• 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

New DHS memo on Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion

As with the other parts of the memo, it is wide open, vague and ambiguous. States officers can arrest and detain if ‘probable cause’, but there is no definition as to how it defines this term and under what conditions.

No more excluding any classes from prosecutorial discretion. Thus, it seems wide open to try to get as many foreign nationals as possible.

Be prepared to fight in Court.

More on new Memo by DHS on priorities to remove

The DHS memo seems to now want to greatly expand expedited removal of foreign nationals.

The memo goes on to State that local and State enforcement officers need to enforce U.S. Immigration Laws

There will certainly be a wide variety of lawsuits on this memo because it is vague, ambiguous and far too broad and puts persons who are not removable under the law into its net.

New DHS Memo on Enforcement of Immigration Laws

All prior enforcement memos are rescinded except those dealing with issues when children were brought to the U.s.

No longer are certain foreign nationals  exempted from enforcement. 

The memo seems to now prioritize removability actions against those persons with crimes and fraud

The new priorities (which may be able to be fought in Court) are 1. those convicted of ANY criminal offense, 2. charged but not convicted, 3. committed acts which constitute a criminal offense, but no arrest or conviction, 4. committed fraud against the government, 5) abused any program to receive public benefits, 6) subject to final order of removal or 7) are deemed by an immigration officer to be a risk to public safety

Essentially – it leaves WIDE OPEN interpretation and attempts to remove foreign nationals who do not have removable offenses under the law.

Trump to rescind January 27, 2017 Muslim Ban

The Department of Justice indicated in a February 16, 2017 court filing that President Trump intends to rescind the January 27, 2017 Executive Order and issue a new order in its place. DOJ urged the court to “hold its consideration of the case until the President issues the new Order,” and the Ninth Circuit subsequently issued an order staying en banc proceedings, pending further order of the court. In a February 16, 2017 news conference, President Trump also stated that he plans to issue a new Executive Order on immigration next week to “protect our country.”

Lawsuits filed across the Country in opposition to Trump’s Executive Order of a Muslim Ban

In response to Trump’s January 27, 2017, Executive Order (EO), attorneys and advocacy groups across the country filed lawsuits in federal court this weekend on behalf of petitioners who were denied entry to the United States pursuant to the EO. First, a court in New York issued a nationwide, emergency stay of removal preventing deportation for individuals with valid visas and approved refugee applications affected by the EO. Going a bit further, a court in Massachusetts barred federal officials from detaining or removing individuals subject to the EO. Also, a court in Virginia ordered federal officials to provide lawyers access to “all legal permanent residents being detained at Dulles International Airport,” and barred officials from deporting covered individuals for the next seven days. Finally, a court in Washington State barred the government from deporting two unnamed individuals from the United States.

Many Oppose Trump’s Executive Order on Muslim Ban

A broad range of voices, including government officials, academic institutions, faith leaders, and civil rights groups, have expressed their opposition to President Trump’s January 27, 2017, Executive Order targeting Muslims and refugees. Notably, consular officials, Foreign Service Officers, and members of the Civil Service released a dissent memo. In addition, former cabinet secretaries, senior government officials, diplomats, military service members, and intelligence community professionals sent a letter to DHS Secretary John Kelly and other government officials opposing the EO.

Class Action Lawsuit on Trump’s Executive Order filed

Yesterday, the American Immigration Council, along with Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, filed a class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, arguing that Section 3 of the EO violates the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law and INA §202(a)(1), which expressly provides for the non-discriminatory issuance of immigrant visas.

Trump Replaces Acting Attorney General and Acting ICE Director

As reported in today’s Immigration Politics Ticker, last night President Trump fired acting Attorney General Sally Yates, after she ordered DOJ not to defend Trump’s Executive Order (EO) barring foreign nationals from seven predominantly Muslim countries and refugees against legal challenges. Trump replaced Yates with Dana Boente, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, who will serve as acting Attorney General until the Attorney General nominee is confirmed. Also last night, President Trump appointed Thomas D. Homan as acting ICE Director, to replace acting ICE Director Daniel Ragsdale.

Trump Issues Executive Order Freezing Most Federal Hiring

President Trump signed three presidential directives today, one of which places a hiring freeze on non-military federal workers. At this time, it is unclear how the announced hiring freeze will affect the hiring of immigration judges. Trump did not take any action today regarding NAFTA or the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program

Trump Signs Executive Actions on the Environment

President Donald Trump signed a total of five orders today pertaining to environmental issues. The orders addressed advancing the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines, as well as actions to expedite environmental reviews for high priority projects.