Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Lawsuits

by

america-41776_1280It has been quite a whirlwind in the two months since President Trump has taken office.

From mass deportations to interrogations at U.S. ports of entry, the White House has delivered on their campaign promises to limit immigration by any means necessary.

Now we are learning that immigration enforcement is about to get even tougher for those in removal proceedings.

The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is now cooperating with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to help officers verify the names and residential addresses of undocumented immigrants they are trying to deport from the United States.

Three government officials recently spoke with New York Times reporters revealing that the tax agency will be helping facilitate Trump’s mass deportations.

This shift in policy is extremely concerning given that thousands of undocumented immigrants provide information about where they are living when filing tax returns with the IRS using individual taxpayer identification numbers (ITINs) instead of Social Security numbers.

Initially, the IRS had refused Trump’s requests to hand over the residential addresses of undocumented immigrants in removal proceedings because federal law prohibits improper disclosure.

Continue reading

by

ai-generated-8775943_1280We knew it was coming. The Trump administration is preparing to roll out a new ban on travel to the United States, restricting the entry of citizens from certain countries for which vetting and screening warrants a partial or full suspension of admission to the United States. This travel restriction is rumored to take place by executive action next week.

If this sounds like déjà vu, that’s because it is.

During his first term in office, in 2017 Trump signed Executive Order 13769 entitled, “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” which banned nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States for a period of 90 days.

This executive order caused international chaos, due to several key provisions:

  • It suspended the entry of immigrants and non-immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries including Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen – for 90 days
  • The order indefinitely suspended the entry of Syrian refugees
  • It reduced the number of refugees to be admitted to the United States in 2017 to 50,000
  • The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) was suspended for 120 days

Implementation of this executive order led to controversy and numerous legal challenges:

  • More than 700 travelers were detained, and up to 60,000 visas were “provisionally revoked”
  • Protests and chaos erupted at airports across the country
  • Multiple lawsuits were filed in federal court challenging its constitutionality

Continue reading

by

international-2693195_1280-1The first 30 days of the Trump administration have involved dismantling Biden-era immigration protections including ending Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Venezuelans, and now Haitians.

Before leaving office, the former Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas had extended Temporary Protected Status (TPS) protections for Haiti for an 18-month period (until February 3, 2026).

Acting under the Trump administration, today DHS Secretary Kristi Noem partially vacated the Mayorkas extension reducing it from 18 months to 12 months.

As a result, Haiti’s TPS extension and new designation will end on August 3, 2025, instead of February 3, 2026, unless extended by the Trump administration.

First-time registration for Haitians seeking TPS protections will remain in effect until August 3, 2025, instead of February 3, 2026.

DHS said in a statement that by taking action it was making good on its promise to “rescind [Biden] policies that were magnets for illegal immigration,” highlighting that TPS is meant to provide only “temporary” immigration status to certain nationals from countries facing ongoing armed conflict, environmental disasters, and other extraordinary conditions.

The statement went on to say, “for decades the TPS system has been exploited and abused. For example, Haiti has been designated for TPS since 2010. The data shows each extension of the country’s TPS designation allowed more Haitian nationals, even those who entered the U.S. illegally, to qualify for legal protected status.”

Continue reading

by

library-of-congress-jPN_oglAjOU-unsplash-scaledIt has been less than 24 hours since President Donald Trump has taken office, and he has already signed into law a flurry of executive orders directly impacting immigration.

More than a dozen of these executive orders dismantle Biden era immigration policies, and usher in restrictive policies for visa seekers, asylum applicants, and undocumented immigrants.

The swift issuance of these executive orders signals a tough political climate ahead for immigration, and what is sure to be a continuance of the Trump administration’s hardline stance on immigration.

While some of these executive orders may face legal challenges, here is a summary of all the executive orders affecting immigration issued on day one of Trump’s presidency.

Executive Order: President Trump’s America First Priorities

President Trump’s first executive order entitled “President Trump’s America First Priorities,” states the following as top priorities of his administration, which touch upon immigration.

  • President Trump promises to take “bold action” to secure the U.S. border and protect communities by calling on the U.S. Armed Forces and National Guard to assist with border security
  • At the President’s direction, the State Department will have an “America-First” foreign policy
  • Ends Biden’s Catch-and-Release Policies

What it is: Catch-and-release authorized the release of individuals without legal status from detention while awaiting immigration court hearings.

  • Reinstates Remain in Mexico Policy

What it is: Known formerly as the Migrant Protection Protocol, this policy will require certain asylum seekers at the southern border to wait in Mexico for their hearings in U.S. immigration court.

  • Continues the construction of his southern border wall with Mexico
  • Prohibits asylum for individuals who have crossed the border illegally

What it is: Aims to end asylum and close the border to those without legal, to facilitate a more immediate removal process

  • Cracks down on U.S. sanctuary cities
  • Enhanced vetting and screening of noncitizen aliens seeking admission to the U.S.

What it is: The President will direct agencies to report recommendations for the suspension of entry for nationals of any country of particular concerns.

  • Expands deportation operations for aliens with a criminal record
  • Suspends the refugee resettlement program
  • Designates cartels such as the “Tren de Aragua” as foreign terrorist organizations and calls for their removal by using the Alien Enemies Act
  • Calls on the Department of Justice to implement the death penalty for illegal immigrants “who maim and murder” Americans and commit “heinous crimes”

Continue reading

by

ai-generated-8775948_1280Last month, San Diego’s Board of Supervisors passed a resolution ending the use of county resources aiding federal immigration enforcement actions.

The measure was made ahead of President Trump’s inauguration and puts an end to the cooperation between law enforcement agencies and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Previously, local law enforcement agencies cooperated with ICE officials by facilitating the transfer of detainees to ICE custody and notifying ICE of their release from custody to aid in their removal from the United States.

In response to San Diego’s actions, the America First Legal Foundation (founded by Trump advisor Stephen Miller) issued a letter to 249 elected officials including the Chair of San Diego’s Board of Supervisors, Nora Vargas. In the letter, the organization warned Vargas that she could be subject to criminal prosecution and civil liability for what the organization considered to be “obstruction” of federal immigration law.

Continue reading

by

boy-2027487_1280In the last few days, the immigration world has been reeling from the results of the Presidential election. People across the nation are preparing for an incoming Trump administration that promises to be extremely tough on immigration.

While the future of many hangs in the balance, the federal courts have started taking action to undo the immigration policies of the Biden administration.

Just two days after Americans cast their ballots and elected Donald Trump to become the next President of the United States, federal Judge J. Campbell Barker of the Eastern District Court of Texas issued a court order in the case Texas et. al. vs. DHS et. al., Case No. 6:24-cv-00306 (E.D. Tex.), ending President Biden’s Keeping Families Together parole program.

In a short one-page ruling, the judge declared that the Biden administration lacked the authority to grant parole in place to undocumented aliens, and therefore set aside and vacated Biden’s Keeping Families Together program.

In doing so, judge Barker delivered the first major blow to Biden’s immigration friendly policies. This decision stops the government from accepting applications for parole in place under the program, which would have allowed undocumented spouses and stepchildren of U.S. Citizens to remain together during the immigration process.

Continue reading

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