Last week, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) wrote a letter urging the Biden Administration to “take action to manage migration at the U.S. southern border in an orderly and effective manner while also ensuring a fair and humane process for people arriving at our borders.” That’s an excellent idea. The problem comes with the implementation, and here, AILA’s solutions fall short.
The impetus for AILA’s letter comes from “reports indicating the administration plans to implement a national border expulsion authority and raise the legal standard for credible fear interviews [initial evaluations of asylum eligibility],” which would make it more difficult for migrants to enter the country at the Southern border. President Biden has not made any announcement yet, but in the wake of the failed Senate bi-partisan border bill, rumors that the Administration will take unilateral action have been swirling. Of course, the President has limited authority and must act within the law, but the law is murky, and AILA wants to ensure that any executive action would not “violate United States and international asylum law and send people eligible for legal protection back into life-threatening conditions.”
While AILA has highlighted the potential risks of executive action (i.e., that legitimate asylum seekers will be turned away), the organization has offered no realistic ideas to improve the situation. AILA indicates that the “way forward requires new solutions that must incorporate an all-of-government approach that is backed by a major increase in funding across all immigration agencies.” More funding? Are you serious? Even AILA knows that ain’t gonna happen: “The greatest hurdle the administration faces is the lack of adequate funding which we recognize results from the inability of Congress to pass regular or emergency spending bills.” You don’t say.
In the absence of additional funding, AILA suggests that the Administration should “use any authorities available that enable it to draw or transfer existing resources.” In other words, the organization is suggesting that the Administration rob Peter to pay Paul. If such a transfer is even legally possible, it begs the question: What vulnerable groups will lose funding in order to finance migrants at the border?
Assuming the Administration can find these magical funds, AILA recommends using them for a host of border-related services, including “maximally increasing the capacity at ports of entry,” “adding asylum officers,” “providing legal representation to those who cannot afford counsel,” and “providing support and foreign assistance… to address the root causes of migration.” That all sounds pretty expensive, and it’s hard to imagine the government coming up with the money by “transfer[ing] existing resources.” But who knows? Maybe they have a good bookkeeper.
Perhaps I am being unduly harsh. Without additional funding, there is no good solution for the border situation. But there are solutions, and some are less bad than others. It seems to me that AILA–the premier organization representing immigration attorneys (including yours truly)–has a responsibility to come up with realistic ideas that do not depend on imaginary sources of funding. AILA also has a duty to take politics into account, especially during an election year where the Republican candidate represents an extreme threat to immigrants, minorities, and democracy itself. Recent polling suggests that 77% of Americans view the situation at the border as a “crisis” or a “major problem,” and this plays into the hands of Donald Trump.
If the goal is to reduce the number of people arriving at the border–and given voter sentiment about the border during an election year, that probably should be the goal–what “less bad” solutions might we try? What can the Biden Administration do now, with limited funds and a high level of public concern?
Primarily, I think the Administration (and we as a nation) need to think about who we believe deserves asylum. Asylum was not created to protect people from all types of harm. Rather, it was created to protect “refugees,” which are defined as people who face persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, political opinion or particular social group. Over the last few decades, these definitions–especial “particular social group”–have been expanded by litigation (and not through any sort of democratic process). As a result, more and more people qualify as “refugees” and are thus eligible for asylum. In the absence of Congressional action, the Biden Administration can narrow the definition of refugee, which would reduce the number of people eligible for protection.
Narrowing the definition of refugee is not enough if asylum cases take years. To deter ineligible asylum seekers, we need more clarity about who qualifies for protection, and those decisions need to be made quickly. This means that when applicants arrive at the border and request protection, they should be screened not only for a fear of harm (as they are now), but also for whether that harm is on account of one of the five protected grounds. In this way, people who do not face harm for a protected reason can be more quickly excluded, which will have a greater deterrent effect on future applicants.
