As you probably know, the Trump Administration recently proposed regulations to make it much more difficult to obtain asylum in the United States. That’s the bad news. The good news is that there is something you can do to try to reduce the damage: Submit a comment opposing the regulation. Submitting a comment is easy, free, and safe, even for people with no lawful status in the U.S. You can do it from the comfort of your own home. Right now. And best of all, it really can help. Here, we’ll talk about how to submit an effective comment.
Before we get to that, let’s talk a bit about the proposed regulation, which you can see here. The purpose of this regulation (and every regulation) is to interpret the law, as created by Congress. Regulations are created by government agencies (in our case, by the Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review) because agencies have specialized knowledge about how to implement (or in our case, subvert) the law. The regulations cannot violate the law or they will be invalidated by courts. Also, regulations cannot be “arbitrary and capricious,” meaning the agency must provide a rational reason for the regulation. While there is a lot of bad stuff in the proposed regulation, I wanted to focus here on the points that people might be most interested to comment about–
- The definition of “particular social group” is narrowed, so that it is more difficult to get asylum if you fear harm from gang members or criminals, or based on domestic violence or an interpersonal dispute
- The definition of “political opinion” is narrowed to exclude people who have a generalized opposition to criminals or terrorists
- The level of harm required to demonstrate “persecution” is increased, and so asylum applicants will need to show a “severe level of harm”
- The categories of people eligible for asylum are reduced, and people who fear persecution on account of “gender” are excluded from asylum
- The new rule encourages decision-makers to deny otherwise-eligible applicants based on “discretion” and lists several “significant adverse discretionary factors,” including–
- unlawful entry into the U.S. or use of fraudulent documents
- the failure to seek protection in any third country the alien “transited” through, unless that country denied protection to the alien, the alien was a victim of human trafficking or the country was not a party to the Refugee Convention of 1951, the Protocol of 1967 or the United Nations Convention Against Torture
- remained unlawfully in the U.S. for more than one year before seeking asylum
- failed to file or pay taxes, if required
- failed to report income to the IRS (i.e., worked without authorization and did not pay tax – this one will be a particular problem if the plan to delay and deny work permits for asylum seekers goes into effect)
- Otherwise-eligible applicants will be denied asylum as a matter of discretion where they spent more than 14 days in a third country before coming to the U.S. or where they transited through more than one third country before coming to the U.S. (there are some exceptions to this rule, similar to those listed for the prior bullet point about “transit” through a third country)
- Applicants will be denied asylum where they “either resided or could have resided in any permanent legal immigration status or any non-permanent, potentially indefinitely renewable legal immigration status… in a country through which the alien transited prior to arriving in or entering the United States, regardless of whether the alien applied for or was offered such status”
- Torture Convention relief is not available where the torturer is a “rogue” official
- Finally, it is not clear, but as the regulations are written, they could be applied to people who already have asylum cases pending. Obviously, this would be unfair, as it would punish applicants for choices they made years ago (if the rules are applied retroactively, they might very well be blocked by a legal challenge)
If there are things here you don’t like, you can comment about them. How to do that?
First, go to this web page, where the proposed regulations are posted. If you look in the upper right part of the page, you will see a dark blue box that says “Comment Now!” Click on that, and you will be taken to a page where you can type your comment. If you want to be fancy, you can even attach files to your comment. You also have to type a name. You can type your own name, but you can also write “anonymous.” The name you type will be included when the comment is posted publicly. There is an option to include your contact information, but this information will not be displayed publicly. Once you are done, check the box indicating that you “read and understand” your statement and hit “Submit Comment.” That’s it. Easy peasy.
While you are on the regulation web page, you can look to see what other people wrote (on the right side of the page). When I last checked, there were more than 1,300 comments.
What should you say?
It is best to write an individualized statement, rather than use a pre-made template. If you are an asylum applicant, maybe think about any parts of the new regulation that might harm you and explain how you will be harmed. You might also write about why you chose to seek asylum in the U.S. (if, indeed, you had a choice) and what is your impression of the U.S. asylum system. Remember, as an asylum applicant, you have something important to say and your voice should be part of this conversation. One important point: All comments must be submitted prior to 11:59 PM Eastern time on July 15, 2020. Also, if you post a comment, and you don’t mind, please copy and paste what you write into the comments section of this blog (below).
If you’d like some additional advice about what to write, check out these postings by Tahirih Justice Center and the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), or just read the comments already posted on the regulation. The federal government also provides general, but helpful, advice about writing a comment.
Finally, you might ask, Does posting a comment matter?
Apparently, it does. According to AILA, “The administration will review and address those comments before the rule becomes finalized, so it is critical for us to submit as many unique comments as possible.” More comments = a longer review process. This will buy more time before these draconian new rules are implemented. Also, the “government gives more weight to each comment if it is unique from others,” and so it is important to personalize your submission.
Since its inception, the Trump Administration has been waging war against the rule of law in our country. Immigrants and asylum seekers have always been the first target in this war, but they are far from the only target. In this particular battle, asylum seekers have a crucial role to play, and so I hope you will consider making a comment in opposition to the proposed regulations. Together, we can protect our asylum system and our country.
Dear Jason
I did something that is worrying me so much. I wanted to file taxes because I think it is so important and the failure to file it might put me in trouble. So I went to an agency to do that and they filed it for under my old status (F1 student) telling me that this was my status during 2019 and your asylee status was gained only in 2020 so we are filing your taxes as a non resident for that year . Will that put me in serious trouble as a potential resident who filed taxes as a non-resident?? I mean would it be a serious trouble regarding my application for green card ? Thank you so much!
I doubt it, but I do not know. You might seek a second opinion from a tax expert. These things can be corrected, and so I think the worst case is you would have to spend some money to fix things. Take care, Jason
Hello – below is my submitted comment:
—-
Dear Reader,
I am writing to oppose the above-referenced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) which would eliminate the possibility of many people to seek asylum in the United States.
