DHS Announced Extension and Redesignation of Haiti & Yemen for Temporary Protected Status (TPS)

by
Haiti & Yemen TPS Designation

YEMEN On July 8, 2024, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas announced the extension and redesignation of Yemen for Temporary Protected Status for 18 months, from September 4, 2024, to March 3, 2026, due to country conditions in Yemen that prevent individuals from safely returning. The redesignation of Yemen for TPS allows an estimated 1,700 Yemeni nationals (and individuals having no nationality who last habitually resided in Yemen) who have been continuously residing in the United States since July 2, 2024 to file initial applications for TPS, if they are otherwise eligible.The extension of TPS for Yemen allows approximately 2,300 current beneficiaries to retain TPS through March 3, 2026, if they continue to meet TPS eligibility requirements. This extension and redesignation does not apply for anyone who was not already in the United States on July 2, 2024. Accompanying this announcement is a Special Student Relief notice for F-1 nonimmigrant students whose country of citizenship is Yemen, or individuals having no nationality who last habitually resided in Yemen, so that eligible students may request employment authorization, work an increased number of hours while school is in session, and reduce their course load while continuing to maintain F-1 status through the TPS designation period. HAITI On June 28, 2024, Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro N. Mayorkas announced the extension and redesignation of Haiti for Temporary Protected Status for 18 months, from Aug. 4, 2024, to Feb. 3, 2026, due to extraordinary and temporary conditions in Haiti.  The redesignation of Haiti for TPS allows an estimated 309,000 additional Haitian nationals (or individuals having no nationality who last habitually resided in Haiti) to file initial applications for TPS, if they are otherwise eligible and if they established residence in the United States on or before June 3, 2024, and have continued to reside in the United States since then (“continuous residence”). Eligible individuals who do not have TPS may submit an initial Form I-821, Application for Temporary Protected Status, during the initial registration period that runs from July 1, 2024, through Feb. 3, 2026. Applicants also may apply for TPS-related Employment Authorization Documents and for travel authorization. Applicants can request an EAD by submitting a completed Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, with their Form I-821, or separately later. HOW TO APPLY FOR OR EXTEND TPS Current TPS beneficiaries who wish to extend their status through March 3, 2026, must re-register during the 60-day re-registration period from July 10, 2024, through September 9, 2024, to ensure they keep their TPS and employment authorization. DHS recognizes that not all re-registrants may receive a new Employment Authorization Document before their current EAD expires and is automatically extending through September 3, 2025, the validity of EADs previously issued under Yemen’s TPS designation. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services will continue to process pending applications filed under previous TPS designations for Yemen. Individuals with a pending Form I-821, Application for Temporary Protected Status, or a related Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, as of July 10, 2024 do not need to file either application again. If USCIS approves a pending Form I-821 or Form I-765 filed under the previous designation of TPS for Yemen, USCIS will grant the individual TPS through March 3, 2026, and issue an EAD valid through the same date. Under the redesignation of Yemen, eligible individuals who do not have TPS may submit an initial Form I-821, Application for Temporary Protected Status, during the initial registration period that runs from July 10, 2024 through March 3, 2026. Applicants also may apply for TPS-related EADs and for travel authorization. Applicants can request an EAD by submitting a completed Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, with their Form I-821, or separately later. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Secretary Mayorkas Announces Extension and Redesignation of Yemen for Temporary Protected Status Secretary Mayorkas Announces Extension and Redesignation of Haiti for Temporary Protected Status

