• 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

Another Win for the Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner

2010 BIA order reopened sua sponte based on a change of law and whether a DUI in Arizona on a suspended license is a crime involving moral turpitude.  Client is now eligible for cancellation of removal.

 

The Associated Press reports that a judge in Arizona ruled yesterday that DACA recipients are eligible for in-state college tuition at Maricopa County colleges. In his ruling, the judge wrote, “Federal law, not state law, determines who is lawfully present in the U.S,” and because the federal government considers recipients of deferred action lawfully present, they can receive lower in-state tuition.

Daca meaning

DACA attorney

President protects DACA

Physical presence in DACA?

AP: Judge: DACA Recipients Can Get In-State Tuition in Arizona

The Associated Press reports that a judge in Arizona ruled yesterday that DACA recipients are eligible for in-state college tuition at Maricopa County colleges. In his ruling, the judge wrote, “Federal law, not state law, determines who is lawfully present in the U.S,” and because the federal government considers recipients of deferred action lawfully present, they can receive lower in-state tuition.

Effective May, 1, 2015, only Chinese-born EB-5 applicants with priority dates before May 1, 2013,

EB-5 visa

EB-5 investment

EB-5 investment attorney

Get the EB-5

EB-5 China Cut-Off

Effective May, 1, 2015, only Chinese-born EB-5 applicants with priority dates before May 1, 2013,

In a precedent decision issued yesterday, the BIA held that a respondent who has voted in an election involving candidates for federal office in violation of 18 USC §611(a) is removable under section 237(a)(6)(A) of the INA, regardless of whether the respondent knew that he or she was committing an unlawful act by voting. The BIA reasoned that because the respondent, an LPR who had disclosed during a naturalization interview that she had voted in an election in 2006 that included a local school board race, had intentionally voted in an election involving candidates for federal office, the general intent requirement of §611(a) was satisfied.

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA deference given to particulary serious crime

 

 

 

BIA Finds That Respondent Who Voted in a Federal Election Is Removable Under the INA

In a precedent decision issued yesterday, the BIA held that a respondent who has voted in an election involving candidates for federal office in violation of 18 USC §611(a) is removableunder section 237(a)(6)(A) of the INA, regardless of whether the respondent knew that he or she was committing an unlawful act by voting. The BIA reasoned that because the respondent, an LPR who had disclosed during a naturalization interview that she had voted in an election in 2006 that included a local school board race, had intentionally voted in an election involving candidates for federal office, the general intent requirement of §611(a) was satisfied.

In a precedent decision issued today, the BIA held that a respondent who adjusted status inside the U.S., and who did not enter as an LPR, is not barred from establishing eligibility for a waiver of inadmissibility under INA §212(h). In so doing, the BIA withdrew from its previous decisions on the topic, aligning its holding with that of nine circuit courts who have held that the plain language of §212(h) precludes immigrants from establishing eligibility for relief only if they lawfully entered the U.S. as permanent residents and thereafter committed a removable offense for which a waiver is required.

Appeal to BIA

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Bia deference given to particulary serious crime

BIA Finds LPR Who Adjusts Status in U.S. Is Not Barred from §212(h) Waiver

In a precedent decision issued today, the BIA held that a respondent who adjusted status inside the U.S., and who did not enter as an LPR, is not barred from establishing eligibility for a waiver of inadmissibility under INA §212(h). In so doing, the BIA withdrew from its previous decisions on the topic, aligning its holding with that of nine circuit courts who have held that the plain language of §212(h) precludes immigrants from establishing eligibility for relief only if they lawfully entered the U.S. as permanent residents and thereafter committed a removable offense for which a waiver is required.

The Salt Lake Tribune: In Utah Speech, U.S. Immigration Chief Says System Is Unjust

The Salt Lake Tribune reports that USCIS Director León Rodríguez called on Congress to make the immigration system more just at a convention of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network yesterday. “The immigration system that we are working off of … was mostly built back in the 1960s, meaning that it is an obsolete and archaic scheme that does not reflect our economy, does not reflect our demographics, and does not reflect—above all—our values,” Director Rodríguez said. “Real justice will come when we have reform … that gives us a path to citizenship [for undocumented immigrants].”