On July 14, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) denied a request for oral argument and dismissed the appeal of a decision by the Immigration Judge (IJ)… CONTINUE
Attorney General Extends Briefing Schedule In A Case Where He Had Referred A Decision Of The BIA To Himself For Review.
On July 8, 2020, Attorney General (AG) William Barr set a new briefing schedule in a matter in which he had previously directed the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or… CONTINUE
EOIR Director Issues Supplemental Ruling, Holding That An Amicus Curiae Is Not A Party In Recognition And Accreditation Proceedings And Has No Authority To Seek Further Action Following The Conclusion Of An Administrative Review Under 8 C.F.R. §1292.18.
On July 2, 2020, Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) Director James R. McHenry (Director) issued a decision supplementing his prior opinion in Matter of Bay Area Legal Services, Inc.,… CONTINUE
EOIR Director Holds That The Assistant Director For Policy Has The Discretion To Extend The Deadline For A Request For Reconsideration Made Per 8 C.F.R. §1292.13(e), But Not For A Request For Reconsideration Made Per 8 C.F.R. §1292.16(f) Or §1292.17(d). The 30-Day Deadline For A Request For Reconsideration In 8 C.F.R. §§121292.12(e),1292.16(f), And 1292.17(d) Is Otherwise Mandatory And Not Subject To Equitable Tolling. A Request For Reconsideration Per 8 C.F.R. §§ 1292.13(e), 1292.16(f), Or 1292.17(d) Must Demonstrate An Error Of Fact Or Law In The Previous Decision. The Standard Of Review For Administrative Reviews Conducted Under 8 C.F.R. §1292.18 Is De Novo. Unless Overruled By Subsequent Precedent Or Superceded By Statute, Regulation, Or Binding Federal Court Decision, Prior Precedent Decisions Of The BIA Remain Binding In Recognition And Accreditation Proceedings After January 18, 2017, Including Consideration Of Requests For Reconsideration Per §§1292.13(e), 1292.16(f), or 1292.17(d) And Administrative Review Conducted Under § 1292.18. In Addition To Establishing The Requirements For Partial Accreditation, An Organization Seeking Full Accreditation For An Individual Per 8 C.F.R. §1292.12(a)(6) Must Establish That The Individual Possesses “Skills Essential For Effective Litigation.” Such Skills Include, At A Minimum, “The Ability To Advocate A Client’s Position At A Hearing Before An Immigration Judge By Presenting Documentary Evidence And Questioning Witnesses, To Present Oral Arguments Before The Board, And To Prepare Motions And Briefs For Consideration By An Immigration Judge And/Or [The] Board.” Matter Of EAC, Inc., 24 I&N Dec. 556 (BIA 2008), Followed.
On May 22, 2020, Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) Director James R. McHenry (Director), following up on a Policy Memorandum he published October 2, 2019 (PM 20-02), issued a… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That The Absence Of A Checked Alien Classification Box On A Notice To Appear (NTA) Does Not, By Itself, Render The NTA Fatally Deficient Or Otherwise Preclude An Immigration Judge From Exercising Jurisdiction Over Removal Proceedings And It Is Therefore Not A Basis To Terminate The Proceedings Of A Respondent Who Has Been Returned To Mexico Under The Migrant Protection Protocols. Matter of J.J. Rodriguez, 27 I&N Dec. 762 (BIA 2020), Followed.
On May 8, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board), in a case where the respondent was pro se, and supplemental briefs were received from DHS and amici… CONTINUE
For Purposes Of Determining Whether A Respondent Is Subject To The Firm Resettlement Bar To Asylum, A Viable And Available Offer To Apply For Permanent Residence In A Country Of Refuge Is Not Negated By One’s Unwillingness Or Reluctance To Satisfy The Terms For Acceptance.
On April 10, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal of a Haitian citizen whose applications for asylum and withholding of removal had been denied… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That Immigration Judge Properly Determined That Respondent Was A Flight Risk And Denied His Request For A Custody Redetermination Where, Although His Asylum Application Was Pending, He Had No Family, Employment Or Community Ties And No Probable Path To Obtain Lawful Status So As To Warrant His Release On Bond.
On March 18, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed Respondent’s appeal of the Immigration Judge (IJ’s) denial of his request to be released on bond. Respondent,… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That An Interpol Red Notice May Constitute Reliable Evidence Indicating That The Serious Nonpolitical Crime Bar To Asylum And Withholding Of Removal Applies To An Applicant. Here, Respondent’s Violation Of Article 345 Of The Salvadoran Penal Code, Which Procribes Participation In An Illicit Organization Whose Purpose Is The Commission Of Crimes, Was “Serious” Within The Meaning Of The Nonpolitical Crime Bar.
On March 6, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal of an applicant whose requests for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention… CONTINUE
Attorney General Holds That BIA Should Consider De Novo The Application Of Law To The Facts Of This Case, Including Whether The Deprivation That Respondent Would Be Likely To Encounter Upon Removal To Mexico Would Constitute “Torture” Within The Meaning Of The Department Of Justice Regulations Implementing The Convention Against Torture (CAT). To Constitute “Torture” Under These Regulations, An Act Must, Among Other Things, Be Specifically Intended To Inflict Severe Physical Or Mental Pain Or Suffering. 8 C.F.R. §1208.18(a)(5). Additionally, Torture Does Not Cover Negligent Acts Or Harm Stemming From A Lack Of Resources. To Constitute “Torture”, An Act Must Also Be Motivated By Such Purposes As Obtaining From Him Or Her Or A Third Person Information Or A Confession, Punishing Him Or Her For An Act He Or She Or A Third Person Has Committed Or Is Suspected Of Having Committed, Or Intimidating Or Coercing Him Or Her Or A Third Person, Or For Any Reason Based On Discrimination Of Any Kind.
On February 26, 2020, U.S. Attorney General (AG) William Barr directed the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) to refer the instant case to him for review of its… CONTINUE
BIA Holds That An Asylum Applicant’s Status As A Landowner Does Not Automatically Render Him Or Her A Member Of A Particular Social Group For Purposes Of Asylum And Withholding Of Removal. To Establish A Particular Social Group Based On Landownership, One Must Demonstrate By Evidence In The Record That Members Of The Proposed Group Share An Immutable Characteristic And That The Group Is Defined With Particularity And Is Perceived To Be Socially District In The Society In Question. The Respondent’s Proposed Particular Social Groups – Comprised Of Landowners And Landowners Who Resist Drug Cartels In Guatemala – Are Not Valid Based On The Evidence Of Record.
On February 10, 2020, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA or Board) dismissed the appeal of a Guatemalan native whose applications for asylum, withholding of removal and CAT relief were… CONTINUE
- 1
- 2
- 3
- …
- 26
- Next Page »