• Hours & Info

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

  • Past Blog Posts

Claims About “Chain Migration” Are Not Accurate

a number of claims about the family-based immigration system made by elected officials and media pundits in recent weeks, debunking many of them. CBS News also fact checked President Trump’s recent characterization of the Diversity Visa Lottery program, explaining how the program actually functions

Is President Trump erasing all Immigration Laws from the Books?

Answer:  U.S. immigration law is very complex, and there is much confusion as to how it works. The Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA), the body of law governing current immigration policy, provides for an annual worldwide limit of 675,000 permanent immigrants, with certain exceptions for close family members. Lawful permanent residency allows a foreign national to work and live lawfully and permanently in the United States. Lawful permanent residents (LPRs) are eligible to apply for nearly all jobs (i.e., jobs not legitimately restricted to U.S. citizens) and can remain in the country even if they are unemployed. Each year the United States also admits noncitizens on a temporary basis. Annually, Congress and the President determine a separate number for refugee admissions.

Immigration to the United States is based upon the following principles: the reunification of families, admitting immigrants with skills that are valuable to the U.S. economy, protecting refugees, and promoting diversity. This fact sheet provides basic information about how the U.S. legal immigration system is designed.

One President cannot simply ‘erase’ all the laws regarding immigration to create fear and to try to make political points. One such way to come into the U.S. is based on Family Immigration. Family unification is an important principle governing immigration policy. The family-based immigration category allows U.S. citizens and LPRs to bring certain family members to the United States. Family-based immigrants are admitted either as immediate relatives of U.S. citizens or through the family preference system.

Court Permanently Enjoins Restriction on Receipt of Federal Grant Money by Sanctuary Jurisdictions

In County of Santa Clara v. Trump, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued a nationwide permanent injunction against §9(a) of Executive Order 13768, which blocks so-called “sanctuary jurisdictions” from receiving federal grant money. District Judge William H. Orrick found the plaintiffs demonstrated that the executive order has caused and will cause them constitutional injuries by violating the separation of powers doctrine and depriving them of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights.

Not-Guilty Verdict Found in Case Pushed by Trump in Immigration Debate

Politico reports on the not-guilty verdict issued by a jury yesterday in the trial of Mexican national Jose Ines Garcia Zarate for the murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco in 2015. In response to the verdict, both Attorney General Jeffrey Sessionsand ICE Deputy Director Tom Homan issued statements accusing officials in so-called “sanctuary cities” of endangering their constituents.

not-guilty verdict

Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Third Travel Ban

oday a federal judge largely blocked the Trump administration from implementing the latest version of the president’s controversial travel ban, setting up yet another legal showdown on the extent of the executive branch’s powers when it comes to setting immigration policy. The latest ban was set to fully go into effect in the early morning hours of Wednesday, barring various types of travelers from Syria, Libya, Iran, Yemen, Chad, Somalia, North Korea, and Venezuela. Judge Derrick K. Watson in Hawaii wrote that the latest ban “suffers from precisely the same maladies as its predecessor: it lacks sufficient findings that the entry of more than 150 million nationals from six specified countries would be ‘detrimental to the interests of the United States.

Demand Transparency from Federal Agencies for “Extreme Vetting” Policies

Touting national security concerns, President Trump has been swiftly implementing burdensome, ineffective, and unnecessary policies through executive actions and memoranda, including implementing several travel bans on Muslim-majority countries and refugees, and now requiring USCIS to conduct in-person interviews with people who have already been thoroughly vetted. Federal agencies like DHS and DOS are not being transparent about how these immigration policies are being developed and administered, leaving individuals and businesses in the dark about how they will be impacted.

Association of Immigration Judges Asserts that Performance Quotas are a Threat to Due Process

The National Association of Immigration Judges (NAIJ) stated that it opposes EOIR’s plan to evaluate immigration judges (IJs) using numerical measures such as performance quotas, stating that “If EOIR is successful in tying case completion quotas to judge performance evaluations, it could be the death knell for judicial independence in the Immigration Courts.” NAIJ also submitted a statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee Oversight Hearing on the DOJ urging Congress to exempt IJs from performance reviews, noting Administrative Law Judges are already exempt because quotas are “antithetical to judicial independence.”  Another attempt by Trump to limit constitutional rights of immigrants

%d bloggers like this: