• Hours & Info

    3233 E. Broadway,
    Long Beach, CA 90803
    (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

Immigration Article: Homeland Security Passes (Part I)

Posted on July 28, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I have heard that the Homeland Security Bill has passed the House and the Senate. I am confused on know this will effect several people whom I know are in the immigration process. Could you give me some background on what exactly this bill does?

 Answer: First, and foremost, this bill referred to as the “The Homeland Security Act of 2002” creates a new department within the United States Government. The main purpose of this department is to prevent terrorism and to make the United States safer. The bill is enormous. It is over 400 pages and deals with a huge variety of issues. Of course, my response will mainly focus on the immigration issues.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service will cease to exist in its present capacity. If fact, the Homeland Security Bill abolishes the INS. There are two major functions currently in the INS. One is the enforcement division which is concerned with deportation/removal and enforcement of the immigration laws. This part of INS is going to be transferred to what is known as Bureau of Border Security under the Department of Homeland Security. The duties of issuing visas will now be transferred to the Under Secretary for Border and Transportation Security in tandem with the Secretary of State. The issuance of Visas will be headed by the Secretary of Homeland Security.

Question: Are there any other new departments? Specifically, who will rule on applications sent to INS?

 Answer: Section 451 of the Bill creates the establishment of Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. This sub-department will perform the following functions: 1) Adjudications of immigrant visa petitions; 2) Adjudications of naturalization petitions; 3) Adjudications of asylum and refugee applications; 4) Adjudications performed at service centers; and 5) All other adjudications performed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Question: When do all these provisions go into effect?

 Answer: Again, the INS would look at this as fraud. In fact, if you get married within less than 60 days after entry to the U.S. on the Visitor Visa, you are presumed to have committed fraud. Not only will the application for Lawful Permanent Residency be denied, you could very well get deported because of the fraud.

Question: What are the consequences of doing the change of status right after entering the U.S.?

 Answer: First, they could deny your change of status application and you could go out of status. Next, the INS may very well assume that you committed fraud. That is, when you got the Visitor Visa and entered the U.S. that you did not really intend to visit, but rather, intended to go to school or to work in the United States. If that happens, you could be deported because you committed misrepresentation and fraud. The fraud will stay with you forever and never goes away. If you ever want to reenter the U.S., you will need to get a Fraud Waiver. Those are not easy waivers to obtain.

Question: What is the best way to avoid these drastic consequences?

Answer: First, the way that people come into the U.S. is probably going to change. You must decide whether you want to go to school or work since these are the options you might be considering. If you are intending on going to school, then you should get the I-20 and apply for the Student Visa from your home country. Then, when you enter the U.S., you will be entering as a Student, not a Visitor. Alternatively, if you want to work in the U.S., you should have your sponsor file the petition prior to you getting to the U.S. Therefore, you will not have any allegations by INS that you committed fraud. You need to be very careful if you come to the U.S. with a Visitor Visa and then change your status right away. Obviously, since you only will be getting 30 days in the U.S., you must strongly consider not getting a change of status in the U.S.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Immigration Article: To Extend or Not to Extend?

Posted on July 27, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I entered the United States on a Visitor Visa. I have been here for about 4 months and my status will expire in another two months. Can I simply extend my status without going back to my home country?

 Answer: Prior to September 11, 2001, it would not have been a problem. These types of extensions were quite easy and were usually approved without any problems. However, after September 11, 2001, new regulations have come out regarding the B1/B2 Visitor Visa. These regulations first were issued to make it clear that persons entering the United States do not automatically get a Visitor Visa for six months. Rather, they could get the Visitor Visa for only a month, or the time required for the stay in the United States. Thus, you might have been able to get a Visitor Visa at the U.S. Embassy or Consulate for six months, but when you entered the United States, the Immigration and Naturalization Service might have only given you a lawful stay of 30 days.

This has had the effect of decreasing the number of people who visit the United States. Realistically, when you are traveling from around the world or some distant country, it was not worth the risk for people to stay only a month (especially if this was a once or twice in lifetime type of vacation.) Also, the uncertainty of being issued a Visitor Visa at the Consulate for a certain period of time, only to have it reduced significantly at the border did not bode well with travelers.