Our pride as Americans comes from our origins as refugees or asylum seekers and being granted access to the greatest country on Earth. The only citizens here who do not have origins in one of these categories were either Native Americans or those who were brought involuntarily as slaves. What is the United States if not a country of those seeking a better life? Was our country not founded for this very reason?
My family came to the United States seeking asylum from pogroms – violent acts towards Jews in Russia in the 19th and 20th centuries. I would not be alive today if my ancestors were not admitted through Ellis Island, as shortly after their pilgrimage, 6 million Jews and 3 million others were murdered in the Holocaust. Though Ellis Island was the “proper” way to gain entry to the United States, many people do not have the luxury of going through these channels, and thousands die trying. The Jewish community remembers the Motorschiff St. Louis, a German ocean liner which carried more than 930 Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany in 1939 intending to escape anti-Semitic persecution. The refugees tried to disembark in Cuba and in the United States but were denied permission to land and were forced to turn around, which became a death sentence for 254 passengers. (source: https://www.history.com/news/wwii-jewish-refugee-ship-st-louis-1939)
We must remember our country’s origins – a gaggle of rebels seeking a better life than that available to them under the British crown – and we must not lose sight of the diversity and opportunity that makes America great.
Well said – thank you. You might be interested in a book called After They Closed the Gates – it is the story of illegal Jewish immigration to the US. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason
this is the comment i posted on the proposed rule today.
I am submitting this comment on behalf of myself in response and opposition to the Proposed Changes to Procedures for Asylum and Withholding of Removal; Credible Fear and Reasonable Fear Review published in the Federal Register on June 15, 2020, which would take away the ability of many applicants to obtain asylum in the United States.
To introduce myself briefly, I left my home country (which is one of east African country) for fear of persecution due to my political participation and opinion. currently I am residing in USA. I have lived in another country more than one year on a temporary permit before I came to USA.
Here are some of the points I found which are unfair and unjust.
The proposed rule suggests circumstances under which an alien would be considered firmly resettled.
Accordingly , Applicants will be denied asylum where they “either resided or could have resided in any permanent legal immigration status or any non-permanent, potentially indefinitely renewable legal immigration status… in a country through which the alien transited prior to arriving in or entering the United States, regardless of whether the alien applied for or was offered such status”
This proposed rule will unfairly prevent survivors of persecution the chance to seek asylum. First it is vague and unclear what “non-permanent but potentially indefinitely renewable legal immigration status” means. It is open for arbitrary interpretation and it would give immigration judges and asylum officers greater leeway to reject asylum claims on the basis of firm resettlement.
Prior to arriving in the United States of America, I have personal experience of residing in another country after I fled my country for fear of prosecution. In the country I lived and filed for protection, permanent residency differs from temporary residency in two distinct ways. The first one is as a permanent resident, one can reside, travel, work, study and start business freely. The second one is permanent residence does not expire and remains valid indefinitely. Holders of non-permanent residence permit have restricted rights compared with the permanent resident permit holders. From my own experience, when a person applies for protection and becomes a non-permanent permit holder, (s)he enters a period of uncertainty and does not know whether (s)he will be granted permanent residence or may eventually have to leave the country. If the applicant is not offered or granted a permanent residence, uncertainty regarding legal status and fear of deportation remain.
My permit used to expire frequently (every month, 3 months, or 6 months) and I had to report for extension. The uncertainty surrounding each renewal creates an additional layer of insecurity and further distress. I had daily stresses and struggles ;continuous trauma; a sense of uncertainty or fear; feelings of being blocked and trapped; and worthlessness and hopelessness.
I also know applicants who remained in the process for many years. Some people wait up to a decade or longer, by just renewing temporary permits and finally their application denied. The prolonged uncertainty causes psychological distress. Considering a person as permanently resettled because his/her non-permanent permit is renewed several times (“potentially indefinitely renewable”) is unjust.
The other circumstance mentioned in the proposed rule is “the alien physically resided voluntarily, and without continuing to suffer persecution, in any one country for one year or more after departing his country of nationality”. This is also inconsiderate and unreasonable. I have lived on temporary permit for more than one year after I fled from my country. I was not allowed to open bank account, get driving permit, rent an apartment by my own name because my permit was temporary and the duration for renewal was for short period of time (every month, 3 months, or 6 months). I could not apply for formal employment since asylum permit is not deemed sufficient to prove eligibility for formal employment and the job vacancy criteria clearly states that the job is for citizens and permanent residents. I stayed years without permanent status, and I was unable to get decent work. This left me destitute, struggling daily to support my life and vulnerable to harassment, and xenophobic violence.
I was able to survive those years because of the help of family who are residing here in USA. I know many who are living with such conditions today too. So, making permanent resettlement decision based on the number of years one resided in another country is so unfair and wrong.
The proposed rule also will deny Otherwise-eligible applicants as a matter of discretion because of failure to seek protection in any third country the alien “transited” through, where they spent more than 14 days in a third country before coming to the U.S. or where they transited through more than one third country before coming to the U.S. But Just because asylum seekers may have traveled through another country does not mean that they could have applied for asylum or been able to live safely there. I know oppositions political party members that are extradited back to the government that they are fleeing because neighboring countries governments had agreement to do that. I also know a person killed in jail after being extradited from a neighboring country. Because of that people stay hiding until they get a chance to transit to a safe country.
Finally, the proposed rule could be applied to people who already have asylum cases pending. Obviously, this would be unfair, as it would penalize applicants for the choices they made years ago. Asylum applicants would have done things differently (for instance they may have decided to travel to another safe country and file for protection ) if they knew about the new rules at the time they decided to seek asylum (or come to the US). It is unfair and inhuman to make new rules and deny asylum applicants who have been waiting for years in limbo, separated from family and loved ones and force them return to the horrors and persecution they fear.
I believe Prohibiting most asylum claims from going forward and being approved goes against long-established U.S. immigration law, and American system of justice. I also believe that it will be against American’s historic commitment to humanitarian relief and providing safe haven to people fleeing persecution.