The “resources” needed to screen arriving migrants are Asylum Officers, who are already largely engaged in this work (at the expense of affirmative asylum applicants, most of whom are waiting indefinitely for their interviews). To free up more officers, the Biden Administration could designate certain countries or groups for much more perfunctory interviews–Uyghurs from China or human beings from Afghanistan, for example. Providing truncated interviews for people who qualify for asylum would remove some applicants from the affirmative asylum queue and would allow more officers to focus on the border.
As an advocate for asylum seekers, I am not saying that I love the idea of excluding vulnerable people who cannot qualify for asylum at the border–I don’t. But given the legal, financial, and political constraints, something needs to change. AILA and everyone else concerned about this issue should be working towards a more sustainable situation at the border. However, unless our ideas are grounded in reality, they move us no closer to a solution.
Jason, what do you think of Republican politicians continuous support of him ?
Respect election results and peaceful transition of power are the cornerstones of our democracy. If losers could just rant that the election was stolen whenever he loses…are we still a democracy ?! What difference will we have with China and Soviet… I for sure as hell will work to stop Trump from being re-elected, we cannot reward a election denier. But are these Republicans without spines ? I feel that even Republicans who respect democracy should vote for Joe Biden to stop Trump. Does it make you fear or concerned ? Cause a lot of people live under Republican governors or represented by Republican Congress members……even Virginia has some Republican house seats right ?
Many people support Trump. Others are ambivalent about Biden and may not vote. I do expect a Trump win will be very bad for our country, including for many of the people who support him. I hope many people will work hard to help Biden win, and I hope those who refuse to vote for a “lesser evil” will understand that not voting for Biden will empower a much greater evil. Take care, Jason
Foreign persecutors and Trump are colluding. Soviet is waiting for Trump to be sworn in and invade west Europe…China will take over Taiwan…
A world with Trump as US president will be a dangerous one…
Do you think if Trump wins it’s going effect granted asylums who are waiting for GC?
I do not know. Last time, they tried to slow down everything at USCIS and the agency is still recovering from that. Also, they said that all GC cases would be interviewed, even if the person already had an extensive asylum interview. So I do think if Trump wins, USCIS and any person with a USCIS case will have a more difficult time. Take care, Jason
Hi,
I am applying for green card based on asylum.I was the principal applicant,my spouse was dependent. There one question asking ,
1.Are you applying with your spouse,I m not sure if it is yes or no, both of us are applying with each one an I 485 application but all will be sent and processed during same period.
2. I have citation, speed camera or red light camera ticket, all were paid. Do I need to include the proof of payment, Currently I don’t have them it’s been longtime.
3.Have you ever misrepresented, I m confused too whether yes or no ,but I think it should be yes, I came on B1B2 for 6 month stay but applied asylum,at the border I didn’t tell the CBP that I m coming to apply for asylum even if that I knew I was going to apply for asylum.
1 – This question never made much sense to me, but if you are both applying at the same time, I guess you should check yes. 2 – That does not sound like a criminal issue. If it was a crime (like reckless driving), you need to mention it and get records, but if it is only a ticket, you do not need to do anything. If you are not certain, it is best to mention it and see what USCIS says. 3 – If you planned to ask for asylum when you applied for the visa, or when you came here, I think the answer is probably yes. You can explain why this happened – maybe you feared harm in your country and so you lied to get a visa and escape? If so, that would not block you from asylum and should have no effect on the GC case (per a case called Matter of Pula). It is best to tell USCIS now, and if they need you to do a waiver, they will tell you. A waiver is just a form to ask forgiveness for the “sin” of misrepresenting. But the waiver for asylees is very powerful and you should get it without any trouble. If you do not tell them and need a waiver later on, it can be much more problematic. Take care, Jason
hello jason,
as a Green card holder through asylum do you think Trump can mess with us or we are kinda in the safe side ? especially I’ve got no criminal history or things like that and never went back to my country and will never will casue i heard that trump want to give hard times for the folks who got asylum in the states then used the gc and travelled back to their home countries even if the issue wasn’t with their government but i have seen many immigration attorneys on YouTube warning people that trump will track down people who went visited their home countries while still not neutralized !!! but other that you think he can give us hard time??? i’m sure the pending asylum people and the people who came through the borders both will suffer and struggle a lot with trump but what about us ? the green card holders?
