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...
"This is a class action complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief or, in the alternative, a class action habeas, brought on behalf of individuals unlawfully subject to mandatory immigration detention in New Jersey under 8 U.S.C. § 1226(c). Plaintiffs bring suit to challenge the standard and procedures for determining whether an individual in removal proceedings is subject to mandatory detention — that is, detention without possibility of a bond hearing or any other determination of whether detention is justified based on danger or flight risk. Plaintiffs do not seek their release from custody, but rather an order prohibiting the government from mandatorily detaining them without the opportunity for a fair hearing at which an Immigration Judge ascertains whether they have a substantial challenge to removal and are therefore eligible for an individualized bond hearing." - Gayle v. Napolitano, Nov. 15, 2012.