Skip to main content

Detained and Not Eligible to File Any Applications With the Judge to Remain in the U.S.? Think Again!



Immigration Court can be a very tricky proceeding, made even more complicated when an individual is detained.  Typically when someone is detained, in order to obtain a bond from a judge, move forward in court, or have a case reopened, a detainee must be eligible to file an application seeking a green card, asylum, or some other permanent form of relief.  There have been countless requests made to judges in Atlanta where the person is eligible to file for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) or to pursue the provisional waiver program (applications not reviewed in court), but a judge denies the request and only allows for voluntary departure or an order of removal.  The situation is compounded further because detainees are simultaneously denied bond as well.
The argument has been made before immigration judges that DACA or eligibility to apply for a provisional waiver is a form of relief and eligibility to apply should warrant a continuation of proceedings and possible release on bond.  Many judges deny this request (in Atlanta and Stewart Detention Center, at least), and the person only faces immediate removal from the U.S.  Well, the BIA just issued a fantastic (unpublished) decision possibly changing that position.  The BIA remanded a case to the Immigration Court where the detainee requested that his case be reopened so that he could apply for DACA and the provisional waiver.  The judge denied the request, but the BIA issued a decision stating that although the judge pointed out that consular processing would be required, the judge did “not address the fact that the Form I-601A waiver permits aliens to remain in the United States with their families until consular processing is scheduled”.  See Juan Luis Avalos-Avalos, A205-834-943 (BIA Dec. 31, 2013) (unpublished decision).  That certainly sounds to me like the BIA feels families should remain united as long as they can, even if the applicant ultimately has to leave in order to consular process. 
This case can be a very effective tool in immigration court when the applicant is only eligible for relief that is not the type filed before an immigration judge, but can allow them to remain in the United States longer than they would otherwise.    
Please call me at 404.949.8151 with any questions if you know someone in this situation.         
-        Danielle M. Conley

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

If You Are An Immigrant (even a US Citizen), Here Are 9 Things You Should Know

Are you a Naturalized U.S. Citizen, Lawful Permanent Resident, Visa Holder, or an Undocumented Immigrant? We recommend you take the following steps to protect yourself in our current version of America. The last couple of weeks have reminded immigrants, even naturalized U.S. citizens, that they were not born in the United States. Our office has received countless phone calls, emails, and social media messages from people worrying about what their family’s future in the United States holds. Most people want to know what they can do now to protect themselves from what promises to be a wave of anti-immigration activity by the federal government. Trump's Executive Order on Interior Enforcement has some provisions that should make most Americans shiver.  We recommend the following actions for each of the following groups: Naturalized U.S. citizens. In particular if you have a foreign accent, and you are traveling within 100 miles of any US Border (including the oceans

Seven Reasons Why the Georgia Legislature Should Repeal HB-87

Recently the Alabama Attorney General called on the Alabama State Legislature to repeal parts of Alabama's horrid anti-immigration law ( HB 56), because of the "unintended" consequences of the bill (frankly, what happened was not unintended). Because of the similarity between the two laws, Georgia's Speaker of the House, David Ralston was asked whether Georgia Legislature would repeal part or all of HB 87, Georgia own anti-immigration law. HB 87 has caused almost a half a billion dollars in damage to the Georgia economy (along with untold suffering in Georgia's immigrant communities) without any noted or reported positive effect. Speaker Ralston plainly stated that the Georgia Legislature would NOT do anything to repeal HB 87 . While it understandable why a politician would not admit that a pet bill he shepherded and pushed through the state legislature was simply bad law, it is also clear that Speaker Ralston is facing a challenge on his RIGHT in th

U.S. Recognizes Five-year Extensions of Venezuelan Passport

Venezuelans received welcome news this last month when the National Assembly published a decree signed by Interim President Juan Guaido on May 21, to extend the validity of Venezuelan passports for an additional five years past their printed date of expiration. The U.S. Department of State issued a  statement ,recognizing this extension for visa issuance and consular process. They also stated that Customs and Border Patrol would recognize this decree. Obtaining a valid Venezuelan passport has been a difficult, if not impossible, task that has been a source of much concern for those seeking visas to the U.S. or have pending applications for immigration benefits. This decree will allow those currently holding a Venezuelan passport that has expired to automatically add 5 years of validity from the expiration date. While this statement can provide much needed assurance, we recommend that Venezuelans who are currently applying for an immigration benefit, including travel to the U.S. w