Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

Mandamus Actions: Avoiding Dismissal and Proving the Case

This Practice Advisory outlines arguments to make in response to the government’s arguments that the court should dismiss a mandamus or Administrative Procedure Act case brought to remedy the delayed adjudication of an immigration application.

Published On: Monday, November 9, 2015 | Download File

Workshop 2006

The American Immigration Law Foundation's Curriculum Center held five successful teachers' symposia in 2006. Teachers attended free day long professional development workshops in Chicago, Miami, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Washington, D.C.The symposia focused on current immigration policies, presenting immigration in the classroom, sharing stories through oral history, learning with literature and media and using artifacts, primary sources and dramatic arts to teach immigration.

¿Cuanto questa?: An Investigation into the True Costs of Illegal Immigration

Published on Wed, Jun 23, 2010

“There are many reports that confirm immigrants contribute to the economy,” said P.U.E.B.L.O. Executive Director Belen Seara, referring directly to studies from the Immigration Policy Center and the University of Southern California.

The Immigration Policy Center reported via the Texas-based Perryman Group, “If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from California, the state would lose $164.2 billion in expenditures, $72.9 billion in economic output, and approximately 717,000 jobs, even accounting for adequate market adjustment time.”

These figures are based in part on income and sales tax revenues and Social Security revenues.

Published in the New Times

Mandamus Litigation Addressing DOL Delays

This Practice Advisory provides basic information about mandamus actions and suggests strategies and practice tips for bringing a mandamus action against the Department of Labor (DOL).

Published On: Friday, November 6, 2015 | Download File

Study Says Northwest Immigrants Have Big Economic Impact

Published on Thu, Jul 29, 2010

The Immigration Policy Center, based in the nation's capital, pulled together immigration data from a variety of sources. Then it released fact sheets for all 50 states.

The center's Wendy Sefsaf says the study concludes that, if all undocumented workers were booted out of the Northwest immediately, the economic impact would be huge.

Wendy Sefsaf: "The undocumented are part of our workforce and they're people who buy and consume goods. So if you get rid of them, there's less consumers, which means there's less money going into an economy that supports those jobs."

The center's study concludes illegal immigrants have a bigger economic impact in Washington than in other Northwest states. Regionwide, the research estimates spending by undocumented workers is responsible for about 90-thousand jobs.

The Pew Hispanic Center estimates five percent of Oregon workers are undocumented, compared to about three percent in Washington and Idaho.

Published in the NPR KPLU

Administrative Procedures Act (APA)

District courts have jurisdiction to review a wide-variety of immigration decisions that arise outside of removal proceedings, including challenges to denials of visa petitions. These cases most often assert a claim under the APA, which permits individuals to sue the government for unlawful agency action. While the INA places some restrictions on review of discretionary decisions in non-removal cases, it does not strip district courts of all jurisdiction. The LAC seeks to ensure that district courts exercise jurisdiction over these APA cases to the fullest extent possible.

CASESRESOURCES

CASES

Ngassem v. Chertoff, No. 05-0584-cv (2d Cir. amicus brief filed Apr. 16, 2008) (case settled without a decision from the court). The LAC filed an amicus brief in support of the petitioner, arguing that the district court had jurisdiction over the denial of an asylee relative petition.

Jama v. DHS, et al., No. 13-4192 (6th Cir. amicus brief submitted Dec. 4, 2013).  The LAC filed an amicus brief arguing that the district court erred when it found that USCIS’ decision terminating the plaintiff’s refugee status was not “final” for purposes of the Administrative Procedure Act because the termination decision could not be appealed or raised in removal proceedings.  Additionally, the LAC argues that the restrictions on judicial review found in the INA do not apply to a district court action, such as this one, that is entirely unrelated to removal proceedings.Read more...

Lesson for Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche’s The Danger of a Single Story

In this lesson, students watch and respond to novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adiche’s Ted Talk “The Danger of a Single Story.” In this 18:39 minute video, she tells the story of how she found her authentic cultural voice and relays the potential risks for misunderstanding a group of people when only a single story is shared as representative of that culture. This film and corresponding discussion guide can enhance the reading of diverse literature in the classroom and lends itself to a discussion on the benefits of diversity.

For lesson procedures and Common Core alignment, please click here.

 

Year Released: 2015

10-12

View File

Swatting babies with the Constitution doesn't improve immigration system

Published on Sat, Aug 21, 2010

Texas Solicitor General James Ho wrote an analysis for the Immigration Policy Center (posted on immigrationpolicy.org) looking at the Senate debate when the amendment was passed, as well as applicable Supreme Court rulings, and concluded that "birthright is protected no less for children of undocumented persons than for descendants of Mayflower passengers."

Published in the Texas Star Telegram

“Admission” and Adjustment of Status

The Council has filed amicus briefs addressing if and when an adjustment of status can constitute an “admission” under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The INA defines the terms “admitted” and “admission” as the lawful entry of a noncitizen following inspection and authorization by an immigration officer. However, the Board has held that adjustment of status from within the United States also constitutes an “admission.” The issue has arisen in cases involving the attempted removal of noncitizens for the commission of certain crimes within five years after “the date of admission” (INA & 237(a)(2)(A)(i)), and in cases involving waivers of inadmissibility under INA & 212(h), which in some circumstances are unavailable to noncitizens who have previously been “admitted to the United States as an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence.”

CASES

Board of Immigration AppealsRead more...