Hon. Jeffrey S. Chase, May 16, 2024 "In 2003, the Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees published Guidelines for applying the bars to asylum known internationally as the “exclusion...
Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box, May 14, 2024 "In “What if the Job Has Changed Since the Labor Certification Was Approved Many Years Ag o” we discussed strategies for noncitizen workers...
Blanford v. USCIS "Because of a consular officer’s suspicions over a $900 payment, two children have spent the last seven years in a Liberian orphanage instead of with their adoptive parents...
EOIR, May 10, 2024 "The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) today announced the appointment of 20 immigration judges—18 immigration judges who joined courts in California, Georgia...
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO TERMINATE THE FLORES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AS TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES News coverage here and here .
"Although the abuse-of-discretion standard is rigorous, our review convinces us that the BIA abused its discretion when it affirmed that the Maoists’ demands for money from KC did not constitute past persecution based on her political opinion. ... [T]he IJ—inexplicably—concluded that the Maoists did not act based on KC’s political activity, but extorted her exclusively for financial gain. This analysis suffers from a serious disconnection between the facts the IJ accepted and the legal conclusion he reached. Because the BIA adopted the IJ’s analysis without further explication, both to dismiss KC’s appeal and to deny reconsideration, the BIA’s decision likewise lacks “rational explanation.” Kechkar, 500 F.3d at 1084. Accordingly, we hold that the BIA abused its discretion and remand for further consideration."
KC v. Holder, Oct. 18, 2011 (unpub.)