On March 7, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit issued a precedential decision in Thuraissigiam v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security that paves the way for federal court review of negative credible fear decisions. Thanks to the decision, asylum seekers in the 9th Circuit’s jurisdiction who have received a negative credible fear decision by the asylum officer and the immigration judge can now seek review of that expedited removal order in the federal district court via a habeas corpus petition.
In the eyes of many, the zero tolerance policy and the family separation crisis came and went as one of the darkest times in U.S. policy toward families, children and asylum seekers. The latest news reviving the issue, particularly Judge Sabraw’s decision to expand the class in Ms. L v. ICE to include thousands beyond the 2,800 separations previously acknowledged, reminds us that our work to bring justice to these families is far from over. CLINIC, along with partners and affiliates, has built a multi-faceted response to the family separation crisis that supports hundreds of families and stands to help thousands.
"Luisa" is the most recent individual freed with the help of the Remote Bond Project, which recruits pro bono attorneys from across the country to represent detainees in their bond hearings.
New memos from Department of Homeland Security agencies instruct government officers how to apply the attorney general’s decision in Matter of A-B-. USCIS officers received instructions on how to adjudicate various applications, and trial attorneys are told how to litigate domestic violence-based asylum cases before the immigration court. CLINIC offers tips on how to strengthen your case against in the wake of this new ruling.
The BIA’s recent decision in Matter of A-C-M-, determined that even minimum support to terrorist organizations, even under dire circumstance, will not excuse immigrants from the terrorism bar.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ precedent decision in Matter of A-B-, where he attempts to narrow the refugee definition, could make it harder for asylum seekers to seek protection.
A recent decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals requires asylum applicants in removal proceedings to clearly describe their membership in a “particular social group” before the immigration judge.
The Board of Immigration Appeals clarified that asylees lose that status when they adjust. Learn how this could affect current and future immigrants.
The Board of Immigration Appeals clarifies that family membership can form the basis of a valid social group, but a clear nexus must be established.