• Hours & Info

    (562) 495-0554
    M-F: 8:00am - 6:00 p.m.
    Sat: 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
  • Past Blog Posts

  • https://api.whatsapp.com/send?phone=13104885414

Under immigration reform USA, here are exceptions to the priorities of deportation

The immigration reform USA has made specific reference to three priorities and how they are to be deported and put into removal proceeding and deported. However, the same memorandum, explains Brian D. Lerner, goes into exceptions of what you can do in order to not be deported or placed into deportation proceedings, even if you fall under one of the priorities.

Priority 1 Exceptions:

Brian D. Lerner reminds that Priority 1 targets are the highest level of targets, such as terrorist suspects, national security, various felonies, aggravated felons and various gang related crimes. The immigration reform USA exceptions to priority 1 are as follows: Of course, if you qualify for asylum, then it does not matter if you are in priority 1 as you can apply and stay if granted asylum. However, the immigration reform USA states that if you do not qualify for asylum and are under priority #1, that you can request that under prosecutorial discretion, you are not placed into removal proceedings and/or removed if in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, CBP Sector Chief, or CBP Director of Field Operations, there are compelling and exceptional factors that clearly indicate you are not a threat to national security, border security, or public safety and should not therefore be an enforcement priority.

Clearly, the immigration reform USA is quite strict on allowing an exercise of prosecutorial discretion if you are under Priority #1. It also allows a variety of levels of personnel to make the decision. It might be best, states Brian D. Lerner, to apply with the top official, rather than the lowest level official who might not have as much sympathy or knowledge or procedure. However, it is possible explains Brian D. Lerner if you have a packet put together that is persuasive and that shows that there are compelling and exceptional factors to grant the request for prosecutorial discretion to not be removed. In the memo itself, in the immigration reform USA, it does not discuss what is defined as ‘compelling’ or ‘exceptional’, and therefore, there is lots of room to properly argue relief from deportation.

Priority 2 Exceptions:
Brian D. Lerner reminds that Priority 2 is the mid level priority to deport people. In summary, Priority #2 deals with persons who have 3 or more various misdemeanors, or a significant misdemeanor of which deals with specific crimes such as domestic violence, gun crimes, drug crimes, burglary, or other crimes where there was 90 days or more in custody. The immigration reform USA also included in Priority #2 includes people entering illegally or re-entering illegally and cannot prove they have been in the U.S. prior to January 1, 2014 and finally those people who have abused the visa waiver or other visa programs and in their discretion should be deported.

Thus, Brian Lerner states, that under immigration reform USA, it is in the memorandum that in order to try to apply for prosecutorial discretion so that you are not deported or put into deportation proceedings if you are in Priority #2, the following must be done: First, as with Priority #1, if you qualify for asylum, explains Brian D. Lerner, then you will not be deported here. However, assuming that is not the case as under the immigration reform USA, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, CBP Sector Chief, CBP Director of Field Operations, USCIS District Director, or USCIS Service Center Director, there are factors indicating the alien is not a threat to national security.

Brian D. Lerner, explains that the procedure and requirements to qualify for a Priority #2 exception, might look the same as Priority #1 under the immigration reform USA, it is not the case. First of all, you do not need to show ‘compelling’ or ‘exceptional’ circumstances. Brian Lerner states this is huge. The burden of proof needed to show why prosecutorial discretion should be exercised is much less with a Priority 2 request. Additionally, in Priority 2, you must only show that you will not be a threat to national security, whereas under Priority 1, you must show not only you will not be a threat to national security, but to border security or public safety. Thus, the immigration reform USA makes it abundantly clear that it will be easier to get prosecutorial discretion granted under Priority 2, rather than Priority 1.

Priority 3 Exceptions
As you might already guess, Brian D. Lerner explains, Priority #3 is the least priority given to deporting people. The immigration reform USA states that Priority #3 which basically consists of persons issued a final order of removal after January 1, 2014, but do not fall under the other priorities.

In order to be issued prosecutorial discretion if you fall under Priority 3, it must be shown that in the judgment of an immigration officer, the alien is not a threat to the integrity of the immigration system or there are factors suggesting the alien should not be an enforcement priority. Thus, Brian D. Lerner states that under immigration reform USA, this burden is even less than Priority 2. No arguments need to be made about national security. Rather, it must be shown that there is no threat to the integrity of the immigration system, or in the alternative, you are not an enforcement priority. Brian Lerner states it is a bit ambiguous what exactly is meant by ‘integrity to the immigration system’, but the fact it is listed on Priority 3 exceptions, would mean it has the least amount of burden to prove.

