Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

§ 212(h) Eligibility: Case Law and Potential Arguments

This Practice Advisory addresses statutory requirements for § 212(h) waivers; availability of § 212(h) waivers in removal proceedings for both LPRs and non-LPRs; and situations when a “stand-alone” § 212(h) waiver can, or arguably might, be filed. The advisory also discusses the regulation imposing a heightened hardship standard in cases involving violent or dangerous crimes.

Published On: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 | Download File

Teachable Moment

Immigration policy is a hotly debated issue in the country and in Congress. The immigration bill now before Congress presents a teachable moment for students to consider the pros and cons of a new policy. The reading provides an overview of the bill that originated in the Senate; the DBQ offers multiple points of view on it. Discussion questions about them and an essay assignment follow.

View Link

Amid Arizona Furor, Reform Debate Simmers

Published on Mon, Jul 26, 2010

"I think that [Arizona's law] has created an imperative for the federal government," to push for the overhaul, said Wendy Sefsaf, communications director at the Immigration Policy Center.

With more than 20 states considering legislation similar to Arizona's law, it would not be in the federal government's interests to challenge each one individually, she said.

Published in the International Business Times

Return to the United States After Prevailing on a Petition for Review or Motion to Reopen

This practice advisory contains practical and legal suggestions for individuals seeking to return to the United States after they have prevailed on a petition for review or an administrative motion to reopen or reconsider to the immigration court or Board of Immigration Appeals.

Published On: Friday, December 21, 2012 | Download File

Celebrate America Creative Writing Contest Coordinator Guide 2015

Contest Coordinators the Celebrate America 2015 Guide has everything you need to get a contest started in your community.

 

 

Year Released: 2014

View File

View Link

Immigrant vigil stresses necessity of a path to legalization

Published on Wed, Aug 11, 2010

Immigrants aren’t very noticeable in West Virginia, which was 95 percent white in the year 2000, according to the Census. Yet, they’re here. The Immigration Policy Center estimates that the state was home to more than 23,000 immigrants in 2008, and the population is growing. Many of the immigrants are Latino or Asian.  

Published in the West Virginia Public Broadcasting

VAWA

<This page is under construction>

Working with partner non-profits, the LAC convinced USCIS to adopt a policy that allows VAWA applicants to apply for adjustment of status under INA § 245(a) even if the applicant is present in the U.S. without inspection and admission or parole. This policy favorably impacts thousands of battered immigrants.

 

Poll indicates Latinos alienated by GOP

Published on Wed, Oct 06, 2010

According to the most recent data from the 2010 Census, Latinos make up 11.5 percent of Utah’s population. The Immigration Policy Center revealed 32 percent of immigrants in Utah in 2008 were naturalized citizens who can vote. That number continues to rise.

Published in the Salt Lake City Examiner

Appointed Counsel for Children in Immigration Proceedings

Each year, the government initiates immigration court proceedings against thousands of children, but does not guarantee that those children have legal representation. Like adults, children who cannot afford to hire an attorney or find pro bono counsel are forced to navigate the complex and adversarial immigration system on their own, even though the government is always represented by a trained attorney.

CASES | RESOURCES

CASES

J.E.F.M. v. Holder

On July 9, 2014, the American Immigration Council, with co-counsel American Civil Liberties Union, Northwest Immigrant Rights Project, Public Counsel, and K&L Gates LLP, filed a nationwide class-action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on behalf of children who are challenging the federal government's failure to provide them with legal representation as it carries out removal proceedings against them.

The complaint charges the U.S. Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Health and Human Services, Executive Office for Immigration Review, and Office of Refugee Resettlement with violating the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause and the Immigration and Nationality Act’s provisions requiring a “full and fair hearing” before an immigration judge. It seeks to require the government to provide children with legal representation in their immigration proceedings.Read more...