I think in theory, the Trump Administration will try to move against anyone who they think obtained status here by fraud, and they will cast a very wide net for that. However, I do not think in practical terms, they will be able to do much against GC holders. It is simply too difficult to review all the cases to determine whether there are issues and there are too many people. That said, I do think it is best to be cautious and to be able to explain why you returned to the home country and how you stayed safe, or better yet, do not return to the home country at all. Take care, Jason
I actually want to ask a question regarding Biden’s handling of immigration.
Why it seems, a lot of people say…Biden is doing a horrible job on immigration, including you I believe ?
I don’t understand…the immigration situation is always like this. They come across the border through credible fear interview…and then they are released into the interior to pursue their case…Is there something wrong with that ? That’s our law, isn’t it ? Sometimes they don’t encounter CBP and later apprehended, they are put to removal proceedings. If they lose their case, they will be ordered removed and ICE has to execute the removal order…If ICE lets them stay, they can stay their removal ? I mean…everything seems to be following along our immigration law and legal process…right ?
Why do they make it sound like Biden is releasing illegals into US ? It’s noting remotely like that. And why do you asylum advocates let these false accusations fly ? Why do you guys not dispute and repudiate them ? Why do you guys seem to implicitly agree that Biden is doing a horrible job. In my opinion, he is doing a better than average, at least adequate job. e.g. After title 42, the scenario we feared didn’t happen.
I also want to ask what did trump do to handle immigration ? Other than stoking a lot of chaos and failed promises, muslim ban, tear gas, family separation ? I think he did a no better job than Biden, why do I rarely see “Trump is doing a horrible job in immigration” ? I mean…to me, it’s a double standard and I feel it’s unfair to President Biden that he has to be subject to a higher standard in terms of job performance.
Do you think Biden is really doing a horrible job in immigration or is it just more of a smear campaign by the republicans to create a perception that Biden is doing a horrible job ?
I have addressed this in prior posts, including the one above, but Trump is far worse than Biden for immigrants and for democracy. Ultimately, if Trump wins, I expect he will do great damage to our country. I suppose that will have the “benefit” of making it a less desirable place to live and so fewer immigrants will come here (for example, you don’t see many immigrants on the way to Russia). Take care, Jason
Thanks for concurring with me on the relative performance of Biden and Trump.
Here is my question: why it seems Biden’s shortcoming in immigration is more heavily scrutinized ? Not just in this blog but like across the media. I am worried that it will create a perception that Biden is just so bad that anything else is better than him, and that will have people tempted to support Trump…which I think will be really bad for asylum seekers…I think any criticism for Biden is fair … But, is there anyway we could match it with corresponding level of criticism of Trump ?
Is there anyway we could help media to match with corresponding level of criticism of trump
If you want all non-citizens detained and deported and want to end asylum, vote for Trump. If you want to try to improve the system and make it functional, we have to vote for Biden. I do think Biden is trying to make the situation better, but without immigration reform from Congress, that is not really working. Take care, Jason
I applied for my GC March 2022, did my fingerprints in May 2022 but since then nothing is done on the process. I usually check it online and it always says that I did my fingerprints. I’m wondering how long it takes to get a Green card.
GC cases based on asylum can take 2 years, and I think if you look at the processing times on http://www.uscis.gov, the case will still be within the “normal” (and ridiculously long) processing time. If it is outside the processing time, you can make an inquiry with USCIS. Otherwise, I think your only option is to try to expedite – I wrote about that on January 29, 2020. Hopefully, though, you will receive a response soon, as we see most such cases processed within one or two years. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason
I am referred to the immigration court by USCIS
MY Master hearing is in July and my EAD is expiring in 5 months so can I renew my EAD now ?
