Single BIA members are deciding summarily thousands of case using the "affirmance without opinion" procedure. This Practice Advisory discusses arguments that challenge a BIA Member's use of this procedure to deny an appeal.
The Memory Coat Journey - A Board Game is designed as a follow-up enrichment activity to the picture book The Memory Coat Journey which follows a Russian Jewish boy on his journey to America during WWII.
The best bet for reforming the immigration system this year lies with smaller bills, and immigrants rights groups have attempted to push for these measures instead. If this happens, the future of comprehensive immigration reform is still unclear, according to Mary Giovagnoli, director of Immigration Policy Center.
“We don’t have a good measure anymore of what will happen once we get something discreet like the DREAM Act passed,” she says. “But when the sky doesn’t fall in and if people still get re-elected after supporting DREAM, it may show members of Congress that leaning into the immigration issue and voting for comprehensive immigration reform could help them politically.”
AILF and AILA Comment on EOIR’S Proposed Rule on “Streamlining” AILF and AILA’s comment on the proposed rule, “Board of Immigration Appeals: Affirmance Without Opinion, Referral for Panel Review, and Publication of Decisions as Precedents,” emphasizes the need for continued federal court oversight of the use of the “affirmance without opinion” procedure; it also objects to EOIR’s proposal to allow to permanent members of the BIA issue precedent decisions. The comment was submitted on August 18, 2008.
Timeliness of BIA Appeal
The LAC argues in this amicus brief that the Board has the authority to consider a late appeal in unique circumstances and that the failure of a guaranteed overnight delivery service to deliver the appeal on time constitutes a “unique” circumstance justifying acceptance of the late appeal.
Liadov, et al v. Gonzales 8th Circuit No. 06-3522
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel
The LAC has long worked to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel in removal proceedings. Read more about our efforts at our Ineffective Assistance of Counsel advocacy page.
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.
Their coordinated efforts have been a success, with more than 280,000 new citizens being registered to vote. This year, with tight congressional races for state Assembly and Senate elections, their goals are to demonstrate the impact of that voting bloc, which already counts more than 1 million registered voters in New York, according to a new study by the Immigration Policy Center.
For far too long, immigration courts have failed to provide a fair, efficient and effective system of justice for noncitizens in this country. Through advocacy and litigation, the LAC has urged the adoption of laws and policies intended to ensure all noncitizens a meaningful opportunity to be heard. The LAC also has issued a number of practice advisories regarding immigration court and Board of Immigration Appeals procedures.
Liadov v. Mukasey, No. 06-3522 (8th Cir. amicus brief filed Dec. 13, 2006) (arguing that the Board has authority to consider late-filed appeal in unique circumstances and that failure of a guaranteed overnight delivery service to deliver appeal on time constitutes such a “unique” circumstance). In a precedent decision, Liadov v. Mukasey,518 F.3d 1003 (8th Cir. 2008), the court denied the petition for review.
Comments to the Department of Justice/Executive Office for Immigration Review regarding the “Retrospective Regulatory Review” (submitted Nov. 27, 2012). The Council, in collaboration with AILA, urged EOIR to amend regulations pertaining to motions to reopen, stays of removal, bond hearings, telephonic and video hearings, filing and service of documents and decisions, and stipulated removal orders.Read more...
Michelle Waslin, an Immigration Policy Center senior policy analyst, tells the Independent that “SLLI wants to spark a legal challenge that goes all the way to the Supreme Court. They want to set up a system for citizens and another for people who can be discriminated.”
Waslin also says that amending the 14th Amendment is not a solution for illegal immigration. “Under the current system, you’re born here, you get a birth certificate,” she says. “If we didn’t have that system we would need a bureaucracy to determine citizenship.”
She points out that if automatic citizenship is eliminated, all U.S. citizens would be affected. She compares the outcome to the current situation of a U.S. serviceman in Germany, married to a German woman, who together have a baby. That couple has to hire an immigration lawyer have to clarify if the baby if a U.S. citizen.
This issue covers the Supreme Court's decision that voluntary departure may be withdrawn, a 9th Circuit ruling that a 2003 no-match letter is not constructive knowledge that an employee is undocumented, a favorable 2d Circuit asylum case rejecting Matter of A-T-, and a new online litigation resource.