Thank you for considering my comments,
You make some very important points – and I think the problems you faced in a third country are common and point to a major problem with the proposed rule. Thank you for sharing this. Take care, Jason
To whom it may concern,
I understand that these laws are an attempt to prevent refugees from seeking asylum in the United States–likely to prevent costs from welfare and fear of crime. However, an important consideration and something that I take pride in as an American, is the fact that we are the land of the free. A place where those seeking asylum can come for better opportunities. My parents are both immigrants and have worked hard to improve not only their lives, but the lives of their fellow Americans. If we live in fear of the poor, the weak and the needy, then I believe that we can’t ever truly help them. Are we not the country of the brave? Did we not declare that all humans are created equal?
As a family medicine physician, too often do I see victims of domestic violence and trauma (be it physical, sexual, secondary) develop depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, which in turn causes increased morbidity and mortality. Several large scale meta-analyses and literature reviews (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3219414/, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4568841/) have shown that PTSD alone can increase mortality (hazard ratio of 1.29) as well as increase incidence of cardiovascular disease, gastric ulcers and even type 2 diabetes. This is also shown in several studies for other mental illnesses. I will say that there may be other confounding biases that need to be explored further, but the preliminary and anecdotal evidence points to the very real physical and mental toll those seeking asylum undergo. To allow these people–who are trying to escape traumas that will literally shorten and mar the quality of their lives–to continue to suffer is inhumane. By placing these new restrictions to limit those seeking asylum, their pain, suffering and death will be on our hands.
How would one define “extreme harm?” Would you have a physician examine each and every asylum applicant, thereby driving up the cost of an endeavor you sought to reduce? Or would you simply place vague, blanketing restrictions that would prevent a large group of asylum seekers who are suffering from real and dangerous threats to their lives and health simply because they did not meet an arbitrary definition of “extreme harm.” I hope that you choose to forgo either option and instead focus on ways to improve our current asylum system from the prospective of how to help these people as human beings. If we focus on rehabilitation and integration for these people, we could likely prevent crime and lower rates of poverty in these populations–if the fears of accepting refugees are due to financial and crime statistic reasons. In the healthcare industry, we have realized (albeit slowly) that a short-term investment in preventive medicine (ie prescribing a blood pressure medication or encouraging healthy diet) can often times save huge-costs (cardiac catheterization, hospitalization, etc) in the future. In a similar way, if we invest in our system to truly aim to help those seeking asylum we could prevent these people from slipping into poverty or crime.
There is a solution that benefits both those seeking asylum and also reduces the burden on the American citizens. Please do not give up in finding this solution, my faith in you all as our representatives remains.
Sincerely,
Jeremiah Moon, MD
Great comment – Thank you. If you are interested, we had a guest post by some Harvard types on May 6, 2020 about the effect of trauma on memory and credibility. Take care, Jason
Dear Attorney General Barr, Director McHenry, Assistant Director Reid, Acting Secretary Wolf, Senior Official Mizelle, Senior Official Cuccinelli, Division Chief Dunn, and Administrator Ray:
I submit this comment to oppose the above-referenced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), which would eviscerate the ability of countless men, women and children to obtain asylum in the United States.
The United States has a long history of protecting those escaping danger, yet the NPRM seeks to target the most vulnerable individuals fleeing to the U.S. in search of safety. The rule imposes new barriers at every stage of the process that will be impossible to meet for the vast majority of asylum applicants, resulting in scores more asylum seekers being returned to harm.
Fundamental to the American system of justice is the guarantee of due process. But under this rule, thousands of asylum seekers would be denied that most basic right to a fair day in court. The regulation would give immigration judges and asylum officers greater leeway to throw out requests for asylum as “frivolous,” and to deny applications without so much as a hearing. Because eligibility for asylum is a complicated legal question, the impact of this rule would fall most harshly on unrepresented asylum seekers, limiting asylum only to those with substantial financial means or lucky enough to obtain legal counsel.
The new regulation would also ban from asylum many people who submit their applications more than a year after arriving in the United States with no exceptions. This explicitly violates provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, passed by Congress. The rule also punishes asylum seekers who fail to report even one penny of income to the IRS, even unintentionally, by stripping them of their right to ever become an American through asylum.
Even more arbitrarily, an asylum seeker who flies to the United States with two or more layovers in different countries would be banned from asylum, while an asylum seeker who flies to the United States with just one layover in a different country would be eligible for asylum.
Grounds for asylum – including those based on gender and so-called “private criminal acts” such as domestic and gang violence – would no longer be recognized as viable claims, despite generations of domestic and international law affirming that refugee status is available on those grounds. The administration may not disregard these standing precedents to achieve the illegitimate goal of dismantling the asylum system.
This regulation attempts to completely dismantle nearly every aspect of our asylum laws and seeks to eliminate critical pathways to humanitarian relief that our laws were designed to protect. The rule strikes at the very heart of our historic commitment to providing safe haven to people fleeing persecution and calls into question our integrity as a country.
Thank you for sharing this – it is very well said. Take care, Jason
My Comment Posted at http://www.regulations.gov today:
‘Dear Department of Justice and Executive Office for Immigration Review,
I am writing this to share my personal opinion about the Proposed Rule to change the current asylum procedures. The proposal seeks to disqualify people who have overstayed in the United States one year after their arrival and worked illegally.
I am a native of an ultra-authoritarian state, a former graduate of a U.S. academic institution, and an ex-employee of American humanitarian projects that help building local democratic governance overseas. Many years ago, I was targeted because of my political views in my country and after my arrival to the United States, I did not return. Because of fear of retaliation from my own government (which still exists), I committed a poor judgment and did not apply for a political asylum upon my arrival. Later, I lapsed out of my legal status and continued to stay as the situation in my home country has continued to deteriorate. In the meantime, I had to work out-of-status to feed myself.
This year, things turned even more to the worse as I learned that I am now being targeted for my religious views in my country after spending many years away. After psychiatric and legal consultations, I finally decided to apply for a political asylum because, honestly, there is no other solution. Deportation to me would mean going straight to a 20 years of imprisonment on fabricated grounds, and death. Under the Third Safe Country Agreement, apparently, I can also not apply for a political asylum to Canada as I am already in the United States.