Secondly how long the process takes in the immigration court after your master hearing
Thank you
Regards
You can file to renew now, as you would have done before you were referred to court, though you should include proof of the court case with your I-765. Also, note that fees are set to increase on April 1, and so you may want to file before then. In terms of the time frame, it varies by judge. Most cases seem to be scheduled 6 to 12 months after the Master Hearing, but some judges take longer and others are faster. Take care, Jason
Thank you for your reply
What document can I submit as a proof with my i765
Secondly do I need to do something before my master hearing date at my end
Regards
Submit everything you submitted before, but also include the fee and some documents that you have a court case, such as the Notice to Appear and an order showing your next court date. In terms of the Master Hearing, I am not sure what you mean. Normally, there is not much to do, but you should talk to a lawyer to be sure. Also, if you plan to file other applications aside from asylum (which it sounds like you already filed), you should submit those. Take care, Jason
Jason, what’s your take on super tuesday results ?
No real surprises. I do expect a second Trump term will be worse for non-citizens than his first term. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I have been following your blog for the last 5 years and it is very helpful. I have one question though.
I was granted asylum over a year ago. I have applied for Green Card a few month ago and I recieved a reciept from USCIS and my case is still on process. My family joined me few weeks ago as aderivetive of an asylee. When should I apply green card for them? Should I have to wait one year and make an application for them?
Thanks
They no longer have to wait one year – many lawyers, including me, recommend waiting 6 months. I wrote about this with an explanation on February 8, 2023. Also, note that until they get their GCs, you should not file for your citizenship. If you become a citizen before they get their green cards, it will cause very significant delays in their cases. Take care, Jason
Hi there! In an older post, you optimistically predicted changes to the RTD, making it valid for kore than just one year than is the case now (which is ironic considering that it takes longer to get an RTD than the duration of its validity.
My question is, have you heard of any updates or plans for such a prospect? (Even if it’s rumors!)
Thank you
I haven’t heard anything. That will teach me to be an optimist! (though I still think this is coming). Take care, Jason
Hi Jason,
I’m just wondering if pending asylum status can adjust their status through DV lottery.
Thank you
If they have no other status in the US aside from pending asylum, probably the only way to do that is to leave the United States and process the GC overseas. There may be an exception to that rule, and so if you win, talk to a lawyer to evaluate the options. I wrote more about this issue on October 5, 2015. Take care, Jason
Thank you
Hi Jason,
Thank you for your consistency and timeliness in responding to our issues. Permit me to seek another advice please.
1. A friend has filed a pro se motion to dismiss his deportation process, for reason that he has married a US citizen.
2. His I-130 has been pending approval for over 7months.
3. He is planning to file a 485 even though he knows that USCIS will not attend to that until his case is dismissed.
4. The reason being that the filing fee will increase from April 1, 2024.
Questions:
a. Is it advisable to file the 485 at this time, bearing in mind that the 130 is still pending?
b Will the filing secure him a priority date even if it is unattended to, but received by USCIS?
Pls advise. Thank you
a – The risk is that USCIS will process the I-485 before his case is dismissed, and then deny the I-485 because they do not have jurisdiction (meaning that the case is still with the court). If it seems like the court will not dismiss, he should be able to use his I-485 receipt to get the GC with the court. b – The issue of the priority date does not really apply when you marry a US citizen, but once he files, USCIS should start processing the case and so that should be moving along. I am not sure, but I think he will need to indicate on the I-485 whether his case is currently with the court. If so, he should probably explain that he is in the process of getting it dismissed. Also, once he has the receipt, maybe he wants to reach out to DHS again to see whether they would agree to dismissal. Take care, Jason
Dear Jason,
Thank you for your blog! My bro is right now in Mexico. He has been trying to get CBP1 parole for a few days but no success. I understand that it can take time. But the problem is that he is young boy, 17 years old and I’m really concerned about his well being there. I heard that he can try to cross the border in Nuevo Progreso without the parole and that because he is under 18 he still will be legitimately eligible to apply for the asylum. Is that correct? And what negative consequences should he expect in his further asylum case if he crossed in Nuevo progreso being of age of 17 years old?