Therefore, there are ways to argue that prosecutorial discretion should be exercised in each and every priority. Brian Lerner reminds you that you should have the packet for prosecutorial discretion exercised in a very persuasive manner and get a qualified immigration attorney to help comply with the requirements of the immigration reform USA.

Immigration Reform News Makes new Policies for deportation

The immigration reform news has made new policies states Brian D. Lerner, for who will be targeted for deportation. There are three different priorities with the first priority being the highest level of deportation and the second priority being the middle level priority and the third priority given the least preference and lowest priority for deportation.

However, the immigration reform news makes clear that there are issues and policies that apply to all of the priorities. Brian D. Lerner explains that prior policy memos were specifically revoked per the immigration reform news. The memorandum by Jeh Johnson states as follows: Nothing in this memorandum should be construed to prohibit or discourage the apprehension, detention, or removal of aliens unlawfully in the United States who are not identified as priorities herein. However, resources should be dedicated, to the greatest degree possible, to the removal of aliens described in the priorities set forth above, commensurate with the level of prioritization identified. Immigration officers and attorneys may pursue removal of an alien not identified as a priority herein, provided, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, removing such an alien would serve an important federal interest. Unfortunately, Brian D. Lerner, immigration attorney, states that this is a rather wide open policy. It certainly allows an ICE official to simply claim that deporting a particular individual is in the ‘federal interest’ of the U.S., or deporting somebody who entered illegally would serve the ‘federal interest’ by not encouraging others to do the same act. The immigration reform news certainly has delineated the different policies, but this particular paragraph, explains Brian D. Lerner is problematic. It would seem that the ICE official which is essentially on the bottom of the enforcement hierarchy should not be given the authority in her own individual opinion what is and is not in the Federal interest of the U.S. This is exactly what the memorandum on the ‘policies’ of deportation spells out.

The immigration reform news then goes on to state that its policies on detention. It is actually quite fair states Brian D. Lerner. Specifically, the immigration reform news states as follows regarding the detention policies: As a general rule, DHS detention resources should be used to support the enforcement priorities noted above or for aliens subject to mandatory detention by law. The immigration reform news states that absent extraordinary circumstances or the requirement of mandatory detention, field office directors should not expend detention resources on aliens who are known to be suffering from serious physical or mental illness, who are disabled, elderly, pregnant, or nursing, who demonstrate that they are primary caretakers of children or an infirm person, or whose detention is otherwise not in the public interest. The Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner states it is about time. There has been years of detaining pregnant mothers, elderly, mentally infirm and persons with physical disabilities. It has taken a toll and not looked very humane to the rest of the world. However, the immigration reform news per this memo seems to put an end to this type of detention. The immigration reform news goes on to state that to detain aliens in those categories who are not subject to mandatory detention, DHS officers or special agents must obtain approval from the ICE Field Office Director.Brian D. Lerner explains this is very fair as it does not put all the decision making ability in the front-line officer and will make a more uniform execution of this policy If an alien falls within the above categories and is subject to mandatory detention, field office directors are encouraged to contact their local Office of Chief Counsel for guidance.

Brian D. Lerner explains that this immigration reform news shows how the Obama administration priority is to not deport or to detain persons who are not in the listed priorities of deportable persons. What is interesting, explains Brian D. Lerner, is that on other parts of this memo, broad discretion is given to officers to decide whether or not to place one in removal proceedings. However, here, if the person is in detention, in accordance with the immigration reform news, they are not given that discretion, and in actuality, must go to a supervisor to keep the person detained if they fall under this category. Thus, the immigration reform news is good, but there are parts that could use clarification states Brian Lerner.

The new immigration reform bill makes changes to prosecutorial discretion

The immigration reform bill just issued by President Obama is actually not a ‘bill’ per se, but rather, an executive order. One part of the order was a comprehensive memo by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security that changed, altered and made in some respects clearer the priorities for deporting people and/or putting people in deportation proceedings.

Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Attorney, states that the immigration reform bill that deals with priorities has three major parts. The highest priority is referred to as Priority 1, second highes t is Priority 2 and of course the third and least preference is Priority 3. Therefore, states Brian Lerner, if you will be requesting prosecutorial discretion and you are under Priority 3 of the immigration reform bill, you should have the highest chance of success.

