NILA, Apr. 24, 2024 "The National Immigration Litigation Alliance (NILA) and Innovation Law Lab are thrilled to announce that, in response to the lawsuit we filed against the United States Citizenship...
NILA, Apr. 24, 2024 "Today, three immigration attorneys and two individuals filed a prospective class action lawsuit in federal court, challenging U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP...
USCIS, Apr. 23, 2024 "U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced the upcoming opening of international field offices in Doha, Qatar, and Ankara, Turkey, to increase capacity...
Rangel-Fuentes v. Garland "Cristina Rangel-Fuentes petitions for review of a final order of removal issued by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), arguing that under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)...
This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 04/30/2024 "This final rule adopts and replaces regulations relating to key aspects of the placement, care, and services provided...
Laura Murray-Tjan writes: "I appealed pretermission of a non-LPR cancellation of removal claim to the Ninth Circuit, arguing that (1) the client's Arizona solicitation conviction can't be a CIMT ground of inadmissibility, as the agency had held; and (2) the underlying offense isn't a CIMT in any event. OIL conceded the first issue after I filed the opening brief, so the Ninth remanded to the Board. Much to my surprise, DHS then moved the Board to remand so that our client can proceed with her cancellation application. Before my brief was even due, DHS said that the Arizona statute wasn't divisible under the Ninth's August 22, 2014 decision in Rendon v. Holder, 764 F.3d 1077; 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 16254, and that the client's offense can't be a CIMT. I have attached the DHS motion applying Rendon."