It has been several months that I haven’t heard from the USCIS about a biometrics appointment. With these new draft regulations in place and the 13,000 USCIS employees lined to be furloughed, like many others, I am in the dark and have no idea what to expect. This regulation is apparently composed in the language that may allow it to be applied to people who already have their asylum cases pending, that is retroactively. This is a really bad piece of news.
Despite these all odds, I still have an unshakeable belief in the United States as a source of my inspirations, bastion of human rights and a country of pluralism and freedom. Please do not disqualify me to seek a political asylum here. Thank you.’
Well written
Well said – Thank you for sharing. Your story of applying late for asylum is true for many people, and helps illustrate why the one-year filing rule is so awful. Take care, Jason
[…] and any other optional contact information you submit is going directly to the government. See this blog for more […]
Hello,
l applied for asylum last year July, received my SSN and work authorization this year, l have not worked since early march because of covid. can i apply for unemployment benefit, if yes will it affect me negatively in any way in future.l was also told am not qualified to receive stimulus cheque, is that true?
I did a post on April 2, 2020 about the stimulus check – maybe that would help. As for unemployment, it would not affect an asylum case. However, if you intend to seek a green card some other way, it could potentially have an effect, so maybe talk to a lawyer if that is an issue. Take care, Jason
Hey Jason, I just submitted the following comment in the website. I copied some content from your blog as well(hope that’s okay). Please let me know how can I make this polished or if I should write another one as well.
Hello,
I am commenting on Procedures for Asylum and Withholding of Removal Credible Fear and Reasonable Fear Review
EOIR Docket No. 18-0002.
I am currently waiting my asylum interview and the following 3 changes concern me –
1) The definition of “particular social group” is narrowed, so that it is more difficult to get asylum if you fear harm from gang members or criminals, or based on domestic violence or an interpersonal dispute.
I am being persecuted by a gang member which might have widespread network in the country. I still fear for my life and that shouldn’t disqualify me from asylum.
—————————————————————————
2) Finally, it is not clear, but as the regulations are written, they could be applied to people who already have asylum cases pending. Obviously, this would be unfair, as it would punish applicants for choices they made years ago (not to mention if the rules are applied retroactively, they should be blocked in court by a legal challenge).
Because I applied for asylum before the rules were written it sounds unfair to use the rules passed later on to see merit in my claim.
—————————————————————————
3)It also says asylum seeker will be denied asylum if they failed to file or pay taxes, if required.
Asylum seekers are fleeing for their life. How absurd would it be to deny them another chance to live just based on a small audit that IRS decides to do on their finances?
Also, taxes shouldn’t be tied to life or death situations(specially considering asylum seekers tend to be ill-informed about all the new regulations that they have to follow while in the US, tax filing by individuals being one major outlier rule compared to other countries). There is enforcement rules/procedures from IRS which take care of such situations with appropriate consequences for the individuals.
I don’t see why this should disqualify an asylum seeker if their claim has merit. Letting victims die because they didn’t know about tax filing procedures in US sounds draconian.
—————————————————————————
In short, this regulation seems arbitrary and capricious and is not a kind of decision that is made with humanitarian motives in mind. I would like the proposed regulations to be withdrawn considering these reasons.
This is good. You might also say more specifically how the changes will affect your case (without revealing too much about your personal details). For example, do your think your case will be denied under the new rules? If so, why? Would you have done things differently if you knew about the new rules at the time you decided to seek asylum (or come to the US). I think giving personal examples is helpful. Thank you for making the comment and sharing it here. Take care, Jason
Here’s what I just wrote:
I object to the proposed Rule “Procedures for Asylum and Withholding of Removal; Credible Fear and Reasonable Fear review. This Rule unjustly limits the definitions of who can seek asylum within the United States, barring women fleeing sex trafficking from seeking asylum based on gender.
It also unjustly places the heavy burden on the asylum seeker to draft a detailed and concise proposal, lest their petition be rejected by a judge without a hearing, when the majority of asylum seekers do not have the means to afford legal counsel.
As a social worker in this great country I have the privilege to work alongside some of the men, women, and families who are seeking asylum. The one story in particular, of a family of 4 seeking asylum in the U.S. after they lost everything to ransom the then pregnant wife/mother from gang members is a heart-wrenching one. This family did not want to leave their country, they had jobs and a life, but they made the decision to do so in order to preserve their family. There is a chance their case would be denied with the narrowing of the definition of “particular social groups” that is proposed in this new ruling as it excludes gangs.
The asylum process is already tedious. Further limiting the asylum petition process and who is eligible to apply is in contradiction to what I see America to be.
Well said. Thank you for sharing that here. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason I have a question please
I never recieved a stimilus check as an asylee. Do you know if any asylees did ? ( who still do not have GC yet) . I still did not file 2019 taxes so you think I might recieve it if I do so? thank you so much!
You are entitled to the stimulus check in as much as you file 2018 or 2019 tax. I am an asylum applicant and I got the check with my family.
Thank you abdednego! is there any way to ask for it since I have never received it? it filed 2018 taxes by mail so I expected a check in mail but it never came
You can go to http://www.irs.gov you can click on “Get your refund status” and you can also view the history and status of your tax filings on the website.
I believe some did – some people commented here about that. I forget all the rules about the stimulus check, but I did a post about this on April 2, 2020 where I discuss the requirements – maybe that would help. You might also talk to a tax professional for help. Take care, Jason
Hi,
Even if you not filled the tax you’re eligible to get the stimulus check follow this steps and complete .
1)https://www.irs.gov/coronavirus/economic-impact-payments
2)Here you will find ( non fillers enter payment info ) Tab Click that button and enter your details even if you not earned anything in 2018& 2019 just enter the total amount $0.
After that you will get a confirmation number keep on tracking after ten business day you will get a stimulus check .
Dear Mr.Jason
I am currently filing my I-131 for a travel document as an asylee . I have a business trip scheduled on early September . Do you think it would be impossible to get the RTD on that time ? Thank you !