Priority 3 of the immigration reform bill states as follows: Priority 3 (other immigration violations): Priority 3 aliens are those who have been issued a final order of removal on or after January 1, 2014. The immigration reform bill states that aliens described in this priority, who are not also described in Priority 1 or 2, represent the third and lowest priority for apprehension and removal. Hence, states Brian Lerner, it is listed by the Secretary of Homeland Security that is the lowest priority. This is quite interesting, because usually somebody with a prior removal order will get one of the highest priorities from immigration.

Resources should be dedicated accordingly to aliens in this priority according to the immigration reform bill. Priority 3 aliens should generally be removed unless they qualify for asylum or another form of relief under our laws or, unless, in the judgment of an immigration officer, the alien is not a threat to the integrity of the immigration system or there are factors suggesting the alien should not be an enforcement priority. Unfortunately, it is this part of Priority 3 of the immigration reform bill that gives most concern. It puts a great deal of discretion in the officer at the lowest levels the ability to basically believe that removing somebody is always an enforcement priority. Brian Lerner states that it is this section that also is the most ambiguous and unclear. Perhaps in the months to come before the regulations are issued, there will be clarification as to this last part of Priority 3.

Brian D. Lerner explains in more detail the immigration reform bill and its reference to a ‘final order of removal’. It is necessary, explains Brian Lerner to know what is meant by the term ‘final order of removal’. An order of removal made by the immigration judge at the conclusion of proceedings under section 240 of the Act shall become final: (a) Upon dismissal of an appeal by the Board of Immigration Appeals; (b) Upon waiver of appeal by the respondent; (c) Upon expiration of the time allotted for an appeal if the respondent does not file an appeal within that time; (d) If certified to the Board or Attorney General, upon the date of the subsequent decision ordering removal; (e) If an immigration judge orders an alien removed in the alien’s absence, immediately upon entry of such order; or (f) If an immigration judge issues an alternate order of removal in connection with a grant of voluntary departure, upon overstay of the voluntary departure period, or upon the failure to post a required voluntary departure bond within 5 business days. Brian Lerner states that if the respondent has filed a timely appeal with the Board, the order shall become final upon an order of removal by the Board or the Attorney General, or upon overstay of the voluntary departure period granted or reinstated by the Board or the Attorney General.

The immigration reform bill does give a lot of hope to the families and to foreign nationals here in the U.S. However, Brian Lerner states there are ambiguities in the Priorites memo and you should get an experienced attorney to help you.

Priority #2 of immigration reform bill latest news give 2nd tier for enforcement of deportations

The immigration reform bill latest news is very good news for people who are here in the U.S. illegally. There is an expanded DACA, a new DAPA and a completely new memo on prosecutorial discretion and when to exercise the authority to put someone into removal proceedings and to try to deport them.

 

The new memo, explains Brian D. Lerner based upon the immigration reform bill latest news is divided into priorities. Basically priority 1 is who gets put into removal proceedings and who is targeted for deportation. As you would expect, claims Brian D. Lerner, it would be those with various kinds of crimes and those who have committed aggravated felonies.

 

However, there are other priorities in the immigration reform bill latest news. Priority 2 consists of (misdemeanors and new immigration violators). The immigration reform bill latest news states that aliens described in this priority , who are also not described in Priority 1, and Brian D. Lerner states that this represents the second-highest priority for apprehension and removal. Note it is the 2nd highest which means that it will be easier to get a Prosecutorial Discretion request granted.

 

The immigration reform bill latest news states on priority 2 that resources should be dedicated

accordingly to the removal of the following:

 

(a) aliens convicted of three or more misdemeanor offenses, other than minor traffic offenses or state or local offenses for which an essential element is the alien’s immigration status, provided the offenses arise out of three separate incidents. Brian Lerner states that this element seems to be met whether it is significant or insignificant misdemeanor offenses (unless of course we are talking only about traffic offenses).

 

The immigration reform latest news lists the second subcategory under Priority 2 as follows:  (b) aliens convicted of a “significant misdemeanor,” which for this purpose

is an offense of domestic violence ; sexual abuse or exploitation; burglary; unlawful possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or  trafficking; or driving under the influence; or if not an offense listed above, one for which the individual was sentenced to time in custody of 90 days or more (the sentence must involve time to be served in custody, and does not include a suspended sentence). Thus, the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner states that assuming the particular situation does not fall under subcategory(a), that only a single crime will permit satisfying the requirement of this section under Priority 2.

