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
Sign-On Letter to Senate Judiciary Committee on the Secure and Protect Act of 2019
On 7/31/19, AILA and other organizations signed on to a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee urging the Committee to vote no to the harmful measures of S. 1494, the Secure and Protect Act of 2019.
How to Shrink the USCIS Backlog in One Minute or Less
USCIS leadership recently testified about a backlog reduction plan which, AILA Policy Counsel Jason Boyd argues, would simply move the goalposts and not solve the backlog at all, writing “We deserve a USCIS that rises to its processing time goals, not one that runs from them.“
CA8 Finds IJ’s Adverse Credibility Finding Was Not Supported by Cogent Reasons
The court granted the petition for review and remanded for a new credibility determination, holding that the IJ’s adverse credibility finding with regard to the Chinese Christian petitioner was not supported by cogent reasons for disbelief. (Tian v. Barr, 7/30/19)
Attorney General Overrules Portion of Matter of L-E-A- Relating to Particular Social Group
The Attorney General found that the BIA improperly recognized the respondent’s father’s immediate family as a particular social group. Decision notes that all cases inconsistent with this opinion are abrogated. Matter of L-E-A-, 27 I&N Dec. 581 (A.G. 2019)
AILA: AG’s Decision Ignores Precedent and Is the Latest Attempt to Restrict Asylum
AG Barr issued a decision in Matter of L-E-A- impacting how family membership could be considered in asylum proceedings. AILA Second VP Jeremy McKinney noted: “Courts, like the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, have voluminous case law directly contradicting the Attorney General’s decision.”
TRAC Finds Access to Attorneys Difficult for Those Required to Remain in Mexico
TRAC found that very few asylum seekers forced to remain in Mexico under the Migration Protection Protocols (MPP) have been able to secure representation for their immigration court proceedings. Of the total of 1,155 MPP cases decided, only 14 (just 1.2 percent) were represented.
Federal Court Allows Challenge to Trump Administration’s Asylum “Turnback Policy” to Move Forward
A district court rejected the government’s attempt to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s allegedly unlawful “Turnback Policy” for asylum seekers who present themselves at ports of entry along the U.S.-Mexico border. (Al Otro Lado, Inc. v. McAleenan, 7/29/19)
CA8 Finds Petitioner’s Conviction for Unlawful Possession of a Firearm in Minnesota Was a Particularly Serious Crime
The court found that the IJ and BIA did not err in concluding that the petitioner’s conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm in Minnesota was a particularly serious crime and that the petitioner was thus ineligible for withholding of removal. (Marambo v. Barr, 7/26/19)
USCIS Acting Director Instructs Asylum Officers to Consider “Possibility” Instead of “Reasonableness” of Asylum Seekers’ Relocation Within Home Countr
USCIS instructed asylum officers to consider whether it would have been “possible” for asylum seekers to relocate within their countries to avoid persecution rather than flee to the United States, even though the appropriate legal standard is whether such relocation would have been “reasonable.”
It Is Time to Stop Detaining Asylum Seekers
Allegra Love urges an end to the detention of asylum seekers, highlighting the immense harm of detention via two videos writing, “It is time we act, so the story of our country is the bravery and resilience of people like Alpha and Luz, and not the brutality of detention that further harms them.R
CA1 Upholds BIA’s Refusal to Reopen Removal Proceedings of Lesbian Ugandan Petitioner
The court upheld the BIA’s denial of the lesbian Ugandan petitioner’s motion to reopen, finding that the motion demonstrated a persistence of negative conditions for members of the LGBT community in Uganda, rather than a material change in those conditions. (Nantume v. Barr, 7/23/19)
CA8 Upholds Finding That Petitioner Who Supported the MFDC Group in Senegal Was Ineligible for Adjustment of Status
The court held that the Sengalese petitioner had failed to meet his burden of proving that MFDC was not a terrorist organization, or alternatively, that he should not reasonably have known that the MFDC was a terrorist organization when he supported it. (N’Diaye v. Barr, 7/23/19)
CA3 Upholds Denial of Cancellation of Removal to Indian Businessman Who Had Resided in the United States Since 1998
The court upheld the BIA’s conclusion that petitioner, who had entered the U.S. in 1998 from India on a visitor’s visa, was ineligible for cancellation of removal, because he could not show that the requisite hardship would result from his removal. (Radiowala v. Att’y Gen., 7/22/19)
CA7 Upholds Denial of Asylum to Guatemalan Petitioner Who Received Extortion Threats from Gangs
The court upheld the BIA and IJ’s finding that there was a lack of a nexus between the extortion threats and gang harassment that the petitioner had experienced in Guatemala and any protected ground for relief. (Hernandez-Garcia, et al. v. Barr, 7/22/19)
U.S. and Guatemala Issue Joint Statement on Efforts to Reduce Border Migration
The U.S. and Guatemala issued a statement on initiatives aimed at reducing border migration, including expanding capacity of “migrant reception” and an agreement to develop a Foreign Labor Recruiter program for Guatemalan H-2A workers.
