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
How the “Internal Enemy” Label Forces Venezuelans to Flee Their Country
AILA Law Journal authors Emercio José Aponte and Andrea Paola Aponte share more about their article in which they discuss how the current authoritarian regime in Venezuela has been violating citizens' human rights and what that means for claims of asylum.
CA5 Remands Asylum Claim Where BIA Failed to Consider Possible Application of TVPRA to Petitioner’s Case
The court held that the BIA erred in denying petitioner’s motion to reopen without resolving whether the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), which would invalidate the existing removal order, applied to the petitioner’s case. (Velasquez-Castillo v. Garland, 1/17/24)
Practice Alert: Notes from USCIS Listening Sessions on Issues Relating to Israel and Palestine
AILA summary of key takeaways from two listening sessions USCIS conducted on January 17, 2024, on a range of issues relating to the Middle East conflict.
Practice Pointer: BIA Addresses the “Unable or Unwilling” Standard in Matter of C-G-T-
AILA’s Asylum and Refugee Committee provides a practice pointer on Matter of C-G-T-, a 2023 BIA precedent decision in which the BIA reiterated the “unable or unwilling” standard as the correct legal standard for demonstrating eligibility for asylum.
EOIR Announces 2024 Model Hearing Program
EOIR will continue its Model Hearing Program and host a series of events nationwide to provide substantive law and practical training on human trafficking, juveniles, adjustment of status, and special immigrant juvenile status. Notice includes in-person and hybrid events for January 2024.
New England AILA Members Joined Community and Government in Helping Newcomers
AILA New England Chapter Chair Robin Nice describes the recent successful set of EAD clinics hosted in Massachusetts, where state and federal agencies worked together with local partners and volunteers “to address immigration issues in a cooperative, common sense, humane manner.“
Resources Related to Case Challenging Credible Fear Interview and Bond Hearing Delays (Padilla v. ICE)
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington issued an order granting the parties’ stipulated motion to dismiss Count IV of the complaint and granting final approval of the class action settlement for the Credible Fear Class. (Padilla v. ICE, 1/5/24)
Digging Into One Key Aspect of Refugee Designations
AILA Law Journal author Betsy Fisher shares more about her recent article published in the journal which reflects on the disappointing results she has seen in one kind of humanitarian program: Priority-2 (or P-2) refugee resettlement, and seeks to identify ways to best leverage P-2 resettlement.
CA5 Upholds Asylum Denial as to Salvadoran Petitioner Who Feared Threats from Her Alleged Rapist and MS-13 Gang Members (Withdrawn)
The court held that the petitioner had failed to show that the Salvadoran government would be unable or unwilling to control her persecutors, finding that the BIA adequately considered evidence of gang involvement in her claims. (Mejia-Alvarenga v. Garland, 1/3/24, withdrawn 3/8/24)
CA7 Upholds Adverse Credibility Finding Based on Inconsistencies Regarding Severity of Attack Against Petitioner in India
The court held that the BIA permissibly inferred that information missing from a physician’s report regarding petitioner’s attack by members of one of India’s political parties showed that the petitioner exaggerated the seriousness of his injuries at the hearing. (Singh v. Garland, 1/2/24)
CA9 Holds That Good-Cause Standard Governs BIA’s Denial of Petitioner’s Motion to Remand to Apply for Asylum
Granting the petition for review, the court found that the BIA abused its discretion in failing to properly evaluate whether the petitioner had established good cause for missing the filing deadline imposed by the IJ. (Alcarez-Rodriguez v. Garland, 12/28/23)
CA1 Finds BIA Erred by Concluding That Guatemalan Petitioner’s PSG Was Circular
The court held that the BIA erred by concluding that the Guatemalan petitioner’s particular social group (PSG) was circular, and also erred by failing to consider whether being a landowning farmer was one central reason for the persecution he experienced. (Espinoza-Ochoa v. Garland, 12/27/23)
Advancing Gender and Sex Equality in Asylum Protections
AILA Law Journal Author Elaine Wood shares a bit about her article entitled “Persecution Taxonomy: Adding Sex and Gender as Protected Grounds for Asylum“ in which she argues persuasively that revising the applicable language is now imperative to address contemporary concerns.
Policy Brief: Border Solutions Are Attainable, But Proposals Under Consideration Fall Far Short
America urgently needs solutions to manage unprecedented migration levels arriving at the U.S. southern border. With volumes exceeding capacity, there is a greater imperative for the country to exercise control over its borders and process migrants more rapidly, efficiently, and fairly.
An Article I Immigration Court
Mimi Tsankov, President of the NAIJ, shares brief highlights of her article on the need for an independent Article I immigration court, featured in the Fall 2023 edition of the AILA Law Journal.
Practice Alert: I-765s in the (c)(8) Category Wrongly Denied with 150 Days on the Asylum Clock
Members have reported USCIS denying (c)(8) I-765s because the applicant has not accrued the required 180 days for employment authorization, rather than holding them, even when the applications are timely filed after the applicant’s asylum application has been pending the requisite 150 days.
AILA Urges Focus on Actual Solutions for Border Security and Management
As negotiators reportedly consider significant changes to America’s asylum system as well as a nationwide expansion of expedited removal, AILA urges the Biden Administration to turn away from destructive proposals and stand by its original funding request.
CA6 Vacates Asylum Denial as to Guatemalan Petitioner Who Was Abused by Her Husband
The court held that the BIA had failed to consider possible mixed motives relating to the petitioner’s first two proposed social groups, and thus failed to fully consider whether she could prove that her persecution had a nexus to a protected ground. (Sebastian-Sebastian v. Garland, 12/8/23)
AILA Law Journal, Vol. 5, Number 2, October 2023
The October 2023 edition of the AILA Law Journal is now available.
Practice Alert: Potential Relief for Asylum Seekers Turned Back at POEs Prior to July 16, 2019
If you have clients who were improperly turned back after the permanent injunction in Al Otro Lado, please reach out ASAP to determine whether they may be eligible to request reopening or reconsideration of asylum claims and, where necessary, return to the United States to pursue their cases.
Policy Brief: What Would Be the Impact of Capping Asylum
AILA provides a policy brief on the idea of limiting the number of people who could receive asylum, which has been proposed as a way to reduce or limit migration at the U.S. southern border. A cap intended to block or limit asylum seekers is not an effective solution to managing border migration.
CA5 Says BIA Erred in Upholding Withholding of Removal and CAT Denial to Salvadoran Petitioner
The court held that the BIA misapplied prevailing case law, disregarded crucial evidence, and failed to adequately support its decisions in upholding the IJ’s denial of the petitioner’s withholding of removal and Convention Against Torture (CAT) claims. (Argueta-Hernandez v. Garland, 12/5/23)
Congress Should Focus Supplemental Funding Bill on Real Border Solutions
AILA and the Council share a statement urging Congress to focus supplemental funding discussions on solutions that would improve border processing as well as reduce backlogs elsewhere in the immigration system.
BIA Finds Family Membership Incidental to Other Ultimate Goal Is Not One Central Reason for Harm in Asylum Analysis
The BIA held that, for purposes of establishing asylum eligibility, if a persecutor is targeting members of a family as a means of achieving some other goal, family membership is incidental to that goal and not one central reason for the harm. Matter of M–R–M–S–, 28 I&N Dec. 757 (BIA 2023)
AILA Submits Statement to Congress Opposes Proposals Restricting Asylum and Parole in the Supplemental
With federal funding discussions underway on a supplemental budget deal, AILA calls upon lawmakers to reject dangerous immigration proposals that would do grave, irreparable harm to the U.S. asylum system while creating chaos in efforts to manage the border.