White House, Sept. 30, 2024 "MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE SUBJECT: Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2025 By the authority vested in me as President by the...
BIB Daily presents bimonthly PERM practice tips from Ron Wada , member of the Editorial Board for Bender’s Immigration Bulletin and author of the 10+ year series of BALCA review articles, “Shaping...
Texas v. Mayorkas "In September 2022, after a notice-and-comment period, the Biden administration promulgated a new Rule redefining the term ["public charge"]. In response, the State of...
White House, Sept. 30, 2024 "...I have now concluded that in order to better achieve Proclamation 10773’s goal of enhancing our ability to address historic levels of migration and more efficiently...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 10/01/2024 "This public notice provides information on how to apply for the DV-2026 Program and is issued pursuant to the Immigration...
US v. Fernandez Sanchez
"Bonifacio Fernandez Sanchez, a Mexican citizen who migrated to the United States illegally as a minor in 2006, was deported in 2011 following a four-minute removal hearing. During that hearing, the immigration judge neglected to advise Fernandez Sanchez about his eligibility for voluntary departure or inform him of his right to appeal. Then, in his written summary order, the immigration judge indicated that Fernandez Sanchez had waived his right to appeal—even though this was never discussed during the hearing. ... [O]ur concern under § 1326(d) is “the validity of the deportation order” under which Fernandez Sanchez was actually deported—not the validity of a hypothetical alternate deportation order that was never entered due to the immigration judge’s own errors. 8 U.S.C. § 1326(d); see id. § 1326(a)(1). Ultimately, we agree with Fernandez Sanchez that there is a reasonable probability that, but for the denial of his appeal rights, he would not have been deported. See El Shami, 434 F.3d at 665. Accordingly, we conclude that his 2011 removal hearing was fundamentally unfair. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of Fernandez Sanchez’s indictment."
[Hats off to Federal Defenders Erin Trodden (argued) and Juval Scott (on brief)!]