EOIR Launches Respondent Access Portal

by
EOIR Launches Respondent Access Portal

On July 2, 2024, EOIR sent out a Stakeholder Update by email announcing the launch of the Respondent Access Portal. Per the announcement, this will be a phased enrollment which will allow unrepresented respondents to access the Electronic Record of Proceedings for their Immigration Court (EOIR) case. This will make it much easier for unrepresented respondents to keep track of their removal proceedings, stay informed about rescheduled hearing dates, and submit evidence to the Court. EOIR Stakeholder UpdateEOIR today announced it has launched Respondent Access Portal, part of the Access EOIR Initiative. Through a phased enrollment, Respondent Access Portal will allow unrepresented individuals who have cases before EOIR to view their case information, keep informed about hearing schedules, download electronic Records of Proceedings, and file case-related documents. Unrepresented adult noncitizens will receive an official notice from the immigration court. Please see the agency notice for more details. EOIR Stakeholder Update See the agency notice for more details. NOTICE Download MAGA IMPACT OF SECOND TRUMP TERM ON IMMIGRANTS IN THE US What can we expect from a second term from President Trump? How bad would it be for immigrants in the US? Learn More

SCOTUS DISGARDS CHEVRON DOCTRINE

by

In the decision issued on Friday, June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court significantly weakened the power of federal agencies to implement and enforce regulations. The court’s decision written by Chief Justice Roberts, overturns the Court’s 1984 finding in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council and will have a major impact on the Federal Government’s ability to regulate everything from climate change to artificial intelligence to labor and immigration. It marks a huge win for corporations, as it will be significantly harder for the government to restrict their ability to dump toxic waste into rivers, treat their workers horribly, make children’s toys with known carcinogens, and fix prices on products people need. This also gives the Courts a lot more power and control over how regulations are interpreted and enforced. In Chevron, the Supreme Court granted the federal government broad deference to enact regulations without judicial interference under the idea that the specialists who write environmental regulations for the EPA or immigration policy or DHS, should be assumed to know what they are talking about. Ultimately it allowed for agencies to enact regulations without having to wait for the courts to weigh in, unless the regulation was an unreasonable interpretation of the underlying law enacted by Congress that delegated regulatory authority to that agency. “ rule of judicial humility gives way to a rule of judicial hubris. In one fell swoop, the majority today gives itself exclusive power over every open issue — no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden — involving the meaning of regulatory law. As if it did not have enough on its plate, the majority turns itself into the country’s administrative czar… The majority disdains restraint, and grasps for power.” Justice Kagan in LOPER BRIGHT ENTERPRISES ET AL. v. RAIMONDO, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE

Department of State v. Muñoz

by
no right to marriage

In State Department v. Muñoz, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against a U.S. citizen who said her constitutional rights were violated by the federal government when it denied a visa to her Salvadoran husband. Munoz and her husband, who she married in 2010 and has a child with, have been separated since 2015 while they were going through the visa process. After several interviews, a consular officer denied Asencio-Cordero’s application, citing a provision that renders inadmissible a noncitizen whom the officer believes seeks to engage in unlawful activity. Asencio-Cordero and Muñoz sued the Department of State, claiming that it had abridged Muñoz’s constitutional liberty interest in her husband’s visa application by failing to give a sufficient reason why Asencio-Cordero is inadmissible under the “unlawful activity” bar, because the consulate did not provide any further explanation for the decision. Visa denials are not reviewable in court unless the government violates an applicant’s constitutional rights in the process.The Supreme Court on Friday rejected Munoz’s claim that the delay in explaining the denial violated her due process rights by interfering with her fundamental right to marry. The claim “involves more than marriage and more than spousal cohabitation — it includes the right to have her noncitizen husband enter (and remain in) the United States,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the court. Justice Sotomayor (joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson) wrote, “There is no question that excluding a citizen’s spouse burdens her right to marriage, and that burden requires the Government to provide at least a factual basis for its decision.”

MATTER OF H-C-R-C- (2024 credibility & CAT)

by
SCOTUS decision

Matter of H-C-R-C-, 28 I&N Dec. 809 (BIA 2024) (1) Applicants bear the burden of establishing their own credibility, and no statute or legal precedent compels an Immigration Judge to conclude that an applicant’s testimony is credible. (2) Rape is sufficiently severe to constitute torture and can never be a lawful sanction under the Convention Against Torture.