 Now, the Immigration and the Naturalization Service has denied many extensions for Visitor Visas. Additionally, many of the ones that have been granted have been granted for only 15 to 45 days. While some extensions are being granted, a large number of extensions are getting what is known as a Request for Evidence. This is a document whereby the Immigration and Naturalization Service does not yet deny the extension, but rather, asks for more information before making a decision. Some Requests for Evidence are intensive consisting of many pages. In some cases, by time you get the response to the Request for Evidence, either the extension is denied, or it was approved for a very small time which has already passed.

 Question: What happens if the denial comes, or if your status is extended, but by time you get the approval notice, the approval date has already passed?

Answer: You will most likely be out of status. If this occurs, then you will not be able to change your status or adjust your status in the United States. You will have to leave the United States and go back to your home country in order to reapply for the Visitor Visa. Once they see that you have been out of status, it will be very difficult to get the Visitor Visa. Additionally, the Consulate or Embassy officers will see that you have just come back from the United States and may not believe you are intending on returning to your home country. Finally, depending on how long it has been since you were out of status, you might be barred from coming back into the United States for the next 10 years.

Question: Is there any other way to remain in the United States without having to go back to my home country?

Answer: Yes. Rather than an extension of your status, you would apply for a change of status to some other type of status. You can obtain a Student change of status. This will allow you after it is approved to go to a designated school. Alternatively, there are a myriad of different types of work visas to allow you to work legally and remain in the country. At this point, I would not recommend doing the extension of the Visitor Visa. Rather, I would recommend that you change your status to some other type of status such as student, exchange or work status.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Preventing Removal through Habeas Corpus

Posted on July 23, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I have heard that the government is trying to deport people to their countries even if the foreign government does not want them back. Is this true?

Answer: Yes. However, in a recent 9th Circuit decision, Ali vs. Ashcroft, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 19213 (9th Cir. 2003), this issue was addressed.

In this case, the man was from Somalia and he had a final order of removal against him. The Bureau of Customs and Immigration Enforcement (BICE) had plans to deport this person (Ali) to Somalia. He filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus in the District Court to prevent BICE from deporting him to Somalia (a country without a functioning government.)

First, Ali was not merely contesting the removal order. Instead, he was primarily arguing that BICE could not remove an alien to a country without a functioning government. Here, the Ninth Circuit held that administrative exhaustion is not required where they are not ruling on the merits of the removal, but rather, a practice of constitutional or statutory violations.

Next, this case held that if it would be futile to exhaust the administrative remedies, and the issue revolves around a legal question, that the appellant is not required to exhaust his administrative remedies.

This is a very critical ruling. Primarily, the reality of being removed from the United States is weighed against exhausting administrative remedies. What usually happens is that when a person is in imminent danger of being deported or removed from the United States, a Motion for a Stay of that Deportation can be filed with the Board of Immigration Appeals. In the vast majority of the cases, they will deny the Stay of Deportation, or simply not rule on the matter prior to the person being deported.

BICE will always try to make these jurisdictional arguments based upon the fact that the alien has failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. However, if the alien did not file the necessary Habeas Corpus to get a real chance at getting the stay of deportation issued, he would be deported and the issue would be moot. In this case, the alien was from Somalia and he faced a real likelihood of being killed or tortured by being returned to a country whereby there is no organized government. Thus, not only would it have been futile to try to get the stay of deportation issued by the BIA, it could have resulted in his death.

Thus, the Ninth Circuit ruled that judicial review was not barred in this case because of a lack of exhaustion of administrative remedies.

In Ali, supra, the Ninth Circuit goes through an analysis of how the government determines which country a person will be deported. The Immigration and Nationality Act §1231 deals with the procedure that must be used in order to designate the country of deportation. It essentially states that a country which the alien designates (or which the government designates if the alien is unwilling to do so) will be the country of removal if the government of that country gives their approval to accept the alien within thirty days. If the foreign government does not give their approval within 30 days, then the subsequent provisions of the statute must be followed to determine which will be the country of removal.