Best, Murad
Unfortunately, you are sol as a substantial number of asylum advocates are unable or unwilling to help people like your friend…He has to figure it out himself…
Who are the substantial number of asylum advocates who won’t help? I have never heard of such a thing. Take care, Jason
I do not have info about the situation at the border, and so I cannot really offer much. The law states that a person at a border entry point or even between points of entry is eligible to apply for asylum, but I am not sure how that is currently being implemented. Also, of course, it may be dangerous to try to enter between lawful points of entry. Maybe you can talk to a lawyer or non-profit at the border to see what the situation is now. Take care, Jason
Thank you for the reply! As far as I know to be admitted in the US and be eligible to apply for asylum you have to have either got denied of the asylum in Mexico and any other transit countries or got CBP1 parole. Also as far as I know underaged persons are subject of the exception from that rule. There is that port of entry, Nuevo Progresso that is not included in the CBP1 program because it’s relatively small. They admit people through that port without CBP1. They give them i94 etc. But since they didn’t use CBP1 many of those immigrants got rejected the asylum. Since underaged persons are subject of the exception, I’m asking if my bro would have negative consequences for his asylum case because he went through Nuevo Progresso without CBP1? Thank you and have a wonderful night, Murad.
Sorry, I just do not know enough about the border situation to know what is happening. You might try contacting a non-profit at the border to ask. I did a post on September 22, 2016 with links to non-profits by state and maybe that would help you find a group that can help. Take care, Jason
It’s clear that the supreme court, with his 3 hand-picked justices, will just protect him. If Trump is reelected, he will weaponize the judicial and DOJ/EOIR and DHS to harm asylum seekers. So the asylum community should unanimously support President Biden to stop Trump
Hello Jason
I was filling I 485 form for my child.
I know I have to sign for her. In the applicant statement which is part 10 . Which part I have to select 1a or 2 which is as applicant or preparer?
Thanks
I think if you prepared the application, you should list yourself on the form somewhere. I am not sure whether the “preparer” part is only for lawyers, but double check that. If it is, you should include a cover letter explaining that you helped prepare the form for your child. Take care, Jason
Hi all, applied for Asylum Nov-2015
Approved in court- Apr-6-2022
Applied for GC – Apr -10 -23 , 330 days still Case Was Updated To Show Fingerprints
Were Taken,
Applied for Travel Document in May-8-23 and 302 days still Case Was Updated To Show Fingerprints
Were Taken
Im really tired ):
The wait times are very long, but most people seem to have the GC and the travel document in 1 or 1.5 years, so hopefully, you are alost there. Take care, Jason
Jason, your opinion with regard to border crossers and interior seekers is a rather novel one and I don’t hear a lot from mainstream pro-immigration organization like AILA. It’s usually all anti-or all pro-. How much of the immigration lawyer community would you say hold same or similar views to you in that we should shift resources to interior seekers and border seekers should be placed in a lower priority ? You are entirely entitled to your opinion and that’s not an issue, however because I personally disagree with that view point. I want to get an idea of how prevalent such school of thought is in the immigration lawyer community so that I can determine how concerned I should be and how forceful should I push back.
Second question is, when you express an viewpoint that is contrary to the positions of mainstream asylum advocacy groups like AILA or ACLU, have you worried about some of the impression that it may create of some people of you ? It is after all a very controversial topic and controversial position to take, what makes you feel the need to voice it out, knowing your proposal probably will be dismissed/ignored and have very low chance of success and potentially alienate some people ?
I do not know how other lawyers feel, but I know at least some have similar ideas to me. As for what others think, some would disagree, but that is why it is worth discussing different ideas. Take care, Jason
fair
Hello, i came to the US in 2019 through the DV lottery and I’m planning to apply for American citizenship in about two months. I had a domestic violence case in the past, but it was dismissed, and I’ve since been divorced. Will this have any impact on my citizenship application?
It depends what you mean by dismissed. If you had any sort of penalty, such as probation before judgment or community service before the case was dismissed, you should talk to a lawyer. Also, if you are not sure, talk to a lawyer. Domestic violence cases are taken very seriously and are viewed broadly under the immigration law and so you need to be careful. Also, even if the case was dismissed, you need to provide the “disposition” (final outcome) to USCIS when you file the N-400. Take care, Jason
Good morning Jason,
I live in Missouri but I do not understand why Missouri National Center sent my green card application to Vermont which technically should not have jurisdiction over Missouri cases. Is this common or it is a mistake from USCIS side? After I checked, I thought that my case should have been sent to Nebraska Center instead. Am I wrong? Please advise.
