence Does Not Support BIA’s Adverse Credibility Determination
The court found the BIA’s adverse credibility determination was flawed when it relied on petitioner’s omission until cross-examination of details concerning third parties, which were not contradictory to his earlier testimony or application materials. (Lai v. Holder, 8/25/14, amended 11/4/14)
CA8 Says Salvadoran Petitioner Did Not Identify a Particular Social Group
The court agreed with the BIA that “men in El Salvador who fear gang violence because of a former gang member who is also their family member” was not a particular social group because it did not satisfy the visibility requirement. (Fuentes v. Holder, 8/22/14)
CA8 Vacates and Remands, Asks BIA to Clarify Frivolous Asylum Determination
The court found the BIA did not adequately explain its frivolous asylum determination relating to the fabrication of the preparer’s name and remanded with instructions to reconsider and clarify its decision. (Limbeya v. Holder, 8/22/14)
BIA on Terminating Deferral of Removal Under CAT
The BIA concluded that collateral estoppel does not prevent the IJ from reevaluating the alien’s credibility by comparing testimony when granted deferral of removal to testimony given at the termination hearing under 8 CFR §1208.17(d)(3). Matter of C-C-I-, 26 I&N Dec. 375 (BIA 2014)
CA11 Says Petitioner Failed to Exhaust Argument that She Did Not Commit an Aggravated Felony
The court held the petitioner failed to exhaust her only ground for her expedited removal that her conviction for battery was not an aggravated felony and the BIA did not err when it rejected her withholding and CAT claims relating to sexual orientation. (Malu v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 8/19/14)
CA2 Says Chinese Petitioner’s Pro-Democracy Activism Constitutes Changed Circumstances
The court remanded, finding the IJ erred when holding that because petitioner’s pro-democracy political opinion reflected views he had when he emigrated, the activism did not constitute changed circumstances that excused untimeliness pursuant to INA §208 (a)(2)(D). (Lin v. Holder, 8/19/14)
CA9 Grants CAT Relief to Vietnamese Petitioner yet Finds Conviction Is a CIMT
The court granted the petition with respect to the CAT claim, yet held the BIA did not err in determining that petitioner’s conviction of misusing a passport to facilitate an act of international terrorism was a categorical crime involving moral turpitude (CIMT). (Nguyen v. Holder, 8/14/14)
CA2 Says Written Warning on Asylum Application Satisfies Notice Requirement Under INA §208 (d)(4)(A)
The court held the BIA did not err in denying the adjustment application, as the petitioner received adequate notice of the consequences of filing a frivolous asylum claim through the written warning on the application, and the IJ did not need to warn him. (Niang v. Holder, 8/13/14)
CA2 Asks BIA for Redetermination of Particular Social Group Analysis for Albanian Women
The court vacated and remanded in consideration of In re M-E-V-G- and In re W-G-R-, which clarified the BIA’s interpretation of “particular social group,” in order to determine whether young Albanian women is a cognizable social group. (Paloka v. Holder, 8/7/14)
CA1 Declines to Review Withholding Denial for Guatemalan Petitioner
The court declined to review the withholding of removal denial, holding that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s findings that the petitioner did not establish past persecution or a clear probability of future persecution by the Guatemalan guerillas. (Bedoya v. Holder, 7/30/14)
CA3 Declines to Review Withholding Denial for Mexican Gay Male with HIV
In a nonprecedential decision, the court found that substantial evidence supported the BIA’s conclusion that the petitioner failed to present adequate evidence linking harm from his uncle and the police officer in Mexico to his sexual orientation. (Gutierrez v. Att'y Gen., 8/12/14)
Video: On The Ground In Artesia
AILA members volunteering in Artesia share their on the ground experiences.
CA8 Affirms Cancellation and Withholding Denials for Petitioner from The Gambia
The court held the BIA did not err in finding petitioner ineligible for cancellation, based on false marriage testimony in the adjustment interview, and also did not err in rejecting her withholding claim as a mother of daughters at risk for FGM in Gambia. (Goswell-Renner v. Holder, 8/7/14)