The subsequent provisions also make clear that it is necessary to have the foreign government’s approval in order to deport and remove the alien to that country.

Failing the first two sections, the government must look to a third section to determine the country of removal. In this third section, there is a litany of different provisions that are stated as to where will be the country of removal. All of the provisions do not require the foreign governments consent as do the prior provisions. Here, the BICE was arguing that the statute in the third set of provisions does not require that they have the governments consent, and therefore, they do not need any consent to deport aliens under this provision.

The Ninth Circuit adopted the reasoning of the District Court. In essence, they stated that the consent requirement of the foreign government was implicit in the third section. Otherwise, it would render the first two sections superfluous. For example, the government in the first section could deny the Attorney General permission to deport the alien to their country. Then, the Attorney General could go down to the third section to give themselves authority to deport the person without the consent of the foreign government which was specifically required in the first section. In fact, to allow the third section to stand without an implicit approval by the foreign government would make the first two sections meaningless.

Unfortunately, we are facing more situations similar to this case where the government will try to bootstrap a particular provision as giving them authority to perform an action when other provisions do not give them such authority.

Thus, this case has stood up to the fairness of aliens in this particular situation. The law has shown that BICE cannot try to deport an individual to a country who will not accept this alien and whom will torture and/or kill him upon his return.

After concluding that it was not legal to deport a person to a country where the foreign government has not given their authorization, the Ninth Circuit then addressed the issue of indefinite detention of the alien. Here, where there is no likelihood of removal in the foreseeable future, the alien must be released.

This particular case is not only a win for this particular alien, but for all aliens in his similar situation across the U.S. It is a ruling that shows that basic humanitarian considerations need to be followed.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Being exiled from the U.S.

Posted on July 22, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: Many people from around the world are being persecuted, tortured, imprisoned or killed in their home countries. However, sometimes they do not win. I heard that they may not be allowed to ever get immigration benefits again. Is this true?

Answer: They flee this persecution and apply for asylum in the United States. As a side benefit of applying for asylum, people can get work-permits which sometimes are more important for these people than the actual asylum. In the past, applying for asylum would be abused by thousands of people for this very purpose.

Thus, in 1996, Congress enacted a law which essentially stated that if someone files a frivolous asylum application, they would be permanently barred from ever applying for any immigration benefit for the rest of their lives. This bar would apply if the Immigration Judge made a ruling that the asylum application was frivolous or meritless.

In a recent 9th Circuit decision, Jamal vs. Ashcroft, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 23239 (9th Cir. 2003), the alien first challenged the Immigration Judge’s credibility determination underlying his removal order. The Immigration Judge had made a specific ruling that the alien was not credible. The Immigration Judge identified specific inconsistencies in the alien’s testimony, his expert’s testimony, his brother’s testimony, and between the different witnesses’ testimony. Further, the Immigration Judge ruled that the inconsistencies went to the heart of the asylum application and the alien’s identity, his membership in a persecuted group, and the date he entered the United States.

The Immigration Judge then ruled that the alien knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application and ordered that the alien be removed from the United States. Thus, because of this ruling the alien was barred for life from ever coming back to the United States. The alien appealed both the removal order and the order that the asylum application was frivolous.

Such a finding carries the severe penalty of a permanent bar to immigration relief. Immigration regulations require there to be sufficient opportunity to account for discrepancies or implausibilities.

The Immigration Judge reviewed with Farah the consequences of filing a frivolous asylum application. However, Farah wanted to continue with the application. In the end, the Immigration Judge found that Farah had knowingly filed a frivolous asylum application, but never allowed Farah to explain any of the inconsistencies the Immigration Judge relied upon in making that decision.

The primary issue to be answered is whether the Immigration Judge ruled correctly on whether there was a knowingly frivolous asylum application filed. This issue is of critical importance as it bears on whether persons who might have a colorable asylum claim will step forward and apply. If they feel that they will be adjudged to have filed a knowingly frivolous asylum application, a chilling effect for asylum seekers will occur. They will be afraid to file these applications. Instead of the United States attempting to adjudicate an asylum claims, the United States will be sending out a message to try to exclude valid claims.

