Asylum Division Continues to Hire Fraud Detectors; Not Protection Officers

This post is by Larry Gollub, who writes: I first encountered a proposal to create a professional corps of asylum adjudicators while in law school in 1985 and immediately knew that was what I wanted to do. I had to wait till 1991 for the government to create the asylum corps, but was hired with the second wave of new officers in 1992, serving with the asylum corps in one capacity or another until my retirement in 2015. I was asked to return to the training program on a part time basis in 2017 and stayed there through 2019. After returning to retirement, I worked with a group from the Asylum Officers union to draft Amicus Briefs to be filed in numerous court cases challenging Trump Administration policy changes. My main contribution was my detailed knowledge of the history of the asylum program.

About a dozen years ago, while researching just what the public thought an Asylum Officer did, I came across this post, by a person calling herself Lucette, in an online discussion thread conveniently titled, “Asylum Officer Qualifications”:

I am an immigration attorney with 3 years experience in Immigration Law and an interest in asylum law. I have successfully represented asylum applicants before CIS and in Immigration Court over the past three years. I am interested in a position as an asylum officer and I am wondering whether anyone would be so kind as to tell me whether my qualifications are such that I would be a viable candidate?

Lucette was constantly being passed over in her applications for employment as an Asylum Officer (“AO”) and wanted to know why. (more…)

Afghan Asylum Absurdity

I wrote last time about recent updates from the Asylum Division. Here, I want to focus on one element of those updates: How the Asylum Offices are dealing with asylum applications from Afghan evacuees.

Since Afghanistan fell to the Taliban in August 2021, about 88,000 Afghans have been evacuated by the U.S. government and brought to our country. These are generally people who cooperated or worked with the United States or the prior Afghan government, plus their immediate family members. These Afghans would be at risk of harm or death in their country due to their affiliation with the United States or the prior government of Afghanistan.

Ideally, we would have brought these people here and given them permanent status, so they could feel stable and safe, and so they could start rebuilding their lives. Unfortunately, that is not what happened. A bill to regularize the status of Afghan evacuees–the Afghan Adjustment Act–has stalled in Congress, and so the evacuees are left in limbo, not knowing whether they can stay or whether they will have to leave. As a result, many evacuees have no other option but to seek asylum. This situation is absurd and insulting, and–adding injury to insult–the Asylum Offices are mishandling the Afghan’s applications. (more…)

Updates from the Asylum Office–or–How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Backlog

In a meeting held earlier this month, we received some updates from the Asylum Division. Although Acting Director Sue Raufer could point to some positive developments in asylum world, the news is generally pretty bleak. In a development that will shock no one, the worst news relates to the backlog, which is growing at an unprecedented rate.

(more…)

Due Process Disaster in Immigration Court

It is not easy to convey the magnitude of the ongoing disaster at EOIR, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the office that oversees our nation’s Immigration Courts. Simply stated, the agency is rescheduling and advancing hundreds–maybe thousands–of cases without notifying attorneys, checking whether we are available to attend the hearings or checking whether we have the capacity to complete the cases.

On its face, this appears to be a mere scheduling problem. But in effect, it is a vicious and unprecedented assault on immigrants, their attorneys, and due process of law. (more…)

More Unsolicited Advice for the Asylum Office

Dear Asylum Office –

Did you ever have an annoying friend who keeps wanting to tell you what’s what? Who couldn’t accept that you’re not interested in his advice about how to improve your life? Who blathers on about this-and-that without noticing that you’ve nodded off? I get it. But here I am anyway. The fact is, my dear Asylum Office, you’re a mess and something needs to be done.

Please don’t misunderstand when I say that you’re a mess. I am speaking as a friend. Or maybe a frenemy. According to your own data, there are now (as of December 2021) more than 438,500 cases pending at our nation’s Asylum Offices. Many applicants have been waiting for years without an interview and with no real hope of receiving a decision any time soon. The good news is that you’ve hired 80 brand-spankin’ new officers to interview older (pre-2016) cases. But the concern is that these officers will not be used efficiently or fairly. Luckily, I am here to offer some unsolicited advice about maximizing efficiency and protecting due process of law. (more…)

Top 10 Ways to Know If the Immigration Court Phone Line Has Been Hacked

We learned last week that hackers have been using the Arlington Immigration Court phone number to make “spoof” calls requesting personal information from the recipients. EOIR (the Executive Office for Immigration Review – the office that oversees the Immigration Courts) warns that, to “protect yourself, be wary of answering phone calls from numbers you do not recognize” and never “give out your personal information over the phone to individuals you do not know.” Good advice. But how do you know whether a call from the Immigration Court is, in fact, fraudulent?