I am not sure USCIS always sends cases to the same office every time. I think they move cases around depending on available resources, and so maybe that is what happened. Take care, Jason
Biden and Harris will be reelected in 2024. Now I am turning my attention to 2028. Both Ron DeSantis and Nikki Haley are anti-asylum seekers. Does Kamala Harris have what it takes to defeat either of them ? I am scared of a Republican administration starting in Jan 2029…
If asylum advocates try to win asylum for an immigrant. Basically they have to beat opposing parties in either administrative or judicial court.
I want to ask, in your practice, have you needed to argue in front of a circuit court of appeals for asylum applicants ?
In your experience, which one is a tougher opponent ? The OPLA lawyer or the lawyer from Office of Immigration Litigation of DOJ ?
Best
I have not had a case at the federal circuit court in some time, but I have done many. The lawyers at the different offices (OPLA, OIL) are generally pretty good. The OPLA lawyers are more overworked and have less time to spend on their cases. Take care, Jason
Okay, thanks
The fact that they are good lawyers is prob bad news for asylum seekers…
today someone i know got referral from Arlington office after been waiting for 6 years to get interview and he got the denial letter today!! that’s so sad i really feel bad for anyone who waits for years to get interviewed then boom you’re in the deportation process! hopefully they interview people as soon as possible so if their asylum got denied then they can leave without feeling that they have wasted too many years of their lives.
god luck to everyone
what are the next steps for him ??? does he needs to find an attorney asap because he didn’t like his last attorney? will he wait for another 3-4 years to get interviewed again by Judge?
thanks
Unfortunately, majority of asylum seekers are denied and deported in the end ..so any asylum seeker should have been aware of such outcome when they initially applied for asylum.
I wrote about this on March 7, 2018 and that post explains the process. These days, court cases in the VA/DC/MD area generally take less than a year, but it depends on the judge. Also, he should know that many cases that are denied at the asylum office are approved in court. I wrote about that on March 8, 2023. Take care, Jason
Jason, thank you for your response.
I always hear people, regardless of their political leaning or ideology, say that America’s immigration laws need overhauling because they are outdated/broken. What I don’t hear them saying is what parts of the laws they find “outdated” and what parts they think need to be changed. I think, for those who are either pro immigration or indifferent to immigration, it’s just an easy way out of the debate surrounding immigration. I would compare it to a defense mechanism. And obviously, those who are anti immigrant or anti immigration falsely claim that the current immigration laws are broken. When anti immigration advocates complain about the current immigration laws being broken, what they really mean to say is that the immigration laws should be tightened such that fewer immigrants get to migrate to the US. For, anti immigration advocates don’t care too much about improving the process for people intending to immigrate to the US. What is distressing, though, is that those who are not necessarily anti immigrant take the bait and start singing the same tune.
While I agree that the agencies and the courts need overhauling and more resources so they can better serve the group of people they were created to serve, it wouldn’t be completely accurate, however, to argue that our immigration laws are so broken such that they are to blame for what is currently happening in the immigration world. If anything, it is Congress that is broken- and Congress is reluctant to provide the necessary resources and leadership so the agencies- and the US-Mexico border- can be more efficient, modern, and organized.
Jason, I was responding to a comment you made earlier to someone else. I am not sure why it was posted as a new comment lol
Well, my response may not make much sense then, but it is time for me to go home, so I will leave it. Take care, Jason
From where I stand, the laws and the system are very broken. I have many clients waiting 6, 7, 8 years or longer, just for an interview. There are many, many other problems with the system. Congress is part of the problem (a big part), but so is the agencies’ incompetence and lack of caring (on a systematic level – many people working in the systems are excellent). Also, the laws themselves are a problem, as they do not provide sufficient clarity, among other issues. Given Congress’s inaction, I think advocates need to think about what can be done with the limited resources available. I also think we need to consider politics, as the border is Trump’s number one voter recruitment tool, and if he wins, the situation will become much worse for non-citizens (and everyone). Take care, Jason
Jason, I don’t think any country has perfect immigration laws. But many countries, especially countries that have advanced economies, seem to be doing fine. And you know that the law can be vague sometimes and therefore require interpretation by the judiciary. That still doesn’t mean that the laws should be blamed for what is going on in the asylum world. To that end, I firmly believe that asylum issues, and immigration in general, have becoming so political, the consequence of which is creating bottlenecks after bottlenecks.