The Immigration Judge concluded that Farah’s asylum application was so inconsistent that it rose to the level of being knowingly frivolous under the immigration laws.

In this case, the Immigration Judge found two specific examples of fabrication that were relevant to his decision: the petitioner’s entry date and his travel history. In his decision, the IJ held that it was clear that the respondent did not enter in New York on January 24, 1999, in the manner in which he stated and that he has fabricated that portion of his claim. The Immigration Judge further stated that he has also been untruthful as to whether he was in Nairobi, Kakuma, London, England or any other place before he came to the United States.

This court stated that Farah had ample opportunities to explain the discrepancies that led to the adverse credibility finding. For example, discrepancies in his father’s name and in his clan identity. To support the finding of frivolousness, however, the Immigration Judge relied with particularity on different discrepancies between what Farah said and the extrinsic evidence. Farah was not given an adequate opportunity to address those additional discrepancies before the ruling on frivolousness was made. In sum, the evidence presented did not allow a proper opportunity for Farah to explain all discrepancies in the record. Therefore, the court overturned the decision of the Immigration Judge that the application was knowingly frivolous.

Even though the Court did not reverse the decision denying the asylum, they did reverse the permanent bar to future filings with immigration. Now, aliens with colorable asylum claims will not be afraid to present those claims to the United States.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Will my son be sent back home?

Posted on July 21, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I am a lawful permanent resident and have petitioned my wife and son many years ago. Just recently I found out about the V Visa which allowed my wife and son to come to the United States and reside with me while we are waiting for the visa number to become current. However, my son is going to be 21 years old in two months. I have been told by USCIS that he will have to return home and he can no longer reside here on the V Visa. I have missed him so much that I cannot bear to be separated for years to come. Is there anything I can do?

Answer: Actually, there was just a case that came out in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal. Therefore, if you live in the jurisdiction of the Ninth Circuit (basically the Western United States), then you are in luck.

In this case, the court held that Immigration regulations terminating V nonimmigrant status the day before the visa holder’s 21st birthday, was contrary to Congress’ intent to reunite families when it enacted the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act (“LIFE Act“).

As background: the LIFE Act added a new nonimmigrant visa category, INA § 101(a)(15)(V). Spouses and children of lawful permanent residents who have been waiting for permanent resident status for at least three years are eligible for V visas. These V visa holders are entitled to certain benefits, including employment authorization. The INS regulations implementing INA § 101(a)(15)(V) provide that V visa status “will be granted a period of admission not to exceed 2 years or the day before the alien’s 21st birthday, whichever comes first.” Upon termination of V nonimmigrant status, the individual is no longer eligible for employment authorization.

In this Ninth Circuit case, the government argued that, the court should allow the USCIS regulations to stand. The court ultimately disagreed, stating “[w]e do not owe deference…to agency regulations if they construe a statute in a way that is contrary to congressional intent or that frustrates congressional policy.”

The court concluded that Congress did not directly speak to the issue of whether a person could lose V status by turning 21. The court found that the LIFE Act made clear that a person over the age of 21 was not eligible to receive a V visa but that the statute was silent regarding whether a person over the age of 21 who has been issued a V issue is able to continue to hold that visa. Thus, the court concluded that Congress’ intent was ambiguous.

The court noted that the LIFE Act provided three ways that V visa status may terminate and that aging-out was not one of those ways. Thus, applying the presumption that “when a statute designates certain . . . manners of operation, all omissions should be understood as exclusions,” the court concluded that “[s]ince Congress explicitly enumerated circumstances by which V Visa benefits are terminated, the presumption is that Congress purposely excluded all other possible means, such as aging-out.” The court further found that its conclusion was supported by: (1) statements in the congressional record regarding another LIFE Act provision (adjustment of status under INA § 245(i)); (2) “the general rule of construction that when the legislature enacts an ameliorative rule designed to forestall harsh results, the rule will be interpreted and applied in an ameliorative fashion;” (3) and the rule of lenity (in immigration cases, “doubts are to be resolved in favor of the alien.”).