I think it is pretty unlikely you will get the RTD in 2 months. You can ask USCIS to expedite the case. Maybe that would help. I wrote about expediting on January 29, 2020. Take care, Jason
With Covid and furloughs it is unlikely. Even in the past, it used to take 5-6 months for RTD. However if you travel to a country where there is a ban such as EU, Brazil etc. check if you can come back on RTD. I saw the EO and it says that citizens and GC are exempt from the ban. It doesn’t talk about Asylees or RTD. The airlines may refuse boarding or CBP May deny entry.
Even when you hold RTD is there a chance that CBP may deny entry? I doubt this. Do you have a source for this? In my opinion if you hold RTD, CBP can charge us for inadmissibility or take us to secondary but still has to allow us or waive thru and that can challenged to court.
But straight denying entry and deporting or sending back to origin i dont think there is such a thing if RTD is valid maybe JSON can shred some light here?
Thanks
Since hardly anyone is traveling these days I don’t think there are any such cases reported. But I am going by the executive order. It does not exempt Asylees although it says that people can seek asylum. My major concern is that airlines may not allow you to board. I have a green card with RTD and every single time I have had airline staff get confused and delay check in. About CBP – they previously sent back Iranians and others with green cards during travel ban 1.0 in Jan 17, remember? Later they exempted Green card holders. Read the EO
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/proclamation-suspension-entry-immigrants-nonimmigrants-certain-additional-persons-pose-risk-transmitting-novel-coronavirus/
Thanks for your reply. I am just about to apply for AOS and RTD. Pretty excited but always wonder how can i avoid airlines to not get confused and make them understand it is what it is? Do you have any tip?
I keep hearing that they dont recognize it and some argument there etc worries me because i have a child and planning for a trip soon.
Also while returning they take you yo secondary is this true?
That is really confusing . I was going through the executive order and it does not mention asylees as an exception, it mentions PR but not asylees, which is scary
You can also show the airline your passport, but try to use the RTD for passing through customs. I have heard about people being brought to secondary inspection, as the CBP officers sometimes do not recognize the RTD. However, that is not so common and is usually brief. Take care, Jason
Hello json, thank you for your kindness. I am curious:
1. My passport has not expired.
2. Can i show my passport in the airlines counter while checking in and use RTD in customs? Is this possible this is a great idea.
You can probably show the passport to the airline and the RTD to customs. The airline may also want to see the RTD, especially when you return to the US, so you can show them that as well. Take care, Jason
TRAVELER – These are unprecedented times and based on the EO, I would personally not travel to any country with a corona related travel ban (western Europe, Brazil, canada and mexico I believe) unless you have a GC/citizenship since there is no exemption for visa holders and asylees. Also, it is very risky to travel due to the pandemic anyway.
EVELYN – Unfortunately RTD and RP are uncommon documents and airline staff isnt aware of them. Just Feb last year I was traveling to France and had a Schengen visa and the airline guy made me wait for a long time and made back and forth calls and then finally allowed me to check in. I had a similar issue when coming back with GC and RTD with the airlines. Two years ago I had a similar issue flying to mexico on a vacation. But I have never had a issue with CBP during re-entry. However, the EO can make it difficult so I am advising caution if you dont have GC.
Thank you, you seem to have good experience.
Around April 2021 i was planning to go to Australia. I dont have GC yet but i will have RTD by then hope so. I will be applying for GC this Aug not sure when it will arrive.
Looking at my above scenario, do you think i should travel? With only RTD 2021 is a long way by then i am hoping things would be normal.
Let me know
I think it is correct to be cautious, and I doubt you will have the GC by then. However, if you have an RTD, you should be able to travel and return. You may face some minor hassles, but I have not heard about anyone being blocked from re-entering or being detained when they enter. You might check with the Australian embassy whether they recognize the RTD for purposes of entering that country, as not all countries do. Take care, Jason
This EO is vague. Still, I have not heard about RTD people being denied re-entry. Take care, Jason
I have never heard pf anyone with an RTD being refused entry, and I do not think that would happen. Maybe if the person was accused of fraud or a crime, they could be detained upon entry, but they would still get in. Take care, Jason
Hello W, thank you for all this answers, I am curious:
1. My passport has not expired.
2. Can i show my passport in the airlines counter while checking in and use RTD in customs? Is this possible this is a great idea.
Eveelyn – If you have a passport then the airlines will not give you much trouble. My situation is that I don’t have a passport. I have heard that using your country passport might raise questions at USCIS during GC or citizenship but I’m honestly not sure if anyone has been refused citizenship due to this reason. Chances are low as there is no such regulation or statute and these speculations are only on online forums. So yes you can use your passport. You have to show the airlines your Passport + GC or Passport + RTD if you don’t have GC (to show you have authorization to enter USA). Most of the trouble with the airlines is due to them not being aware of RTD and RP. Like I said, personally I never had issue with CBP before or after GC. I was never sent to secondary so far although some people claim to be sent there. I have entered via LAX, ORD, MIA and HOU. If you are going to Australia, it’s not an issue as there is no COVID ban on Australia in the EO. So you can go even now technically. Also by 2021 we should hopefully be free of COVID or so I hope. Like Jason said, perhaps there is no issue with RTD even with the ban but the EO clearly does not have exemption for returning Asylees so I personally find it risky and would not have traveled if I was in that situation
Hi W, thank you for your generous detailed reply.
I am very worried about using my National passport because of future citizenship implications.
Is this considered as using my national passport in below scenario:
– Imagine i am in Australia, I will show my National passport to airlines while boarding a flight in australia and they will see my US unexpired visa and they will allow me to board in, When i reach customs in Australia i will show them my RTD to exit the country or for exit visa on US arrival i will show my RTD at CBP.
This way airlines wont nag me, but looking at above scenario have i used my National Passport? I am not sure my logic would work in above scenario.
I am thinking airlines may have to type in our passport number and all and that can be directly fetched into US immigration system and them knowing i have used my national passport. I am not sure.