 

The immigration reform latest news for the differing priorities lists the third subcategory as follows:  (c) aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States after unlawfully entering or reentering the United States and who cannot establish to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that they have been physically  present in the United States continuously since January 1, 2014. Brian D. Lerner explains that this element is quite interesting in that it does not outright put somebody who entered illegally in this preference of priority 2 removals. Rather, it would seem based upon the language of the immigration reform latest news that if you can properly show you have been in the U.S. since January 1, 2014, that you will not fall under this section.  While it might not be clear, the immigration reform latest news does seem to imply that if you re-entered illegally after a deportation order that it could be argued you do not fall under this subsection.

 

The immigration reform latest news gives the last element of what makes Priority 2 of  enforcement as follows: (d) aliens who, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, USCIS

District Director, or USCIS Service Center Director, have significantly abused the visa or visa waiver programs. Brian Lerner states that this element both gives more room to argue that prosecutorial discretion should be mandated to not deport these people, but on the other side, it does give a significant amount of discretion to the immigration officer to put the person into deportation proceedings.

 

The immigration reform latest news states that these aliens listed in Priority 2 should be removed unless they qualify for asylum or another form of relief under our laws or, unless, in the judgment of an ICE Field Office Director, CBP Sector Chief, CBP Director of Field Operations, USCIS District Director, or users Service Center Director, there are factors indicating the alien is not a threat to national  security, border security, or public safety, and should not therefore be an enforcement priority. Therefore, the immigration reform latest news shows that there is certain room in Priority 2 to argue there should not be deportation.

 

Immigration reform update gives hope to millions even with criminal history

 

The immigration reform update was waited for years years by millions. Brian Lerner explains that over 16 months ago, the U.S. Senate put together a comprehensive immigration package and sent it to the U.S. House to bring up for a vote and hopefully pass. However, the House just sat on the Bill and did not do anything. Whether it was only John Boehner who did nothing, or other people in the Tea Party forcing their views and policies is unknown. However, Brian D. Lerner states that the immigration reform update is given by President Obama as an executive order which has expanded the already existing DACA program and creates the new DAPA program.

 

However, another part of the immigration reform update is made so to give clear guidelines as to enforcement priorities for  whom will be deported. This will affect all those, states Brian Lerner, as to whom will or will not be deported, but under the immigration reform update, should also have an effect on who can and cannot qualify for DACA and/or DAPA who have a criminal history of some type. On the same day practically that President Obama made the announcement of the Executive Order in the immigration reform update, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson sent a memo explaining the new enforcement priorities to Thomas S. Winkowski, Acting Director, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, R. Gil Kerlikowske, Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Leon Rodriguez

Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and Alan D. Bersin, Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy. Thus, the immigration reform update initiated this memo to heads of about every division of U.S. Immigration states Brian Lerner. This means that the officer at the port of entry or one who works in the detention facility or one who is adjudicating petitions will all have to follow the guidlines in this memo as it is ordered by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

 

Therefore, what does the memo per the immigration reform update talk about and mandate, asks Brian Lerner? Foremost, it deals with the new/updated policies of removal, detention and apprehension of foreign nationals in the United States. The immigration reform update mandated the policies change and be updated. Brian D. Lerner explains that the overiding direction of the memo is that it directs enforcement against those who issue a threat to the public safety or national security of the United States. The immigration reform update also gives high priority to border security.

 

A quote from the immigration reform update memo from Jeh Johnson is a follows:

 

“In the immigration context, prosecutorial discretion should apply not only to the decision to issue, serve, file, or cancel a Notice to Appear, but also to a broad range of other discretionary enforcement decisions, including deciding: whom to stop, question, and arrest; whom to detain or release; whether to settle, dismiss, appeal, or join in a motion on a case; and whether to grant deferred action, parole, or a stay of removal instead of pursuing removal in a case. “

 

Clearly, explains Brian D. Lerner, the memo makes crystal clear that people who are not in the enforcement priority categories should not be targeted for deportation. That would serve the whole purpose of the immigration reform update. In fact, explains Brian D. Lerner, the memo states that the prosecutorial discretion can and should be exercised at all stages of the enforcement process from the time the initial contact with the foreign national up until the moment of removal. The prosecutorial discretion can be exercised at anytime .  