Thus, the court invalidated the age-out provisions of the V Visa. Thus, your son can legally stay with you under the V Visa even though he will be older than 21 years of age. This is a significant victory for immigrants as it shows the power of the family unit and how Immigration cannot simply make arbitrary regulations.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Is Immigration suffering or being helped by DHS?

Posted on July 21, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: Last year, the Department of Homeland Security came into being. I have many friends who are having lots of problems with immigration. Is the DHS helping or hurting these people?

Answer: March 1, 2004 marks the one-year anniversary of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS’s) assumption of U.S. immigration functions. There are several problems that exist within the agency. 1) Inadequate Coordination: Because enforcement and adjudications are two sides of the same coin it would be to the benefit of all if there were close coordination from DHS and between the DHS and other federal agencies including the State Department, Department of Justice, FBI, and CIA. However, this has yet to be realized.

Next, inadequate funding long has characterized adjudications. Especially in light of this historical underfunding, it is imperative that the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) be accorded adequate resources to do its job. Direct congressional appropriations are necessary in order to ensure that the USCIS lets the appropriate people into the country and bars those who mean to do us harm, and adequately delivers services.

Question: I also have many friends over the last year who have received answers to their applications. For one reason or another, it always boils down to a “no”.

Answer: This is a definite problem. The DHS must change the culture of “No”. There have been widespread reports of unfair, arbitrary and inconsistent adjudications. Reinforcing this view are the increased numbers of unnecessary requests for additional information that contribute to the dramatic slowdown in the processing of petitions and applications. While our immigration system has long been characterized by backlogs, delays, and inadequate funding, current backlogs and delays have reached historical levels. Many organizations and individuals are reporting severe delays in processing that have negatively impacted American business and family members. USCIS needs to efficiently and fairly adjudicate petitions and applications.

Question: I have read a report that the number of B2 Visitor Visas has been denied and cut drastically over the last couple of years. Is this really what DHS wants?

Answer: The Importance of Immigration at our Ports of Entry must be recognized. Our national and economic security depends on the efficient flow of people and goods at these ports. Unfortunately, current reports suggests that the Custom and Border Protection Bureau (CBP) is giving inadequate attention to immigration and is initiating polices that do not reflect the intricacy of the subject and its importance to our country.

Question: My family has appointments at the U.S. Consulate, but there have been numerous delays. Is this also a problem?

Answer: With the Department of Homeland Security’s authority to establish and administer rules governing the granting of visas, it is vitally important that visas be granted to the people who come to build America and denied to those who mean to do us harm. We must balance our national security and economic security needs by recognizing that the U.S. is tied to the rest of the world economically, socially, and politically. However, severe delays at the consulates continue to hamper the visa issuance process, with serious consequences for businesses, families, schools and others in the United States. The gridlock that has paralyzed the visa issuance process in the past two years must be resolved – the agencies charged with clearing security checks must be motivated to give these operations the priority that they deserve.
Thus, there are a great many items that must be worked upon. It is a constant balancing of safety verses allowing immigrants into the U.S. Hopefully, in the near future, there will be a comprehensive policy to deny visas to persons who would be a danger to our society, but to allow those into the U.S. for legitimate means.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

I can file online!

Posted on July 16, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I have heard that in the past the USCIS has accepted work permit applications online and that this program has been very effective. Why do they not accept more types of forms online?

Answer: Actually, USCIS expanded their e-filing service online as of May 26, 2004. Now, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) include six new forms for customers to apply for immigration benefits online to expand its E-Filing program.

Initially, when the Internet-based customer service initiative began last year (May 2003), it allowed customers to file for two of the most frequently used applications online: Application to Replace a Permanent Resident Card (Form I-90) and Application for Employment Authorization (Form I-765).

With the addition of the six new forms online, E-Filing now supports eight forms that account for more than 50% of the total volume of benefits applications USCIS receives annually. Since the establishment of E-Filing, more than 115,000 customers have chosen to apply online for immigration benefits.

Question: Can you let me know which new forms are now accepted online?

