DOL, July 26, 2024 "On August 7, 2024, the Department of Labor will host a public webinar to educate stakeholders, program users, and other interested members of the public on the changes to the...
Atud v. Garland (unpub.) "Mathurin A. Atud petitions for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings based on alleged ineffective...
Shen v. Garland "Peng Shen, a citizen of the People’s Republic of China, applied for asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture. An Immigration Judge ...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 07/25/2024 "On January 17, 2017, DHS published a final rule with new regulatory provisions guiding the use of parole on a case...
Lance Curtright reports: "After the 5th Circuit’s initial decision in Membreno, [ Membreno-Rodriguez v. Garland, 95 F.4th 219 ] my law partner Paul Hunker (a new AILA member!) reached out to...
AFGHAN AND IRAQI ALLIES, UNDER SERIOUS THREAT BECAUSE OF THEIR FAITHFUL SERVICE TO THE UNITED STATES, ON THEIR OWN AND ON BEHALF OF OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED v. BLINKEN
"Congress has authorized the Secretary of State to give special-immigrant visas to certain Iraqi and Afghan nationals who face serious threats because of their faithful service to the United States during recent armed conflicts. After initial applications for these visas languished, Congress further provided that the government “shall” improve its efficiency so that it “should” process the applications within nine months, except in cases involving unusual national-security risks. The plaintiffs here represent a class of individuals who have had applications for such visas pending for more than nine months. In 2019, the district court held that the government had unreasonably delayed processing these applications. In 2020, the court approved a plan requiring the prompt adjudication of applications filed by class members and pending for more than nine months as of May 21, 2020. In 2022, the Secretary moved to terminate or modify the plan based on changed circumstances in the two years since 2020. The district court recognized that changed circumstances warrant modifying the plan, but it refused to terminate the plan. The government appeals the refusal to terminate. We affirm."
[Hats off to Mari Hirose!]