"Four national immigration experts will discuss the changing landscape of border law and policies at a free Dec. 6 webinar sponsored by the American Bar Association Commission on Immigration...
Theresa Vargas, Washington Post, Nov. 25, 2023
"The Northern Virginia doctor was born in D.C. and given a U.S. birth certificate. At 61, he learned his citizenship was granted by mistake."
Cyrus Mehta and Jessica Paszko, Nov. 24, 2023
" This is the story of our client Nadia Habib who was in immigration proceedings from 18 months till 31 years until an Immigration Judge granted her...
Letter to ICE, Nov. 21, 2023 - Continued Barriers to Attorney Access in Immigration Detention Facilities
Cyrus D. Mehta and Kaitlyn Box, Nov. 21, 2023
"On November 9, 2023, the Department of Justice (DOJ) settled a dispute with Apple concerning allegations that Apple’s recruitment practices under...
Lomi Kriel, Houston Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2019
"The case, one of the most important of the justices’ term, will help define the scope of presidential powers over immigration. It also is seen as a test of Chief Justice John Roberts, who has lamented the politicization of the court and appeared reluctant to take on the DACA case, waiting until the last moment to do so. ... A majority of justices have consistently agreed that Trump has expansive latitude on immigration, green-lighting his travel ban preventing citizens of several Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States and declining to halt a policy ending asylum at the southern border. But in a 5-4 majority opinion, Roberts recently blocked the administration from adding a citizenship question to the 2020 census — seen by some as an attempt to suppress the participation of immigrant-heavy communities — by arguing that it had done so improperly, which is also at issue in the government’s termination of DACA. ... Stephen Yale-Loehr, an immigration law professor at Cornell University Law School, said he predicted a 5-4 decision with Roberts as the swing vote.“The Supreme Court has traditionally given the president wide latitude on immigration policy decisions,” he said. “But they could try to avoid the thorny constitutional issues by ruling on narrower statutory grounds” such as what occurred in the census case."