Anyhow, i do not want to use my National Passport i have heard too much of story about it. And i am also afriad i may not have my GC by april 2021 and i may have to travel only with RTD, do you have any tips and tricks that can help me since this is my first time and you have good experience can you guide me?
Thank you, wish i could talk to you in person.
I do not think you will have an issue when getting the GC or US citizenship. I have had many clients travel with the RTD and no one has had a problem yet. If you can avoid using the passport, you should do that. Maybe just get to the airport early so you have more time to explain the RTD to the airline. Or show them the passport if they insist, but tell them that as a refugee, you do not want to use it for travel. Also, this is Australia, which is a pretty sophisticated country, and my guess is that they will accept the RTD for all purposes and that airlines that fly there know about this. You can always contact the airline in advance to ask about traveling with the RTD to see if they can provide advice. Even in the worst case (where you use your passport), you can explain to the USCIS when you naturalize why you used it (you tried to avoid it and you had an RTD, but the airline wanted to see it). In short, I think you will be fine. Take care, Jason
No worries Evelyn I’m glad to help. I have been through travels and tough situations. About showing passport with unexpired visa to airlines – I do not recommend doing that. Why? Because they enter data into CBP APIS (advance passenger information system). If they enter your passport and visa and you show up with RTD, there is a likelihood of getting secondary. However you will not be denied entry in any case just wasting time. Sometimes people spend hours in secondary (including USC) so it’s not a pleasant experience. If I were you, I would show passport + RTD. RTD is your entry authorization to the US. If you are worried about using passport then just use RTD. They may make you wait and verify as they are ignorant about it but waiting at the airline counter is way better than secondary (although I haven’t been in secondary ever touchwood). About issues with citizenship like I said, I only heard concerns on online forums. I never heard of anyone actually refused for using PP but again your mileage may vary! I personally do not have a passport at all so I have no choice. Good luck!
Dear Jason, the new proposed rule that is taking effect on August, 2020, are those refered to court after denial by asylum officer refused renewal of EADs upon expiry? Or it applies to future asylum seekers only.
Under the new rules, if you are referred to court, you can continue to renew your EAD as before. I wrote more about this in a posting from today. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason,
I am asylee granted before a year and have with pending I-485 and pending EAD renewal. My EAD is already expired and in the state I lived, the DMV ask EAD to renew driving license. It is in New Jersey. My question is that how could I renew my driving license with expired EAD. Please if any law or article can I refer to for appealing.
Thank you
Hi tesfa,
When did you apply for both I-485 and EAD, and did you file the EAD based on the pending I-485 ?
Thanks l,
My i-485 is before a year and apply EAD based on c(5).
Normally, the EAD would be based on category a-5, for someone already granted asylum. Take care, Jason
You would have to talk to the DMV, and maybe talk to a supervisor. You are eligible to work and live in the US as an asylee, and you do not need an EAD. The problem is that many employers and DMVs do not know this, and so it is easier to have the EAD. Nevertheless, you should be eligible for the driver’s license, and you may want to push the issue and ask for a supervisor. Also, you can apply to renew the EAD. If money is an issue, you can request a fee waiver, using form I-912, available at http://www.uscis.gov. Take care, Jason
Jason Kindly read this link >> https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hamedaleaziz/immigration-system-budget-cuts
Immigration system coming to a halt and no one is paying attention . Please make post . I think this is worthy of you making one . I don’t think I have seen anything as alarming as this in years and we will all feel this in a few months.
I wrote about this 2 weeks ago (it was one of several pieces of bad news in that post). I may write again about it, but in that post, I provided a link to a petition. Also, people can contact their Congress persons about the funding. I may post again about it, if I have time. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason
Thank you for all the informative write up and answers to questions from Asylum applicants/Asylee on this platform. I believe you do not know the big relief this has been for person like me as I am always watching and reading your comments like a drip. Though I am a passive reader here but 99% of my immigration knowledge was gotten from your posts. My wife is the primary asylum applicant and my two kids and I are dependants in the application. We applied in October 2013 and we have had two interviews but eventually we were referred to the immigration court in April 2018. We have had two master hearings and the next hearing is in October 2020. I have some questions in regard to the telephonic appearance I just read on the immigration court website:
1) Are the immigration court now conducting interviews by telephone?
2) Do you think one stand a good chance of being granted through this medium because according to the information on the website, one has the right to waive this telephonic appearance?
3) Have you had any of your clients scheduled for telephonic appearance?
This is a kind of mixed feeling for me because with this, one is sure that any close down per the 2nd waive of the pandemic will not hinder the court appearance. On the other hand, I believe in-person appearance will allow applicant to express his or her emotion for the judge to see to base his or her judgement.
Thank you and God bless.
1 – It is unclear to me whether any Master Calendar Hearings are going forward. Depending on the Judge, it is possible to do the MCH in writing. Maybe some also do that by phone. If you are referring to an Individual Hearing, it would depend on the Judge. I think most Judges would want you to appear in person. Sometimes, there are video hearings, or a witness may appear by phone, but I have not seen a case where the asylum applicant himself appeared by phone (it may happen, but I have not seen that). 2 – For an individual hearing, I think it would be harder to do by phone and would make it more difficult to win. 3 – Only at MCHs. Take care, Jason
Thank you Jason
I think this telephonic appearance for master and merit hearing are only available at immigration court in Los Angeles, Newark and New York. The information is available under the standing order in their website in For EOIR Operation Status during Coronavirus Pandemic.
Thank you – I did not hear about that. Take care, Jason
Comment submitted:
Where is our human empathy? Is it fun to leave one’s homeland and sojourn in a foreign land, learn their culture and language just so one can easily adapt? Not all asylum application is fraudulent. This great country is built by the hardwork of immigrants. Why? We have seen worse. When we arrive here, we strive to make good of every opportunity that comes our way. We do not take these opportunities for granted neither do we take this country for granted. Asylum applicants are already going through enough. Some have been in this country for more than five years with no hope of any interview in sight. Yet,we do not give up. We keep pushing on, hoping and praying that the Sovereign Lord will touch our Lawmakers’ hearts to enact laws that would alleviate our sufferings.
