This Practice Advisory provides background information about requesting stays of removal from the court of appeals, discusses the legal standard for obtaining a stay, and addresses the implications of the government’s policy with respect to return of individuals who are successful on their appeal.
After Arizona passed its crackdown law on illegal immigration, SB 1070, politicians across the country said they planned to introduce similar legislation in their states — even after the Justice Department sued Arizona for overstepping its authority to police immigration. Via Immigration Impact, pro-immigration business coalition Immigration Works USA released a report on which states are most likely to go through with their plans. Based on past enforcement policies and Republican support, four states were deemed likely to pass copycat laws: Georgia, Mississippi, Oklahoma and South Carolina.
In an amicus brief submitted in Castaneda-Castillo v. Gonzales, the LAC argued that the First Circuit should uphold the majority panel’s decision not to remand the case to the BIA pursuant to the “ordinary remand rule” established in INS v. Ventura, 537 U.S. 12 (2002). While the ordinary remand rule requires remand when the BIA has not yet had the opportunity to consider an issue, the LAC argued that the rule does not apply where the BIA has thoroughly examined a particular issue but reached a wrong conclusion. When the BIA has addressed an issue in the first instance, the LAC argues, the court of appeals has authority to reverse the finding when the record compels the opposite conclusion.
Castaneda-Castillo v. Gonzales, No. 05-2384 (1st Circuit amicus brief filed Mar. 6, 2007). The court issued a precedent decision declining to follow the ordinary remand rule. Castaneda-Castillo v. Gonzales, 464 F.3d 112 (1st Cir. 2006).
The Issues in Immigration series consists of three parts or modules listed below. Each module is designed to teach secondary students about immigration and immigrant conflicts, myths and facts. The lesson will also increase student awareness about immigration issues.
If all illegal immigrants were removed, the state would lose $1.7 billion in economic activity, $756.8 million in gross state product and 12,059 jobs, according to the non-profit Immigration Policy Center. In a statement accompanying its report, the center opposed SB6 and an earlier, similar Arizona measure now tied up in the federal appellate courts.
"As Kentucky faces a $780 million budget shortfall in fiscal year 2011, state legislators are currently pursuing a costly and short-sighted 'papers please' law," the center said in its statement. "Senate Bill 6 is a copycat of Arizona's SB1070. ... Kentucky should consider the following evidence before continuing to pursue this kind of immigration legislation."
This issue covers two class actions, one seeking to recover TPS fees and the other involving the Child Status Protection Act; upcoming BIA argument on Matter of Perez Vargas (IJ's jurisdiction to apply INA § 204(j)); a decision on the consular nonreviewability doctrine; and a court order compelling DOL to adjudicate a PERM application.
Roberts, a journalist by trade and talented story teller by passion, paints the lives of 13 families by retelling their stories in a way that captures the essence of their journeys to the United States as well as their journeys to becoming Americans. Roberts eloquently breaks down many of the myths surrounding immigrants by sharing stories of men, women and children who had to leave so much behind by emigrating. The book is divided into sections, The Survivors, The International Entrepreneurs, The Business Owners, The Professionals, and The Women. The characters and their stories give many fresh perspectives on the issue of immigration.
The new face of immigration "reform"? Republican Utah Governor Gary Herbert. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
Labor supply programs for employers, with deportations and diminished rights for immigrants, have marked U.S. immigration policy for more than 100 years.
Last week the Utah legislature passed three new laws that have been hailed in the media as a new, more reasonable, approach to immigration policy. Reasonable, that is, compared to Arizona’s S.B. 1070, which would allow police to stop anyone, demand immigration papers and hold her or him for deportation. Utah’s law was signed by Republican Governor Gary Herbert on Tuesday, March 15. Arizona’s S.B. 1070 is currently being challenged in court.
Utah’s bills were called “the anti-Arizona” by Frank Sharry, head of America’s Voice, a Washington D.C. immigration lobbying firm. According to Lee Hockstader, on the Washington Post’s editorial staff, the laws are “the nation’s most liberal—and most reality-based—policy on illegal immigration.”
The Utah laws, however, are not new. And they’re certainly not liberal, at least towards immigrants and workers. Labor supply programs for employers, with deportations and diminished rights for immigrants, have marked U.S. immigration policy for more than 100 years.Read more...