STATUTORY COURSE: IMMIGRATION LAW (BOSWELL/SPRING 2003)
OVERVIEW OF IMMIGRATION LAW
1. Different Categories
I. Firm Statuses:
USC (United States Citizen): Have to be a LPR first. There is a danger from going to one status to another status. They are at a risk of being discovered of some wrong doing. For example, fraud. If so, the person will be put in removal proceeding because the person did not have legal status to begin with. The person have to make sure that his/her LPR status was lawful.
LPR (Lawful Permanent Resident): Not limited to asylees or refugees. Firm status to have. Better than being a valid NIV status or being an asylee. Once obtained, can travel or work. Won’t be able to vote or apply for certain kinds of jobs. But have to pay taxes. Subject to draft. Three ways to get LPR: 1) job – employer can show that he needs you and that you won’t displace US workers (employment based immigrant); 2) family based immigrant (married to USC, married to LPR, brother/sister of USC; 3) Asylum
Also, you have to show that you are not inadmissible to the US. There is no statute of limitations for grounds of inadmissibility.
Parolee: Someone who is not admissible to the US, but here at the pleasure of US. But don’t have any right. If you leave US, can’t come back.
Asylee/Refugee: Asylee is someone who is in the US and can establish that they have a well-founded fear of persecution. Can prove that their governments cannot provide them with protection. Refugee is outside of the US. These people, after a year, they can apply for permanent status as long as they have no criminal convictions.
II. Limbo Category:
Pending AOS (Adjustment of Status)/EOS (Extension of Status)
Valid Nonimmigrant Visa: Someone actually admitted to the US under a visa. If they want to stay longer than 3 months, then can try to get EOS (extension of status).
Temporary Protected Status (254 of INA): Similar to parolee. For people who may not qualify for asylum. Temporary relief from being kicked out of the US. If a person leaves the US, can’t come back. Maybe sought any time after admission as long as person qualifies.
IV. Dangerous Statuses: People under these categories can be captured and have serious problems.
NIV Expired: Person overstayed his visa. The person is now deportable. Arrival/Departure record will determine, not the visa.
EWI (Entry Without Inspection): If the person is not inspected, then have to go through inspection. There person is deportable/subject to removal. How can a person move into legal status. Either through TPS or through asylum or LPR. LPR is the most difficult to obtain. January 1, 2001 is the date to keep in mind.
Pending Removal: In removal proceeding. Government knows about them. Waiting to hear from the government. This person can’t be deported until a ruling, but if the person loses the case before the judge, then they will lose their status. This is not the end of the day because INS has to prove its case. In the removal proceeding, if the person can justify,
people to talk and make informed decisions based on the interactions).
1.1 Interview: The proceedings are not recorded. There is no transcript.
Whoever the person brings in is the translator, so that goes only as good as
the person can find. When the asylum officer speaks the language of the
applicant well, it makes it efficient.
Benefit of having an asylum officer is that it is non-adversarial. But the negative side is that there is not much role for the lawyer and there is no good translation.
The one safeguard is that at the end of this, no matter how bad the result might be, there is a possibility of a hearing. Whatever the decision was, the applicant is either recommended for the case to be granted (positive outcome) or referred to the immigration court for removal proceedings (adversarial decision). The worst case scenario is that person has to present the case in front of a judge.
If an officer makes a wrong decision, there isn’t necessarily a check on that. The only check is in the immigration court before a judge and hopefully the judge can get it right. (Since the establishment of the Homeland Security Act, the hearing is before an administrative law judge who belongs to the Department of Justice).