We are not saying we will not work. How do we survive if you strip us of our power to make daily living? Without EAD,how can a man confidently provide for his family of four? How can we confidently pay for health insurance especially in this pandemic? Where is our human empathy? This asylum applicant can be anyone close to you. Show mercy on asylum applicants. Do what generations would remember you for. Search your hearts and show mercy. Mercy is reciprocal. Let us leave great footprints in the sand of time. Let us be remembered as people who brought about great change, positive great change, to the asylum applicants. Asylum applicants are hardworking, resilient and honest people. We are resilient because we have passed through the fires of persecution in our home country. We came out stronger. All we seek is safety to live out the remaining part of our lives in peace and harmony. Shall United States of America deny us that? We run to you for safety. If you turn your backs against us, we may not survive it. It is traumatizing enough that you are running away from persecution from your home country only to be persecuted in the same country you seek refuge.
I plead with Congress to show mercy. We are not all fraudulent.
While some of us are waiting for the interview, please do not deprive us of the means to take care of us and our loved ones.
Wow! You poured out your heart. I hope someone reads, and is touched too.
@Tina I hope so too. We all have been through a lot.
it is so sad how different trump is from Obama
before the end of his second term, Obama wanted to give a path to citizenship for all undocumented migrants, that was unfrotnuately blocked by the supreme court..
it is so sad how different trump is from Obama
before the end of his second term, Obama wanted to give a path to citizenship for all undocumented migrants, that was unfortunately blocked by the supreme court..
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/24/us/supreme-court-immigration-obama-dapa.html
Thank you, Jason
Hi jason. God bless you. I have a question. I filed for asylum one month ago snd till now i have not received the receipt. For very serious health issues i need to move to another state so i believe that i will need to move my asylum application to the new state. I want to ask you will thus delay my chance if having an interview soon and what do you believe shall i do that now or wait till i receive the receipt and then ask for transferring the case ?????
Hi,
We are in the same situation. I applied for asylum on on May 19th and USCIS received it on May 24th. However, no receipt yet until today June 30th. I heard from others after 2-3 weeks applying, you usually receive the receipt. Perhaps, because of COVID-19, the receipt is taking longer, hopefully. BTW, where did you apply? Mine is Nebraska center.
Hope we will get our receipts sooner.
Good luck!
Waiting times for the initial receipt have become unpredictable. Hopefully, you can keep your old address until you get the receipt. Also, under new rules that are scheduled to go into effect, moving is considered a “delay” and would prevent you from receiving an EAD, so be careful about that. Whether moving will make the case faster or slower, I do not know, as wait times at the different asylum offices are not predictable. Take care, Jason
What is the meaning of life if we’re all gonna die and rot in hell ? Jason did you know that the Andromeda galaxy is closing on ours at the speed of 500,000km per hour and the collapse will basically erase all of our atom/ and signs of life . All I’m saying is pour yourself a glass of
Your favorite liquor , smoke your cigarette and pray for a sweet release . Cheers
Funny, but I was just watching a video about our galaxy colliding with another galaxy. If you need me, I will be hiding in my basement…
Comment Submitted:
“ Respected Authorities, we seeking Asylum in completely strange land needs lots of courage. In my country I have seen families and individuals chose to end their life because of not handling pressure from persecution. People who have courage and believe in fighting for their RIGHT TO LIVE choose to fight persecution and find countries that provide them shelter and protection. We know the pain of separation from home country and we respect the land which allowed us to live side by side with its Citizens. We also believe that country that feed us and our kids is more respectful than our mother land. Cutting staff from their job will not only make our life in trouble but people who will be losing their job will also be in bad situation. More people who are legit to receive asylum will be an asset in many ways. This country is known as the safest land on earth and should be known the same. From generations , Asylees have been serving this country and hopefully will continue to serve in future. Asylum seekers and immigration officers must not be sacrificed to save money for government. Creating opportunities will bring success to this country, taking away someone’s right will not! ”
Thank you for posting this. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I am an asylee and my husband is my dependent.
I want to separate from him. People change and i am just concern about him. He might get deported and he was suffer severely from his home country as well. But he didn’t fill for his asylum because my lawyer said my case was enough for both of us. Can he still fill up for asylum by his own, or he will be deported.
I am in pain that I supposed to be with him. But he and me suffer severely and we can’t be the same anymore. Please advise me what to do. Thank you.
He can file his own case. There is a different procedure to file since he is currently a dependent on your case (basically, he has to file at the local office, but talk to a lawyer). He should file before you are legally divorced, as filing after the divorce could result in an issue for the one-year asylum filing bar (if he files while he is still married and still a dependent on the case, he meets an exception to the one year bar). Take care, Jason
hello jason,
I sent my I-485 package for my wife an i on friday using the the 2 days usps mail no signature required, when i tracked it this morning its showed me that its available for pickup, could be it be because my I-485 package didnt fit in the PO.BOX, have you experienced any troubles sending files to USCIS ? im only concerned because i sent the medical along with them ( which is hard and costly to retake )
We send documents by certified mail, but do not get signature service. Even so, I think it will be fine. It takes several weeks to get the receipt. Take care, Jason
I just posted a comment there.
“This is outrageous! Trump is damaging everything he touches ! America is built by immigrants, Trump himself descends from a German immigrant family, his wife is an immigrant! What’s wrong with this person? BLM, Asylees’ lives matter and ALL lives matter.
No one chooses to leave their home country or family for pleasure, circumstances forces them to do so. Life is tough on everyone, imagine topping it up with these rules? Basically thIs rule/law intends to send people to die in their county.”
Thank you for posting this. Take care, Jason
Let me see if I understand this: Are you saying that USCIS is furloughing 70% of its staff but the government is keeping every other agency that comes under DHS, including ICE, fully staffed? And, in this pandemic, there are more ICE officers out there looking for more people to cram into tight spaces? Why are you furloughing staff, which is essentially closing the agency, if you are so adamant about opening up the economy? Something is definitely not adding up!