To the extent that the politics prevents any reform of the immigration law, I agree. I also think we need a complete re-write of who is eligible for asylum, and that should be done legislatively and not through litigation, as is the case now. Of course, the politics being what they are, that is wishful thinking at best. Take care, Jason
I remain the only one in this blog calling for punishment of persecutors in our asylum law…let me be clear, if you guys reject my idea, I doubt you will be able to find a sustainable solution. You can all try and I wish you luck 🤞.
But given my track record of successfully predicting the upcoming GOP nominee 3 year ago. Maybe my word should be taken a little bit more seriously. That demonstrates that I have foresight and I am prescient. Of course that is my personal opinion. But my view is that, if you don’t address the root cause, the asylum system will remain unstable because it’s the persecutors’ action that is dictating the dynamic of the asylum inflow. The changing of downstream action by US government feels like a bandaid but not a good way to address the issue. I accept that it’s a little unrealistic to just kill persecutors. But I said, after taking into account of the feedback, let’s start small, like visa sanction…it should be completely doable … right ? In asylum affidavit, the asylum applicant will obviously name a persecutor that persecuted him or her or s/he is afraid that will persecute him or her…If asylum is granted, that means that the US government believed the allegation in asylum affidavit…and then there should be some action taken. Like…denying visa … seizing finance or bank accounts of foreign persecutors in the US…
I have a track record in successfully predicting the GOP nominee 3 years ago and AILA, the reputable immigration organization appears to largely agree with my viewpoint in denouncing restricting credible fear interview…so that’s not just me…so I feel that all this suggests that my point is a meritorious one and worthy of consideration
Hello Jason,
I have pending asylum, if my spouse (dependent in my case) travels and goes back to my persecution country.
Will it be negative for my case if I mention about her harassment (being harassed, persecutors ask about me) in affidavit and she traveling and going back to persecution country.
Thank you
You may need to explain why she returned to the country (for example, maybe she thought that she could do so safely). Otherwise, if she was harassed or threatened because of you, that sounds like it would be information that would help your asylum case. Of course, if she had these problems and returned again to the country, it might be harder to explain why she did that.
Jason, what if the wife is the main applicant of her case and it’s based on FGM. Can the husband who is the derivative travel to their home country? Thanks
If that were the case, it would be easier to explain why he traveled. The only issue would be if her case indicates that he was in danger too (for example, because he does not circumcise his wife). Take care, Jason
Hello Jason.
I have the same situation. I have not mentioned anything about her in the affidavit (meaning she has not been harassed). Will her travel to any third country and back to my persecution country have any impact on my case?
Thank you
I doubt that there would be an effect on the case, but you should be able to explain this if you are asked, and so it does not hurt to think about what you will say beforehand, so you are ready. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason, I applied for asylum with my wife and daughter still expecting to be called for interview. It’s Tax season and we normaly filled together as a family, Please I will like to know if we can file our tax return separately, will it have a negative effect on our case.
That should have no effect and it is very unlikely that you would be asked about taxes for an asylum case. Take care, Jason
Hi Jason. How much time takes by experience to approve and interview for i-130 for wife living in a south Asian country applied by Husband with 1. Green Card holder and 2. Citizen. I checked website but your experience what says? kindly guide. Thank you.