CA7 Upholds Asylum Denial to Mexican Petitioner Who Feared Persecution as the Mother of a Cartel Member’s Child
Where the Mexican petitioner claimed she feared persecution as the mother of a cartel member’s child, the court held there was nothing in the record that required BIA to conclude that she had experienced past persecution or reasonably feared future persecution. (N.Y.C.C. v. Barr, 7/19/19)
What Would Fix the Immigration Courts? Well, Independence is a Start!
AILA Secretary Kelli Stump highlights recent efforts by AILA and its partners to urge Congress to establish an Article I immigration court system to ensure that “when cases are as serious as they are, when lies and livelihoods are on the line“ justice is served and people get a fair day in cou
When Will the U.S. Government Stop Detaining and Abusing Migrant Children?
In this blog post, AILA member Ola Mohamed draws attention to the conditions migrant children have been subjected to and encourages a “grassroots movement, a sustained outcry for the abolishment“ of the detention of migrant children.
CA9 Grants Mexican Petitioner’s Untimely Motion to Reopen Due to Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
The court held that the BIA erred in finding that the petitioner had failed to show prejudice from his prior attorney’s ineffective assistance with respect to deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and relief under former INA §212(c). (Flores v. Barr, 7/18/19)
CA1 Finds BIA Erred in Concluding Nepali Petitioner No Longer Had Well-Founded Fear of Persecution
The court granted in part the petition for review, finding that substantial evidence did not support the BIA’s decision to deny the Nepali petitioner’s asylum application, because the government did not rebut the presumption of a well-founded fear of persecution. (Dahal v. Barr, 7/18/19)
Practice Pointer: Special Issues in Asylum Seeker and Asylee EAD Applications
This practice pointer provides tips to help attorneys understand and navigate certain requirements that may arise when preparing asylum seeker or asylee EAD applications.
District Court Denies Motion for Temporary Restraining Order Against Rule Barring Asylum Eligibility for Many Migrants
The CAIR Coalition and RAICES filed a complaint in district court seeking relief from the 2019 third-country transit ban. (CAIR Coalition, et al. v. Trump, et al., 7/16/19)
DHS and DOJ Interim Final Rule Barring from Asylum Eligibility Individuals Who Transit Through a Third Country Without Seeking Protection
DHS and DOJ interim final rule establishing a mandatory bar to asylum eligibility for persons who transit through a third country and enter or attempt to enter the southern U.S. border without having applied for protection in a third country. The rule is effective 7/16/19. (84 FR 33829, 7/16/19)
DHS and DOJ Issue Joint Third-Country Asylum Interim Final Rule
DHS and DOJ issued a joint Interim Final Rule revising 8 CFR § 208.13(c) and 8 CFR § 1208.13(c) to add a new bar to eligibility for asylum for an individual who enters or attempts to enter the United States across the southern border.
EOIR Releases Guidelines Regarding New Regulations Governing Asylum and Protection Claims
EOIR issued guidelines that established its policy and procedures for adjudicating asylum claims in the context of migrants who enter or attempt to enter the U.S. across the southern land border after failing to apply for protection while in a third country. This guidance is effective 7/16/19.