TRAC, Apr. 2024 "At the end of March 2024, 3,524,051 active cases were pending before the Immigration Court."
Sanchez-Perez v. Garland "One day after he pleaded guilty to violating a Tennessee domestic-violence law, the federal government initiated removal proceedings against Jose Yanel Sanchez-Perez. Ultimately...
In a letter dated April 12, 2024 the State Department and USCIS discuss "concerns about biometrics collection for applicants for T nonimmigrant status and petitioners for U nonimmigrant status abroad...
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 84 / Tuesday, April 30, 2024 "This final rule adopts and replaces regulations relating to key aspects of the placement, care, and services provided to unaccompanied...
Bouarfa v. Mayorkas Issue: Whether a visa petitioner may obtain judicial review when an approved petition is revoked on the basis of nondiscretionary criteria. Case below: 75 F.4th 1157 (11th Cir....
NILC, Jan. 27, 2020
"The U.S. Supreme Court today temporarily lifted nationwide court orders blocking implementation of the Trump administration’s public charge regulation, allowing this widely opposed wealth test to take effect while several cases challenging the legality of the rule make their way through the courts. That regulation threatens the health, nutrition, and housing of families — overwhelmingly families of color — all over the country. The multiple lawsuits challenging the regulation will still have to be decided by their merits, and the regulation may be overturned by courts hearing those cases.
The regulation directly affects only a small number of people, but it has already done considerable harm. In addition to the first uptick in America’s child uninsured rate in more than a decade, the Kaiser Family Foundation has reported that about half of community health centers reported people declining or canceling coverage because of the public charge regulation. Anecdotal accounts nationwide suggest similar harm with respect to anti-hunger programs. Experts expect the fear resulting from today’s ruling will deepen the “chilling effect.”
In a 5-4 ruling, the Court’s justices did not focus significantly on the merits of the underlying suit. A written concurrence by Justices Gorsuch and Thomas questioned the propriety of nationwide injunctions in general.
“Nearly every sector of society has gone on record in opposition to this morally repugnant and legally dubious regulation, and for good reason: its implementation will hurt countless of immigrant and citizen families, and we’re all worse off as a result,” said Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center. “This move by the Supreme Court is deeply disheartening and harmful for our low-income communities of color and our democracy. But it only strengthens our resolve to continue to fight — both in the courtroom and along with our communities — for a future in which every family can thrive.”
“The regulation itself directly affects only a small number of people, but the Trump administration is counting on fear to amplify the harm,” said Olivia Golden, executive director of the Center for Law and Social Policy. “The administration disregarded the law, the facts, and the voice of the American people to advance a brutal attack on millions of children and their families. Don’t let them win — fight fear with facts and make the best decision to protect your family. This regulation has already fueled fears that could cost millions their food, medical care, and homes”
The public charge regulation was finalized by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in August 2019 despite a record-breaking 266,000 public comments having been received about it, the vast majority in opposition. It represents a drastic departure from how the public charge test was previously administered and is opposed by experts in fields ranging from health to education and economics.
The DHS regulation is much narrower than early drafts leaked by the administration in 2018, applying in its final form to only a few specific public programs and a small segment of people. It is also one among many Trump policies targeting immigrant families of color. Others advanced by Trump’s State Department, Census Bureau, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Agriculture Department, and immigration enforcement agencies, among others, have contributed to the harm.
“The public charge regulation is ultimately about disenfranchising low-income communities of color. Trump has launched a governmentwide assault on families of color, and we must meet that challenge with an equally massive resistance,” said Hincapié. “As a Latina and as an immigrant, I know that my community will continue to fight back against Trump’s attacks on our communities. We urge our allies to join the fight to protect immigrant families.” "