• 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

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

 

 

 

The BIA Overturned! The evidence was not

The BIA Overturned! The evidence was not properly considered http://ow.ly/rPiEQ

Appeal to BIA

Board of immigration appeals

BIA overturned

BIA rules on step child

Petitioner could present the error to the BIA

The court found that a translation error in a medical document corroborating Petitioner’s injuries contributed significantly to the IJ’s adverse credibility finding, and stayed the appeal so that Petitioner could present the error to the BIA.

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA decisions

Husband and wife appealed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision denying their petitions for asylum

Where husband and wife appealed the Board of Immigration Appeals’ decision denying their petitions for asylum and withholding of removal and relief under the Convention Against Torture, and husband’s petition for review was deemed moot after he died, court of appeals retained jurisdiction to consider wife’s derivative petition because there could be collateral consequences if it was dismissed. Wife’s derivative claim failed because substantial evidence supported immigration judge’s adverse credibility finding against husband where his application and attached declaration were inconsistent–with one stating that he was a Hindu who feared violence by Muslims and the other stating that he was a Muslim who feared violence by Hindus–and where husband’s omission of details was misleading in light of his later claims

The BIA

Board of immigration appeals

Appeal to BIA

BIA issues two crime related decisions

Immigration Judge’s jurisdiction on remand from BIA

An immigration judge’s jurisdiction on remand from the Board of Immigration Appeals is limited only when the BIA expressly retains jurisdiction and qualifies or limits the scope of the remand to a specific purpose. An articulated purpose for the remand, without any express limit on scope, is not sufficient to limit the remand such that it forecloses consideration of other new claims or motions that the immigration judge deems appropriate or that are presented in accordance with relevant regulations. Immigration judge’s adverse credibility determination was supported by substantial evidence where witness testified credibly and consistently that he had prepared and falsified petitioner’s asylum application, as he had done for at least a hundred other clients, and petitioner, to rebut that evidence, relied only on his own testimony, which he eventually admitted was riddled with misrepresentations. Immigration judge’s finding that petitioner filed a frivolous application was supported by a preponderance of the evidence.
Fernandes v. Holder – filed August 20, 2010.

BIA 

BIA rules 

Board of immigration appeals 

BIA issues 

USCIS Guidance on Uniform Denial Language Pertaining to Appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)

USCIS draft memorandum, “Guidance on Uniform Denial Language Pertaining to Appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

BIA

Board of immigration appeals

BIA and immigration

BIA issues two crime related decisions

New Case on BIA being overruled

New Case on BIA being overruled: Because deferral of removal is available under the Convention Against Torture regardless of whether petitioner has been convicted of a crime, a denial of deferral of removal under CAT is always a decision on the merits. Where alien testified credibly that Nigerian citizens deported for crimes committed in foreign lands were immediately imprisoned upon returning to Nigeria and nothing in the record contradicted this testimony, Board of Immigration Appeals’ conclusion that alien was not likely to be detained upon return to Nigeria was not supported by substantial evidence. Both BIA and immigration judge erred in failing to consider potentially dispositive testimony and evidence that alien would be intentionally tortured in Nigerian prisons because he has AIDS and subject to having his medications withheld as a form of punishment, and such evidence was required to be given reasoned consideration on remand.
Eneh v. Holder – filed April 15, 2010

BIA

Appeal to BIA

Board of immigration appeals

BIA deference given to particularly serious crime

Title: The BIA. Just a stepping stone.

Question: I lost my case at the Immigration Court. I understand that I have many issues that I can appeal and that there is a very reasonable chance that I could win. Can you let me know where my appeal goes and what might happen?

Answer: There are many Immigration Courts in the U.S. All together there are about 55 Immigration Courts through all 50 States as well as in Puerto Rico. Whenever you lose at the Immigration Court level, you appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals or the BIA. There is only one BIA in the entire United States. The BIA is located in Virginia and handles all of the appeals of every Immigration Court throughout the entire United States.

The Notice of Appeal must be in the hands of the BIA no later than 30 days after issuance of the decision from the Immigration Judge. Afterwards, it goes to a panel of three of the members of the Board of Immigration Appeals and in about one year the decision is issued.

Question: I have heard that there will be some changes at the BIA. Is that true and what are they?

Answer: Yes it is true. The changes are not for the better. In fact, the changes will make the appeal process to the BIA an exercise in futility and will deny numerous rights to immigrants and their rights to appeal. Attorney General Ashcroft has just issued regulations to go into effect later this month that will change some of the basic ways that the BIA decides cases. First, they will no longer make a three member panel to decide cases, but only one member will decide. Only on cases of novel importance or ones that are unusually complicated will it be referred to a three member panel. Who decides if a case is novel or unusual is unclear. In all other real appeals (other than the new BIA regulations) it goes to a three member panel. This gives the person appealing the knowledge and satisfaction that the appeal will be decided among three qualified persons who must come to a consensus. Now, the appeal at the BIA, for the most part, is in the hands of one person. This item by itself takes away much of the due process and fairness to the immigrant.

Next, there is now a timetable that is set for deciding the case. Thus, rather than taking the necessary time to properly decide the case, the Attorney General has mandated that the cases take around 6 months. Thus, again there is a violation of the Due Process rights of immigrants. An appeal should not have as its primary importance the number of days or months it must be decided. What this will do is make a single member rush through cases to make sure that the timetable is met, rather than the case being decided on its merits.

Question: What will happen if the BIA denies the case?

Answer: In reality, that is what will happen in most cases. Because of these new regulations, and because of the violation of Constitutional Due Process rights, people will simply use the BIA as a stepping stone to get to the real appeal. Once the BIA denies the case, it can be appealed directly to a Circuit Appellate Court of the United States. These courts are right below the U.S. Supreme Court. In these appeals, there will be a three judge panel and they will give a real chance to have the case heard on the merits. Do not give up with these new regulations. Just keep fighting until you get to the Circuit Courts, and hopefully, we can restore the immigrant rights that have been lost.

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/appeal-to-bia/

https://cbocalbos.wordpress.com/tag/bia-board-of-immigration-appeals/

https://californiaimmigration.us/bia-rules-on-withholding-of-removal/