Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Lawsuits

by

ai-generated-8489042_1280New details have emerged relating to a pending lawsuit before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas known as  Texas et. al. vs. DHS et. al., Case No. 6:24-cv-00306 (E.D. Tex.), which is currently blocking the approval of applications filed under the Biden administration’s parole in place program.

Litigation Updates

On August 26th eleven individual intervening parties who stood to benefit from the parole in place program filed a motion to intervene in the Texas lawsuit.

Thereafter, on September 3rd the Texas district court judge denied the motion to intervene. As a result, the intervening parties filed an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit claiming the lower court’s denial of the motion to intervene was unjustified.

On September 11th  the Fifth Circuit Court ordered the lower court to freeze all proceedings until they have had the opportunity to hear the intervenors appeal.

A hearing date of October 10th has been set and the court has said that no further action can be taken in the lower court until that date.

The appellate court’s order states as follows, “Meaning no criticism of the district court’s recognition of the need for prompt resolution, this panel must have an opportunity to consider the merits briefs, scheduled to be received by September 16, and to hear argument on the appeal of the denial of intervention. Accordingly, we administratively STAY proceedings in the district court pending a decision on the merits or other order of this court. The stay issued by the district court will remain in effect pending further order of this court.”

What does this mean for parole in place applications?

In the meantime, USCIS can continue accepting and processing parole in place applications under the Keeping Families Together program, but it cannot approve cases until further notice.

Continue reading

by

judgment-8442199_1280We have new developments to report relating to pending litigation for parole in place applications in the case Texas et. al. vs. DHS et. al., Case No. 6:24-cv-00306 (E.D. Tex.).

Yesterday evening, federal Judge J. Campbell Barker of the Eastern District Court of Texas issued a court order extending his previous administrative stay on parole in place (PIP) approvals for an additional 14-day period expiring on September 23, 2024.

The judge’s initial stay (of August 26th), which was set to expire on September 9, 2024, will now continue through September 23rd.

What does this mean for parole in place applications?

While the administrative stay is in place, those eligible for parole in place under the Keeping Families Together program can continue to submit the online Form I-131F, Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

USCIS will also continue to issue biometrics appointment notices to capture applicant biometrics during the administrative stay.

However, USCIS is prohibited from approving applications received for as long as the administrative stay is in place (currently until September 23rd)

This is because the Texas lawsuit challenges the legality of the Keeping Families Together program and approvals must be paused while the parties in the case make their arguments before the court, and a final ruling is made.

What’s next in the Texas lawsuit?

The court has ordered an accelerated hearing where motions for preliminary and permanent relief will be heard on September 18th.  The accelerated proceedings in this case mean that the judge could make a decision on the merits of the case in the coming months. However, despite the outcome in this case appeals are likely to be filed in district court.

Can the judge extend the administrative stay past September 23rd?

Yes. The judge may decide to extend the administrative stay past September 23rd in the future if it finds that good cause exists to do so throughout the litigation process.

Continue reading

by

smile-5621670_1280-1On Tuesday June 4, 2024, President Joe Biden’s rumored executive action on immigration was unveiled by the White House.

Among its sweeping provisions, effective Wednesday June 5, 2024, the order will limit the number of migrants who can claim asylum at ports of entry along the southern U.S. border, while there are high levels of illegal crossings at the southern border.

Specifically, migrants seeking asylum will be turned away at the border when the seven-day average of daily border crossings exceeds 2,500 daily encounters between ports of entry. Since the number of encounters currently exceeds this figure, the order will go into effect immediately.

This means that starting June 5th U.S. border officials will stop conducting credible fear interviews for asylum claims and will instead quickly expel migrants seeking asylum at the border.

Migrants who are expelled under the order will receive a minimum five-year bar on reentry to the United States and potentially be subject to criminal prosecution.

The government will only accept asylum claims at the border if 14 days have passed, and the number of daily encounters has declined to 1,500 migrants or less at U.S. ports of entry.

Apart from unaccompanied minors, the order applies to all noncitizens, encountered along the southern border, irrespective of their country of origin.

What does the order do?

This executive order will temporarily suspend the entry of noncitizens who cross the border without prior authorization, or a legal basis to do so, including those claiming asylum at the border during periods of high border crossings.

Can migrants still claim asylum through scheduled appointments on the Customs and Border Protection’s One App?

Yes. The executive order does not prohibit migrants from using the CBP One app to make appointments at the border where they are able to claim asylum. The executive order only prohibits “unscheduled” asylum claims at the border.

Continue reading

by

The Supus-supreme-court-building-2225766_1280reme Court of the United States has issued an important but temporary victory to the Biden administration. On Monday, the court temporarily halted the enforcement of a controversial immigration law from the state of Texas known as SB4, which would authorize state law enforcement officials to arrest and detain those suspected of entering the country illegally, while imposing harsh criminal penalties.

The administrative hold issued by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito blocks the law from taking effect in the state of Texas until March 13. This temporary pause will give the court enough time to review and respond to court proceedings initiated by the Biden administration. Alito has ordered Texas to respond to the government’s lawsuit by March 11.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar has argued that SB4 violates the law by placing the authority to admit and remove noncitizens on state law enforcement when these matters fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government, and not individual states.

Continue reading

by

win-gaa7fe7f08_1920

In this blog post we share amazing news with our readers regarding the settlement of a recent class-action lawsuit filed against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. The agreement reached under the settlement will immediately allow for automatic renewals of employment authorization for: L-2 spouses of L-1 nonimmigrants and qualifying H-4 dependent spouses who (a) properly file an application to renew their H-4 based employment authorization document before expiration (b) have an unexpired Form I-94 showing their status as an H-4 nonimmigrant and (c) who will continue to have H-4 status beyond the expiration date of their employment authorization document. Shergill v. Mayorkas, No. 21-1296 (W.D. Wash.)

What does this new settlement mean?

 Effective immediately, the Shergill settlement will make it a lot easier for L-2 and H-4 dependent spouses to continue working in the United States without having to apply for a renewal of their employment authorization and without interruptions to their employment. As many are already aware, the processing of I-765 employment authorization applications is currently subject to extreme delays due to the pandemic and burdens on USCIS offices. This new settlement will prevent L-2 and certain H-4 dependent spouses from being stuck in these backlogs. Not to mention L-2 and certain H-4 spouses will no longer have to pay the required $410 filing fee to renew their employment authorization. Following this new settlement, L-2 spouses and certain H-4 spouses will be able to work just by having their valid H-4 and L-2 visas, and they will not need to file any separate applications nor need an employment authorization card (work permit) to work in the United States.

Guidelines for Dependent Spouses under the Settlement Agreement

Under the terms of the Shergill settlement agreement, as it relates to L-2 dependent spouses, USCIS will now interpret 8 CFR § 274a.13(d) to recognize that employment authorization for such spouses is now linked (incident) to their visa status. USCIS will also allow up to 180-day automatic employment authorization extensions when the applicant has already had the H-4 or L-2 status extension granted either through USCIS or through travel.

Automatic Renewals of Employment Authorization for applications that already have valid H-4 status

  • Pursuant to the settlement agreement, USCIS is now interpreting the law so that H-4 nonimmigrants who have timely filed their I-765 EAD renewal applications and continue to have H-4 status beyond the expiration date of their EAD, qualify for the automatic extension based on their (c)(26) EAD.
  • This automatic extension will terminate on the earlier of: the end date of the H-4 status, adjudication of the EAD renewal application, or 180 days from the previous card’s expiration date.

Continue reading