CLINIC

 

Sign up for enews

Learn More

Login Logout Search

Inadmissibility and Waivers

Three Decisions Address Definition of Admission

By Susan Schreiber The concept of admission is central to many critical issues in immigration law. If your client was “admitted,” he or she may qualify to adjust status under INA § 245(a). If your client was “admitted,” he or she is subject to the grounds of deportability, not inadmissibility, and the government will have the burden of proof. And if your client was “admitted,” this may impact on available remedies for relief from removal.

Intent is Irrelevant to Unlawful Voting

By Ilissa Mira Unlawful voting has serious consequences for noncitizens.  The BIA confirmed this in a precedent decision finding that a noncitizen is removable under INA § 237(a)(6)(A), regardless of whether the alien knew that he or she was unlawfully voting in violation of 18 USC § 611(a).  Matter of Fitzpatrick, 26 I&N Dec. 559 (BIA 2015).

Seventh Circuit Finds IJs Have Jurisdiction of 212(d)(3) Waivers for U Nonimmigrants

  If you represent U visa and U status applicants, you already know that immigration judges have no jurisdiction over applications for U status or for applications for adjustment of status under INA § 245(m).  By statute, USCIS has exclusive jurisdiction over theses applications, including waivers of inadmissibility under INA § 212(d)(14), the waiver provision that exclusively applies to the U status applicants.

New BIA Decision Expands LPR EligibilIty for 212(c) Waivers

By Susan Schreiber If you represent LPRs in removal proceedings, you will want to take a close look at the Board's recent  decision in Matter of Abdelghany, 26  I&N Dec. 254 (BIA 2014), which presents a new framework for analyzing LPR eligibility for INA § 212 (c) waivers.  It will likely result in more LPRs qualifying for this relief.

Recent Decisions on Immigration Law and Crimes

By Susan Schreiber Three recent circuit court decisions provide some good news for immigrants related to immigration consequences of criminal offenses. These decisions, summarized below, address (a) analyzing when an offense is a crime of moral turpitude; (b) LPR eligibility for an INA § 212(h) waiver; and (c) conviction finality.

DHS and DOS Announce New TRIG Exemptions

By Tatyana Delgado On February 5, 2014, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Department of State (DOS) announced two new exemptions from the terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (TRIG) found at INA§ 212(a)(3).   TRIG aims to exclude individuals who have or will engage in terrorist activities, such as providing material support to terrorist organizations or their members.  Material support includes providing transportation, communications, funds, explosives, or training, among other activities. 

Adjustment for Visa Waiver Entrants

By Kristina Karpinski On November 14, 2013, USCIS issued a policy memorandum on adjudication of Form I-485, Application to Register or Adjust Status, filed by immediate relatives of U.S. citizens admitted to the United States under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP).  This long awaited guidance clarifies USCIS's position on adjudication of adjustment cases filed after the applicant's 90-day period of admission has expired and outlines when a case should be referred to ICE.

Webinar: Waiving Crimes Away: All About 212(h) Waivers

Held On: 11/20/13
Who qualifies for a waiver of crime-based inadmissibility? What kinds of crimes are covered and what do you need to show to qualify for a waiver? When can a lawful permanent resident use a 212(h) waiver to overcome losing his or her status based on a criminal conviction?

CLINIC Files Amicus Brief in Supreme Court in CSPA Challenge

CLINIC's Amicus Brief to the Supreme Court

The above document is a copy of the amicus brief that CLINIC filed with the US Supreme Court in a case challenging the government’s interpretation of a part of the CSPA.

Pages