Fear not, for I stand ready to assist. Below are the top ten ways to know whether a phone call from EOIR is a “spoof” or the real deal. If you receive any of the following calls, hang up immediately because it ain’t the Immigration Court– (more…)

Remembering Immigration Judge David Crosland

I was very sorry to learn recently about the death of Immigration Judge David Crosland. Judge Crosland had been an Immigration Judge since 1997. I first met him when he arrived in Arlington, Virginia in about 2008. He later transferred to the Baltimore Immigration Court. Over the years, I have had many cases with Judge Crosland. In fact, I was scheduled to see him for an Individual Hearing tomorrow, for an Iraqi woman seeking protection from militias and terrorists in her home country.

Judge Crosland had his own style. Unlike most IJs, he started his hearings by questioning the applicants about their activities and instances of harm. Once he finished and established a framework for the case, he would turn things over to the applicant’s attorney. We then had to build on his framework (and often correct issues that came up during his questioning). While this was a challenging way to present a case, and left us with more uncertainty about how the direct examination would go, it also allowed Judge Crosland to hone in on aspects of the case that were of most concern to him. I will say that this was not my favorite way to present a case, and applicants were often confused by the IJ’s questions (and his soft voice). Nevertheless, Judge Crosland almost always “got it right” and it was hard for me to disagree with his decisions, even if we did not get the outcome we wanted. (more…)

Help Is on the Way for Asylum Seekers in the Backlog + a Humble Request for the Asylum Office

It’s the rare occasion when I can report some good news, but it seems that USCIS is taking action to help people in the affirmative asylum backlog. According to the most recent data (from December 2021), there are about 438,500 cases pending at the Asylum Office. The large majority of these applicants have not yet received interviews. Now, USCIS has hired an additional 80 Asylum Officers who will be dedicated to interviewing applicants who filed for asylum on or before January 1, 2016, meaning that they will be interviewing asylum seekers who have been waiting the longest.

Here, we’ll discuss what this means for those applicants, and also for people who filed after January 1, 2016. I’ll also make some suggestions about how to schedule these interviews in a way that is fair to applicants and to their lawyers (i.e., I will beg USCIS to have mercy on us). (more…)

Asylum Office Finally Releases New-ish Statistics

Back in 2019, the Trump Administration ended the long-standing practice of releasing data about our nation’s Asylum Offices. The Biden Administration has not seemed particularly eager to restore transparency, but now, a year and a half after President Biden took office, we finally have some new data from the Asylum Division. Mind you, the data is only current as of December 31, 2021, but we are told more information will be released soon. Since “soon” in asylum world tends to mean “not any time soon,” I’ve decided to write about the information we have now, rather than wait for a second data dump, which may or may not be released in the near future.

The new data gives us a lot to discuss and sheds some light on why cases are moving so slowly. It also raises questions about how the asylum system is working–or not working. (more…)

Don’t Forget to Update Your I-589

It’s common these days to find asylum seekers at the Asylum Office and in Immigration Court who filed their asylum application, form I-589, five, six, seven or more years ago. During that time, some information on the form becomes out of date. Also, new events occur which need to be added to the form. What is the best and most efficient way to update your asylum application at the Asylum Office and in court? (more…)

Second Interviews at the Asylum Office

Though I haven’t seen any data to back this up, it seems to me that second interviews at the Asylum Office are becoming more common. I’ve been hearing reports about second (or third) interviews from others and we are seeing it in our own practice as well. In this post, we will talk about the second interview: Why is it needed? What happens at a second interview? How should you prepare? (more…)

Prosecutorial Discretion in Immigration Court

The Department of Homeland Security (the prosecutor in Immigration Court) has been implementing new rules related to its “enforcement priorities.” These rules apply to people who have cases pending in Immigration Court, meaning that the U.S. government is trying to deport them. Not surprisingly, the government wants to deport some people more than others. Under the new rules, cases that are not a priority for removal may be dismissed as a matter of prosecutorial discretion or PD. When that happens, the government has stopped the removal/deportation process and the noncitizen is able to remain in the United States.

Here, we’ll talk about who might qualify for PD, the different types of PD, and how to request PD from DHS. (more…)

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!

Let me tell you about some recent events in my office.

We had two cases set for individual hearings this week. Both cases involve noncitizens who have been waiting years for their decisions, both have family members abroad who they hope to bring to the U.S. if their claims are successful, and both have strong cases for asylum.

For the first case, we prepared and submitted evidence earlier in the pandemic, but the case was postponed at the last minute due to Covid. We were hoping that the new date would stick, given that restrictions are easing and the court now has a system to do cases remotely (called Webex). As the date approached, we filed additional evidence and scheduled two practice sessions for the client. We also regularly checked the Immigration Court online portal, which lists our court dates, to be sure the case was still on the docket. (more…)

Failures and Solutions at the Asylum Office

A new report, Lives in Limbo: How the Boston Asylum Office Fails Asylum Seekers, raises concerns about the Boston Asylum Office and about the affirmative asylum system in general. Here, we’ll discuss some of the report’s findings and some suggested improvements to the system. I want to focus on one particular suggestion in the report, which has been on my mind lately: Whether asylum applications can be approved largely “on the papers,” with only a brief interview. But first, let’s take a look at the report’s main points. (more…)