 

The immigration reform update divides enforcement categories into priorities with the top priorities listed in order of enforcment and significance. Priority 1 (threats to national security, border security, and public safety) gets the top tier attention. Brian Lerner states that foreign nationals described in this priority represent the highest priority to which enforcement resources should be directed. Per the immigration reform update, it is foreign nationals in this priority 1 enforcement that should be targeted for deportation. They are (a) aliens engaged in or suspected of terrorism or espionage, or who otherwise pose a danger to national security; (b) aliens apprehended at the border or ports of entry while attempting to

unlawfully enter the United States; (c) aliens convicted of an offense for which an element was active

participation in a criminal street gang, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 52 l(a), or aliens not younger than 16 years of age who intentionally participated in an organized criminal gang to further the illegal activity of the gang; (d) aliens convicted of an offense classified as a felony in the convicting jurisdiction, other than a state or local offense for which an essential element was the alien’s immigration status; and (e) aliens convicted of an “aggravated felony,” as that term is defined in section 101(a)(43) of the Immigration and Nationality Act at the time of the conviction.

 

Thus, the priority 1 category of the immigration reform update makes clear who and who will not be targeted. Therefore, if you are not under this particular category, you should be able to apply for the DAPA and expanded DACA programs. In fact, explains Brian D. Lerner, if you are under one of the Priority 1 updates, you should still seek immigration advice so as to see if you can reduce or vacate the crime so it is not listed as a Priorty 1 offense in the immigration reform update.

Immigration reform USA 2014 news brings the new DAPA

Immigration reform USA 2014 brings a new form of relief called DAPA states Brian D. Lerner.  USCIS will create a new deferred action process, similar to DACA, for certain individuals. The immigration reform USA 2014 through the executive action will allow millions of people to obtain DAPA. Brian D. Lerner states that the requirements are as follows under the immigration reform USA 2014 news:

 

Brian D. Lerner states that it will apply to those who (1) have a U.S. citizen or LPR (Lawful Permanent Resident)  son or daughter (of any age) as of November 20, 2014; (2) have  been continuously present in the U.S. since before January 1, 2010; and the immigration reform USA news shows that the third item is that they were  physically present in the U.S. on November 20, 2014 and are present at the time  of requesting DAPA. Such individuals must pass background checks and must not  be an enforcement priority under the new memorandum. DAPA will be granted  for a three-year period. USCIS expects that it will begin accepting DAPA applications within 180 days of November 20, 2014 states Brian D. Lerner.

 

See Brian D. Lerner speak about the new DAPA program discussed in the immigration reform USA news

 

Immigration reform USA 2014 news states that USCIS will consider each request for Deferred Action for Parental Accountability (DAPA) on a case-by-case basis. Enforcement priorities include (but are not limited to) national security and public safety threats. Of course, Brian D. Lerner states it might be an issue as to what is or is not a public safety threat. However, if the DACA program is anything to look at, then there are certain areas or situations that should not be a problem for applying for DACA, explains the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner

 

The immigration reform USA news basically is giving low priority to persons for sure who do not have a criminal history. This means that if you have a prior deportation order or expedited removal order you should be able to still apply for DAPA states Brian Lerner, The immigration reform USA news is similar to the DACA news given a few years ago by President Obama.  In that respect, those people could apply for the ‘DACA’ at that time, even if they did have illegal entries into the U.S, or they had a deportation or removal order and even if they were already in detention facilities and/or in removal proceedings. Brian Lerner elaborates that the immigration reform USA news does not yet have regulations or instructions, and therefore, we do not know for sure. However, like the DACA program, what would be the use of issuing such an expansive DAPA program if by having a prior deportation order, or expedited removal order, it would be so easy to deny. It would defeat the purpose of the whole program.

 

The immigration reform USA news was to give an executive action to help millions of people here in the U.S., and therefore, if there is no criminal history, but there is negative immigration history (even other illegal re-entries after a deportation), there should probably still be the ability to apply for DAPA. Brian D. Lerner also puts out other issues such as what happens if the person who wants to apply for DAPA has already been deported and is outside the U.S. right now? In that case, hopefully the regulations to be issued will still permit that person to apply and then to be able to get some type of parole to enter the U.S. The immigration reform USA news is excellent news, but remember it will take 180 days after issuance of the order of the DAPA program to take effect.

