Hamed Aleaziz, New York Times, Oct. 4, 2024 (gift link) "The Biden administration said Friday it would allow the temporary legal permission for migrants from Cuba, Venezuela, Haiti, and Nicaragua...
Singh v. Garland (2-1) "Jaswinder Singh, a citizen and native of India, appeals the Board of Immigration’s (“BIA”) decision affirming the Immigration Judge’s (“IJ”...
CGRS, Oct. 1, 2024 "Last night, a federal judge ruled in a case challenging the Biden administration’s policy of turning back asylum seekers who approach ports of entry along the southern...
Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and National Immigration Litigation Alliance, Oct. 2, 2024 " FREE WEBINAR Today, Oct. 2 from 3-4pm Eastern, 2-3pm Central, 12-1 Pacific On September 26, a U...
USCIS, Oct. 2, 2024 "U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is issuing policy guidance in our Policy Manual to further clarify the types of evidence that we may evaluate to determine eligibility...
"The BIA committed legal error by determining that Barrios-Cantarero was properly given notice through a letter addressed to Adrian Eliseo and therefore abused its discretion by denying his motion to reopen. ... Here, the BIA failed to apply 8 C.F.R. § 103.8(a)(1)(i) in determining whether Barrios-Cantarero had received proper notice of his hearing; its proper notice conclusion is owed no deference. The document is clearly not addressed to Barrios-Cantarero and therefore cannot be proper notice to him. Under 8 U.S.C. § 1229a(b)(5)(C)(ii), the lack of sufficient notice entitled Barrios-Cantarero to reopen his proceedings at any time. Accordingly, the BIA abused its discretion in denying Barrios-Cantarero’s motion to reopen." - Barrios-Cantarero v. Holder, Nov. 21, 2014. [Hats off to David J. Bird!]