Answer: Form I-90, Application to Replace a Permanent Resident Card; Form I-765, Application for Employment; Form I-129, Petition for a Non-immigrant Worker; Form I-131, Application for Travel Document; Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker; Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Non-immigrant Status; Form I-821, Application for Temporary Protected Status; Form I-907 and Request for Premium Processing Service Why Use E-Filing.

Question: Is E-filing difficult to do?

Answer: E-Filing is quick, easy and convenient because it allows you to complete and submit applications at any time, from any computer with Internet access. After filing online, you will receive instant electronic confirmation that your applications were received. You can then schedule an appointment, if necessary, to visit an Application Support Center at a convenient time – by calling the National Customer Service Center. You can schedule the appointment for the collection of a digital photograph, signature, and fingerprints. You would pay fees online with a credit or debit card or through the electronic transfer of U.S. funds from your checking or savings account. You do not need to obtain a money order or a cashier’s check.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

How can I be reunited with my family?

Posted on July 15, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

 Question: I am a Lawful Permanent Resident and have petitioned my spouse and child years ago. However, I am heartbroken because I have not been with them in years. Is there anything I can do?

Answer: The Legal Immigration Family Equity Act (LIFE Act) established a nonimmigrant category within the immigration law that allows the spouse or child of a U.S. citizen to be admitted to the United States in a nonimmigrant category. The admission allows the spouse or child to complete processing for permanent residence while in the United States. It also allows those admitted in the new category to have permission for employment while they await processing of their case to permanent resident status.

The Visa classification is known as the K-3/4 nonimmigrants. The K3 applies to the spouse and the K4 applies to the children.

Question: Who is Eligible?

Answer: A person may receive a K-3 visa if that person: 1) Has concluded a valid marriage with a citizen of the United States; 2) has a relative petition (Form I-130) filed by the U.S. citizen spouse for the person; 3) seeks to enter the United States to await the approval of the petition and subsequent lawful permanent resident status, and, has an approved Form I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiancée, forwarded to the American consulate abroad where the alien wishes to apply for the K-3/K-4 visa. The consulate must be in the country in which the marriage to the U.S. citizen took place if the United States has a consulate which issues immigrant visas in that country. If the marriage took place in the United States, the designated consulate is the one with jurisdiction over the current residence of the alien spouse,

A person may receive a K-4 visa, if that person is under 21 years of age and is the unmarried child of an alien eligible to be a K-3.

Question: How Do I Apply?

Answer: So that the alien spouse and child may apply for a K-3 nonimmigrant visa for a spouse and a K-4 nonimmigrant visa for a child, the citizen must file the necessary forms on behalf of the alien spouse with the applicable Service Center having jurisdiction over the citizen’s place of residence. The citizen petitioner will then receive a Form Notice of Action, indicating that the I-130 has been received by the BCIS. The citizen should then file a copy of this notice with the appropriate forms to the BCIS office in Illinois.

Once approved, the petition will be forwarded to the applicable consulate so that the alien beneficiary or beneficiaries may apply to the Department of State for nonimmigrant K-3/K-4 visas.

Question: Will I Get a Work Permit?

Answer: Persons in K-3 or K-4 status and applicants for adjustment to permanent resident status from K-3 or K-4 are eligible to apply for a work permit while their cases are pending.

Question: Can I Travel Outside the United States?

If you are in K-3 or K-4 status, you may travel using your unexpired K-3/K-4 nonimmigrant visa to travel outside of the United States and return, even if you are applying for adjustment of status simultaneously.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Why should I become a U.S. Citizen?

Posted on July 14, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I have been a Lawful Permanent Resident for many years. Many of my friends have become U.S. Citizens (USC) as have many of my family members. However, I just do not know why I should become a U.S. Citizen. Can you advise me?

Answer: The Constitution gives many rights to citizens and non-citizens living in the United States. However, there are some rights the Constitution gives only to citizens, like the right to vote. When you are naturalized, you will be given the right to vote. Having a U.S. passport is another benefit of citizenship. A U.S. passport allows citizens the freedom to travel. In addition, citizens receive U.S. Government protection and assistance when abroad. Additionally, while no one should go and commit crimes, persons whom are only Lawful Permanent Residents can be put into deportation proceedings and deported. This is not true of U.S. Citizens. In fact, once you become a U.S. Citizen, it is incredibly difficult to take away your citizenship. Regarding the crimes, many times people will just be in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because of that they will just take a plea bargain. Of course, if they only have their Green Cards, they could be put into deportation for the same reasons as stated above. To be a U.S. Citizen, is simply a much safer way of living here.

