In Avendano-Hernandez v. Lynch, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled today that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) made an error of law in denying protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) to a transgender woman from Mexico who had been sexually assaulted and raped by members of the Mexican police and military. Apparently, an immigration judge and the BIA got it so wrong that it took an appeal to the Court of Appeals (a step below the Supreme Court) to reach the right decision.
Since last summer, when the Obama Administration hastily resurrected the concept of family detention to jail refugee women and children seeking asylum, thousands of women and children have languished in inhumane conditions, have been refused meaningful access to counsel and interpreters, have been hurled through bond proceedings with predetermined results, and have been sent directly and expeditiously back to the danger from which they fled – all in violation of U.S.
Franklin Crespo is our Client of the Month for June 2015. BR attorney Dree Collopy has been representing Mr. Crespo and his family since 2009. At that time, Mr. Crespo’s adjustment of status and extreme hardship waiver under section 212(h) of the Immigration and Nationality Act had been denied by the Immigration Judge, his appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals had been dismissed, and Mr. Crespo had been detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
After a years-long battle, a client of ours was recently sworn in as a United States citizen after his naturalization victory. Why is this significant? Because in 20 years of practicing immigration law, it’s difficult to recall the government being so fiercely opposed to naturalizing someone. Over a decade ago, our client – a U.S. lawful permanent resident – was engaged in serious criminal activity. In 2003, he was arrested and pled guilty in federal court to possession with intent to distribute 5 kilograms of cocaine and 1,000 kilograms of marijuana.
Yesterday, in a 7-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that an immigrant who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge for concealing pills in his sock cannot be deported for the offense. Simply stated, Moones Mellouli faced the possibility of deportation for possession of a sock. Mellouli, who came to the U.S. on a student visa from Tunisia in 2004, graduated with honors from U.S.
The Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in a 2-1 decision refused the Obama administration’s request for an emergency stay of Judge Andrew Hanen’s injunction against the President’s deferred action (DAPA and DACA+). This action leaves the stay in place, meaning that the administration remains unable to proceed with DAPA and DACA relief to millions of immigrants. Two judges of the 5th Circuit found that the Obama administration was “unlikely to succeed” in establishing that Texas and the other 25 states lack a sufficient injury, or “standing,” to challenge the President’s actions in creating DAPA and DACA+.
The Board of Immigration Appeals has finally given in to the overwhelming weight of the opinions of nine circuit courts of appeals (there are only 12 of them) and accepted the proposition that a permanent resident who received his residence through adjustment of status and was later convicted of an aggravated felony may seek a waiver of inadmissibility under Immigration & Nationality Act sec. 212(h). In Matter of J-H-J-, 26 I.&N.
Oral arguments in federal court generate lots of light, but very little heat. One thing every appellate lawyer knows is not to predict the outcome of a case based upon oral arguments. The better legal reporters also understand that. Unfortunately, that maxim was not in display in the reporting surrounding the argument on April 17 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit over the government’s motion to lift Judge Andrew Hanen’s DAPA and DACA injunction.
A victory for the Obama administration in a case related to DACA in the 5th Circuit should give hope to millions waiting for deferred action of DAPA and expanded DACA. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a decision in an immigration case today. No, not that case, but close. The Fifth Circuit ruled in another case challenging deferred action called Crane v.
It seems that nothing is going to happen on the Texas judge’s DAPA and DACA injunction until next month at the earliest. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a series of orders yesterday that gave an indication of how the court intends to proceed with the Department of Justice’s appeal of Judge Andrew Hanen’s DAPA and DACA injunction, Most importantly, the Court of Appeals set oral arguments on the Department of Justice’s motion to lift the injunction (“stay the stay”) for April 17.