Biden Administration Expands Parole In Place to Spouse’s of US Citizens–Does NOT Extend Immigration Benefits to Any Immigrants Who Were not Already Eligible for a Green Card

by

What is Parole-in-Place? Parole-in-Place (PIP) is an immigration policy that grants temporary protected legal status to certain undocumented individuals who are already in the United States that are present without admission or parole. It is a sort of legal fiction in which the person will be “paroled” into the US without actually having to leave and reenter. Once a noncitizen has been paroled into the US they become eligible to adjust status to that of a legal permanent resident, something that cannot be done (in most circumstances) by a noncitizen who entered the US without being admitted or paroled. PIP’s main benefit is not the temporary protection or the temporary employment authorization, rather, it is that it makes a person with an immigrant visa petition from their US citizen spouse eligible to adjust status and become a resident without having to get a waiver or leave the country. Is Parole-in-Place Something New? Traditionally, PIP has been available to undocumented family members of U.S. military personnel. It exists through Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which provides wide discretion to the Department of Homeland Security to parole someone into the US for humanitarian purposes. President Biden’s new policy expands its scope to include spouses of U.S. citizens. Does This Announcement Make Millions of Immigrants Eligible for Legal Immigration Status? No. It does not make anyone eligible for legal immigration status if they weren’t already eligible. You probably saw many headlines parroting the line from the White House’s Press Release stating “the Biden administration estimates the parole in place program will offer amnesty, and a path to legal permanent residency, to 500,000 spouses of U.S. citizens and 50,000 children under 21.” Those numbers seem greatly exaggerated but more importantly, the entire announcement is very misleading. The extension of parole-in-place for spouses of US citizens that have been in the US for ten years will not “create a path to legal status” for a single person. Every person who is eligible for this parole-in-place already had a path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship. This announcement will not benefit anyone who wasn’t already eligible for a green card. This might shorten the amount of time it takes for them to obtain residency, it will reduce the amount of paperwork they are required to file, and it will eliminate the need for them to depart the country and reenter legally. Since the three and ten year bars on reentry to the US due to unlawful presence were created in 1996 as part of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, there has been “waiver” available for the spouses of US citizens. The Obama administration expanded that waiver to include spouses and children of US citizens and permanent residents (green card holders). So anyone who qualifies for parole-in-place through Biden’s new program would have been eligible to obtain legal residency already. The majority of the people who are eligible in the US probably have a waiver pending or already approved and are waiting for a visa interview. It is incredible how the media churns out AI generated articles and copy-paste news alerts that all simply repeat the information in the press release without mentioning the above. Even the articles criticizing this move fail to address this and claim that this move protects a half a million immigrants from deportation. This announcement comes two weeks after he issued a sweeping executive action that allows US officials to quickly remove migrants entering the US illegally without processing their asylum requests. That resulted in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) that argues that the policy violates US immigration law. The White House’s claim that this election-year move will protect more than 500,000 people from deportation doesn’t ring true. It saves them from the inconvenience of having to obtain a waiver and attend a consulate interview in their home country. The additional claim that this will benefit “roughly 50,000 noncitizen children of immigrants under the age of 21 whose parent are married to a US citizen” seems to be referencing the minor children who would be considered paroled upon the parole-in-place of their parent, which would allow them to adjust status based on the step-child petition they would likely have from the US citizen spouse of their parent. People are divided along party lines in their support of this executive order and I see people on both sides incorrectly stating that this is some sort of unprecedented move to extend residency to a tremendous number of immigrants that are in the US without status. It’s basically just political theater. People are debating the merits of an announcement that doesn’t actually expand eligibility to legal immigration status. The media should make an attempt to explain this to people rather than reprinting hundreds of identical articles and blog posts spreading misinformation. Who is Eligible for Parole In Place? In order to qualify for parole in place, the spouse of the U.S. Citizen must: Link to the Official Department of Homeland Security Fact Sheet for this topic.