Question: Are there increased responsibilities if I become a U.S. Citizen?

Answer: The Oath of Allegiance includes several promises you must make when you become a U.S. citizen, including promises to: give up prior allegiances to other Countries; support and defend the Constitution and the laws of the United States; swear allegiance to the United States; and serve the country when required. Citizens have many responsibilities other than the ones mentioned in the oath. Citizens have a responsibility to participate in the political process by registering and voting in elections. Serving on a jury is another responsibility of citizenship. Finally, America becomes stronger when all its citizens respect the different opinions, cultures, ethnic groups, and religions found in this country. Tolerance for differences is also a responsibility of citizenship. When you decide to become a U.S. citizen, you should be willing to fulfill the responsibilities of citizenship.

You will have to honor and respect the freedoms and opportunities citizenship gives you. Once you become an American Citizen, and participate in all that this country has to offer, you will truly become an American.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

My mother is a drug addict

Posted on July 13, 2025 by Brian D. Lerner, Immigration Lawyer & Deportation Attorney

Question: I am 16 years old and came to the U.S. many years ago when I was a small child. I have no legal status in the U.S. and have been put in foster care homes for what seems like all of my life. My father left when I was a baby and my mother has been in and out of rehab because she is a drug addict. Is there anything I can do to try to get legal status in the U.S.? I have no other family in the U.S. and am desperate.

Answer: Yes. You might qualify for what is known as the Special Immigrant Juvenile petition. Generally, this includes those juveniles deemed eligible for long-term foster care based on abuse, neglect, or abandonment.

Question: What are the basic requirements for this type of visa?

Answer: You would need the consent of the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for all of these types of cases. There is also express consent required by a juvenile court showing dependency. Express consent means that the Secretary, through the CIS District Director, has determined that neither the dependency order nor the administrative or judicial determination of the alien’s best interest was sought primarily for the purpose of obtaining the status of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, rather than for the purpose of obtaining relief from abuse or neglect or abandonment. In other words, express consent is an acknowledgement that the request for this type of classification is real.

Question: Procedurally, what must I do to apply for this type of petition? Also, if I am successful, what does the approval of this petition mean?

Answer: This type of petition if approved will grant you lawful permanent residency in the U.S. In other words, you will be able to obtain the Green Card. First, the special immigrant petition must be filed by what is known as the I-360 Special Immigrant Petition. Because the petition must be approved before you turn 21 years of age, you should also simultaneously submit the Adjustment of Status Application to speed up the process.

Question: What type of documents do I need to help support the application?

Answer: The Form I-360 must be supported by the following: 1) Court order declaring dependency on the juvenile court or placing you under the custody of an agency or department of a State; 2) Court order deeming that you are eligible for long-term foster care due to abuse, neglect, or abandonment; 3) Determination from an administrative or judicial proceeding that it is in your best interest not to be returned to your country of nationality or last habitual residence; and 5) Proof of your age.

The Adjustment Application must also be supported by the following documentation: 1) Your birth certificate or other proof of identity; 2) A sealed medical examination; 3) Two ADIT-style color photographs; and, where applicable, also supported by evidence of inspection, admission or parole. Since you are over 14 years old, you must also submit a Form G-325A (Biographic Information) and if you have an arrest record, you must also submit certified copies of the records of disposition.

Question: What if I am inadmissible on some other ground?

Answer: Actually, with this type of petition, there are many provisions of the law that are excepted from inadmissibility statutes. Many of the other grounds of inadmissibility can be waived.

Since you have no other way to adjust status to that of a lawful permanent resident, you should start on this application as soon as possible.

Filed under: best deportation attorney | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »

  • Brian D. Lerner

    Immigration Lawyer

  • Blog Stats

    • 305,636 Visitors

  • Categories

  • Recent Posts