The reason is that USCIS is funded by user fees. Other agencies are funded by tax money. Since user fees are way down, there is no money to pay USCIS employees and the furlough notices are being sent out as we speak. Maybe Congress will step in to keep the agency afloat. We shall see. Take care, Jason
Helo sir trump ban some visas for 6 months Could it have an effect asylee refugee i-730 process ?
Hi Jason,
I need your urgent advise on this, I have moved to another state properly done rye address change online and applied my EAD renewal for pending asylum case, USCIS received my application on May 21 with the new address, I have not received so far my uscis receipt notice so I am little bit worried I have tracked my application was recieved properly. Now I am worry since I have moved to this address USPS might have returned my receipt maybe my name was not properly mentioned in the mailing box, please let me know what could happened if your receipt is returned for not delivery would that jeopardize my EAD renewal. I have not receipt number so there is no way to check.
Thanks in advance for advise.
If you paid the fee by check, and the check was cashed, you can get a copy of the check from your bank and on the back, you will see a receipt number, which you can check online. If you did not receive the receipt, you can call USCIS (800-375-5283) and probably get the receipt number using your Alien number and other personal info. I did this for someone just last week, so it should work. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason. Thank you. I was denied asylum and referred to court. 1. What is my status as far as immigration is concerned? 2. Can I renew my EAD? 3. I have been working but due to covid our office was shut down, will I be a public charge if I apply for unemployment benefits? Thanks.
1 – You have a pending asylum case, but that is not a status. Given that you are in Immigration Court, you probably have no other status in the US (unless they made a mistake when they issued the Notice to Appear). 2 – Yes, as you did at the Asylum Office. 3 – Unemployment benefits are not part of the public charge analysis. And in event event, the public charge rules do not apply to asylum seekers. Take care, Jason
So I first come to usa in 2012 on a student visa. and then I traveled to canada from us in 2015, spend a few days there and came back to US. in 2016 I went back to my home country and after two weeks came back. on a student visa directly to US. That same year (2016), I applied for asylum. Do you think I will somehow affected by third country rule this ?
Under the current rules, no. Under the new rules, I do not think so, but it is not clear to me how some of these rules will be implemented. Under either set of rules, you will need to explain why you traveled from a safe country back to your country. Maybe something changed after the return trip or maybe there is another explanation, but either way, it will be important for you to explain this as part of your case. Take care, Jason
Jason my fuc&$ing oath ceremony got cancelled bc of the furloughs , no staff in my office until further notice what am I suppose to do ?? Can I move it somewhere else ?? I. Was ready 2 vote !! Uhhhh
I dont think there are furloughs yet. They start on Aug 3. It probably got cancelled due to Covid.
Notices are being sent out (my friend got hers). That probably means that they stop working 30 days after the furlough notice. It ain’t good. Take care, Jason
Ugh. If you move, your oath ceremony will be moved, but how will you inform them and get them to switch locations? Maybe try calling USCIS at 800-375-5283 and ask whether there is anything to be done. As far as I know the law on this point (which maybe is not too far), you have to be sworn in inside the state where you live. So maybe if one office is closed, they can schedule you at a different office in the same state. Maybe. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason,
I was wondering, how long does it usually take for USCIS to reply to a congressional inquiry? My representative wrote an inquiry on my behalf and I still haven’t received a response.
Regards,
Thanks for everything,
I do not know that there is a usual time frame, and it depends on the nature of the inquiry. If it was to expedite an asylum case, usually there is some response in a month or two, but since the offices were closed (and are still operating at less than full capacity, I would not be surprised if it took longer. Take care, Jason
Hello Jason. Thank you for your efforts. I did submit a comment. I hope together we will be able to get some thing done.
Thank you – Let’s hope so. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason, thank you for all your help !
Is it true that the new proposed amendments include not becoming a US citizen after 5 years of being granted asylum???
Where did you see this news? Do you have a link?
I have not seen that, and so I think not. The rule is that you can apply for a GC one year after receiving asylum (assuming you spend that year in the US), and once you get the GC, it will be back-dated by one year. From that date (the back-dated date), you can apply for citizenship after 5 years (really 4 years and 9 months, since you can apply 90 days early). Overall, if you add in the waiting times, it takes maybe 6 or 7 years to get citizenship. Take care, Jason
Helo sir trump ban some visas for 6 months Could it have an effect asylee refugee i-730 process ?
As far as I know, the ban does not affect I-730 beneficiaries. Take care, Jason
Dear asylum seekers ( like myself ) asylees , green card holders , and any others who seek immigration benefits. I understand your frustration with USCIS , I have been waiting already 4 years for an interview . It’s unfair . But if the agency collapses we can rest assured that more damage is coming our way. There is no USCIS 2 . again this is the petition link posted by ASYLUM OFFICER on twitter , it generates automatic letter to Congress >>>>>>
https://actionnetwork.org/letters/tell-congress-to-halt-uscis-furloughs?source=email&
And to Jason thank your for all you do , I understand and respect all opinions on funding . But one thing I think you and I can agree on is that having the agency collapse does more damage to us than them getting the bailout . Sorry for commenting the same thing but there is power in numbers and I’m trying to help all of us , as I have seen some people say they sign. We need to make the community aware and let them make a choice
I agree – I think people should sign too – I already signed it. Take care, Jason
This is a good drive to reach out to our state congress reps. Just completed and sent form.
Hey Jason , thank you for your help. I have been granted asylum last year as a dependent and my wife is the principal. I just want to know after receiving my travel document, I can go back to my country ?
Thank you!
People do that, and I have not heard about a dependent having a problem. However, this Administration is pretty vicious, and I would be careful. If your wife’s asylum case indicates that you or her whole family is in danger, especially from the home government, your return could raise issues of fraud. On the other hand, if only she is under threat, and you have a strong reason to go back, maybe it is safe. Either way, you should be prepared to explain why you returned and how you stayed safe. Take care, Jason