Supreme Court, Oct. 15, 2024 Transcript here . Audio here . Case documents here .
DOS, Oct. 11, 2024 "The Department of State’s Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Consular Affairs (L/CA), in coordination with the Visa Office in the Bureau of Consular Affairs, appreciates...
BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE AMERICAN IMMIGRATION COUNCIL, THE AMERICAN IMMIGRATION LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, AND MARGARET STOCK IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES AND OF AFFIRMANCE - filed Oct. 9, 2024 "Amici...
Visa Bulletin for November 2025 See Notes D & E: D. EMPLOYMENT FOURTH PREFERENCE RELIGIOUS WORKERS (SR) CATEGORY EXTENDED H.R. 9747, signed on September 26, 2024, extended the Employment Fourth...
CA5, Oct. 10, 2024, MP3 recording 23-40653 10/10/2024 State of Texas v. USA Brian Boynton- Jeremy M. Feigenbaum- Joseph N. Mazzara- Nina Perales-
Mazariegos-Rodas v. Garland
"Beky Izamar Mazariegos-Rodas and Engly Yeraicy Mazariegos-Rodas (collectively, the Petitioners) are two sisters who are natives and citizens of Guatemala. The Petitioners, who were left behind in Guatemala as young children after their parents entered the United States without inspection in 2009, fled to this country in 2015 after gang members threatened to maim and kill them. They also entered the United States without inspection, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) placed them into removal proceedings shortly thereafter. Appearing before an immigration judge (IJ), the Petitioners applied for asylum and withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1158, 1231(b)(3). The IJ denied the Petitioners’ applications, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) dismissed their appeal, and the Petitioners filed a timely petition for review with this court. They contend that (1) the IJ’s bias against the Petitioners’ mother violated their due-process rights, (2) the IJ erred in concluding that the Petitioners’ proposed particular social group (PSG) of “Guatemalan female children without parental protection” is not cognizable, and (3) the BIA erred in concluding that there is no nexus between the harm that the Petitioners suffered and their other proposed PSG of “the Rodas family.” The Petitioners’ arguments regarding due-process and the “Guatemalan female children without parental protection” PSG were not raised before the BIA and are thus unreviewable, but the BIA’s no-nexus determination with regard to “the Rodas family” PSG is inconsistent with this court’s precedents. We therefore GRANT the petition for review in part, DISMISS it in part, VACATE the BIA’s denial of the Petitioners’ application for asylum and withholding of removal, and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion."
[Hats off to Elly Jordan and Polina Hristova! Listen to the oral argument here.]