 

The next issue with the immigration reform USA is whether persons with criminal history can apply for DAPA. Again, states Brian Lerner, since there are no regulations at this time, we are somewhat guessing. However, we do have the history of the last few years of the DACA program in order to see how it could very well be applied. For example, with DACA, there could not be more than 3 insignificant misdemeanors among other various provisions. Therefore, it would be incumbent for the particular person to have a good immigration attorney argue in the DAPA case that they do not fall under the enforcement priorities of deportation and that their crimes are not targeted and that they should qualify for DAPA. Even if you have significant misdemeanors and/or a felony, there are ways to eventually apply for DAPA. It would seem that with the immigration reform USA news that it would be possible to make some type of motion to vacate and or reduce the crime so that if granted, afterwards, you should be able to apply.

 

Brian D. Lerner makes clear that the executive action by President Obama is not a congressional action, but rather an executive order that he is taking on his own initiative because Congress failed to act. Therefore, do not wait to apply. Take advantage of the immigration reform USA news and see a qualified immigration attorney.

 

Immigration reform 2014 news by President Obama will help millions of people

 

Immigration reform 2014 news is very good for the people who are here illegally in the United States.f Unfortunately, shares Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Attorney, it is an executive order, so once President Obama is no longer President of the United States, the executive order can simply be revoked.

 

The Law Offices of Brian D. lerner can take the immigration reform 2104 news and start preparing the applications at the present time.  There are several different items which President Obama discussed in the immigration reform 2014 news.  The first and probably one of the most important is the expansion of DACA. This is also known as the Dream Act, or Deferred Action or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

 

See Brian D. Lerner speak about the immigration reform news 2014 about the new DACA

 

In order to understand how the Immigration reform news 2014 differs from the old or current DACA, it is necessary to understand first what was originally promulgated by President Obama for the last few years. Brian D. Lerner, immigration attorney explains that this is the current DACA, prior to the immigration reform 2014 news by President Obama:

 

 

  • Have arrived in the U.S. when they were under the age of sixteen;
  • Have continuously resided in the U.S. for at least five years prior to June 15, 2012 and have been present in the U.S. on June 15, 2012;
  • Currently be in school, have graduated from high school, have a GED, or be an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard or the U.S. Armed Forces;
  • Not have been convicted of a felony offense, a “significant misdemeanor offense,” three or more non-significant misdemeanors, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety; and
  • Have been under thirty-one years old on June 15, 2012.

 

 

Now, with the immigration reform news 2014, all of the basic requirements are the same, except there are a couple very important changes states Brian D. Lerner. As one can see from the above description, the persona applying for the old DACA needed to be no more than 31 years old as of June 15, 2012. However, the new expanded DACA does not have an upper age limit states Brian D. Lerner.  Thus, the immigration reform news 2014 mandates that you must be under 16 when you entered the U.S., but no longer is there a 31 year age cap.

 

The next item, explains Brian Lerner which is different from the older DACA is that you do not have to be residing in the U.S. from 2007. Rather, January 1, 2010 is when you have to be present in the U.S. in order to qualify for DACA under the immigration reform news 2014. Brian D. Lerner explains that the next change is that the period of work authorization will be 3 years, not the two years as is currently the case.

 

It would be a good idea to have the application prepared right now. The immigration reform news 2014 states that 90 days after November 20, 2014 is when  these newly expanded DACA applications will be accepted. Therefore, Brian D. Lerner states that you should start right away and then complete preparation and have ready to file in 90 days from the issuance of the order.


www.californiaimmigration.us The Associa

http://www.californiaimmigration.us

The Associated Press reports that fewer unaccompanied immigrant children are crossing the Texas-Mexico border, allowing the federal government to close three temporary shelters. The decline could be the result of searing summer temperatures or a messaging campaign that stresses the dangers of the journey and warns them they will not be allowed to stay. The article also notes that the removal time for many adults traveling alone has been reduced from 33 days to about four days.

www.californiaimmigration.us The Second

http://www.californiaimmigration.us

The Second Circuit remanded to the BIA for further proceedings, finding that the IJ erred when it required the petitioner to demonstrate that political opinion was “the central” as opposed to “at least one central” ground for persecution by the Nepali Maoists.

http://youtu.be/bVNaFucwkeQ

http://youtu.be/bVNaFucwkeQ