There is no queue for spouses of US citizens, and so there is only the processing time. We do not do many stand-alone I-130 forms, but I think most are completed in 8 to 12 months. There is a wait time for I-130 forms for spouses of GC-holders, which you can see if you Google “DOS visa bulletin” – the first chart shows the wait time for a GC, but the chart below that shows when the spouse can start the consular processing, so the case can move forward even before the wait time is completed (though the consular processing cannot be finished until after the posted wait time in the first chart). The I-130 filed by a GC-holder probably takes longer than one filed by a citizen, as they have lower priority and have to wait in the queue anyway, so there is no rush on the part of USCIS. Take care, Jason
Hey Jason, I got an email from USCIS saying a decision has been made on my case. When I checked the status, it said my interview was scheduled for February 21st. I never got any notification about the interview being scheduled, and I’ve been checking my status regularly. Now, the date is shown in the past. What does this mean?
Hey Jason, I got an email from USCIS saying a decision has been made on my case. When I checked the status, it said my interview was scheduled for February 21st. I never got any notification about the interview being scheduled, and I’ve been checking my status regularly. Now, the date is shown in the past. What does this mean?I filed case online .
Probably you get referred to immigration court
I expect if that is the case, the decision could be reversed given the lack of notice. But that is a real pain, and stressful. Take care, Jason
My case was affirmative and I’m still maintaining my legal status since 2019 , so how come this is possibility. And also I never applied for Asylum based EAD
If you are still in status, you would not get referred to court if your case was denied. You would get a letter called a Notice of Intent to Deny and you would have 16 days to respond. Anyway, this all sounds like a big mistake on their end and that you should contact them about it. Take care, Jason
Strange. You should email the asylum office directly and ask. Maybe include a screen shot of that message. You can find their email if you follow the link under Resources called Asylum Office Locator. It really seems there is no end to the problems with the online USCIS system. Take care, Jason
I feel like the last paragraph is in anticipation of me lol…
People who are harmed should be able to be granted asylum…I feel it’s necessary for to expand the definition of persecution. Because INA has existed for a long time without major overhaul, it’s long past time…right now people around the world are suffering and they should be able to find sanctuary in the US. It would be a good idea to make asylum more accessible so that our country can have a moral high ground for protecting the vulnerable…
Also in terms of solution…maybe the asylum community could reconsider my suggestion in stepping up punishing the persecutors around the world ? At least get it started… Here is a concrete example: if a person is approved asylum, clearly they must have named the (would-be) persecutor(s) ? Right ? So we take that information and pass it to state department, so when these group of people apply for visas, they will be denied…visa sanction is a very small step…but it’s a start and it does deter some persecutors…and then we go from there.
Just an idea, my reasoning is that, over the years, asylum advocates’ comments always center on “too many people not enough resources”, it seems they are a bit hyperfocused on “not enough resources”, but completely ignored “too many people”…I disagree that we should narrow asylum or close border to address “too many people”, these are dangerous precedents. Because the administration will just feel…okay why dont we cancel the asylum program…there will be no people at all…and thats not good.
An ideal world should be that the persecution no longer happens, and people no longer need to seek asylum…the asylum provision in INA can naturally phase off…and that in my opinion, starts from punishing persecutors, address persecution locally. That would be a nicer, more equilibrium state of the matter…than the abrupt narrowing of asylum or closing of border.
Just my 2 $
I think we need to completely re-do our immigration and asylum systems, which are out-dated, don’t address the current world situation, and are extremely inefficient. However, I don’t see that happening. Also, advocates have long failed to convince the American public to accept a more open immigration system, even though that would be good for the country economically, culturally, etc. The article above is addressing a more narrow point – give the practical/humanitarian and political concerns about the border, what can be done with the resources available now. AILA’s suggestion is unrealistic, and I think it is important to focus on what can be done with the resources available at our disposal now. Also, in my day, it was 2 cents, but I guess that is inflation. Take care, Jason
Another point I want to say is that your opinion is very similar to former AG sessions. He penned a memo saying certain people who were suffering private harm ( mostly PSGs) are not eligible for asylum. And AG Sessions is clearly … not an asylum advocate…
There are many ways to reform the asylum system and if conservatives and liberals could set aside politics, maybe they could actual make some sound policy decisions. That said, I am no fan of Jefferson Beauregard…