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.
Defending Vulnerable Populations
After two years as a project within Training, Litigation and Support, Defending Vulnerable Populations on March 1 became a separate department within CLINIC. Though it comes as an acknowledgment of the importance of the work DVP has developed, the change primarily affects administrative functions within CLINIC.
Formerly separated families continue to face difficulties. These difficulties include navigating removal proceedings in immigration court without legal counsel. In absentia removal orders are a likely consequence of navigating removal proceedings pro se, especially given the trauma these families endured. The Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc.
Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher, LLP, represented CLINIC on an amicus brief in support of the plaintiffs-appellees in Inland Empire – Immigrant Youth Collective, et al., v. Kirstjen Nielsen, et al. The plaintiffs-appellees challenge the government’s unlawful termination of their DACA without process on behalf of a class of DACA recipients.
On August 16, 2018, Attorney General Jefferson Sessions issued Matter of L-A-B-R-, 27 I&N Dec. 405 (A.G. 2018), a precedent decision about how immigration judges (IJs) should decide certain motions for a continuance “to await the resolution of a collateral matter.” The decision uses the term “collateral matter” to refer to filings with U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) and other matters pursued outside of immigration court that could affect the outcome of the removal proceedings. Many noncitizens in removal proceedings are eligible for immigration relief that is adjudicated by USCIS, and that, if granted, would provide them with lawful status and a basis for terminating the removal proceedings.
This practice advisory by CLINIC and the American Immigration Council provides practitioners with strategies and considerations based on the U.S. Supreme Court case of Pereira v. Sessions.
This practice pointer provides a summary and analysis of USCIS's June 28, 2018 policy memo which expands the situations in which USCIS will issue a Notice to Appear in connection with adjudicating a request for immigration benefits.
This index provides a catalogue of unpublished decisions by the U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (USCIS) Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) reviewing decisions on petitions for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS). The authors reviewed the decisions available on the USCIS website, from 2005 to March 2019. The goal of this index is to assist practitioners who represent children and youth seeking SIJS.
Sample Respondent’s Brief Regarding Particular Social Group Formulation Requirements Under Matter of W-Y-C- & H-O-B-