1. Re-Parole Process for Certain Afghans 2. Afghan Re-Parole FAQs 3. Certain Afghan Parolees Are Employment Authorized Incident to Parole
Visa Bulletin for July 2023 Retrogressions... D. FAMILY-SPONSORED SECOND PREFERENCE AVAILABILITY In the April 2023 Visa Bulletin, it was necessary to establish a final action date in the F2A category...
Arizmendi-Medina v. Garland "Andres Arizmendi-Medina, a native and citizen of Mexico, was ordered by an immigration judge (IJ) to be removed from the United States after the IJ ruled that Arizmendi...
Filed June 7, 2023
ICE, May 11, 2023 "General Information President Biden announced the termination of the Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Public Health Emergency, effective on May 11, 2023, following the termination...
Brathwaite v. Garland
"[W]e hold that the limitations the BIA imposed in [Matter of] J.M. Acosta [27 I. & N. Dec. 420 (BIA 2018)] are unreasonable. ... [W]e conclude that the specific burden-shifting regime and evidentiary standard demanded by the BIA to show a merits-based appeal is not reasonable. Specifically, the BIA requires a non-citizen to make a merits-based showing at the notice stage, often before he is able to review the record or identify his arguments on appeal. The BIA points to nothing in the statutory text or legislative history indicating that this requirement reflects Congressional intent. Moreover, the requirement ignores the realities of appellate practice. ... The BIA’s burden-shifting scheme and its accompanying evidentiary requirement amounts to an unreasonable and arbitrary interpretation of the IIRIRA. We therefore GRANT Brathwaite’s petition and REMAND the matter to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."
[Hats off to Joseph Moravec, John Peng, Nicholas John Phillips, Paul Skip Laisure and Mark William Vorkink!]