AILA Report on U.S. Violations of its Own Immigration Laws

My experience representing refugees has included feasting, praying together and lots of children. I can personally attest to the good moral character of many refugees, and have witnessed a vast majority of success stories in thriving immigrant communities across the US. I believe the US benefits from refugees as they bring current, diverse voices into our national dialogue regarding foreign policy and economic development.

However, immigration attorneys see heart breaking due process violations every day in detention facilities, immigration court and with the USCIS. It happens, you object, and you keep on going with the case. These violations are confirmed to be true years later on appeal, and I yell out “TOLD YOU SO” to the crickets. I know these violations are really hard on people and break them down.

Xenophobia is “intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries”. This article from AILA shows a clear xenophobic bias throughout our government immigration system. The government has given up on having a fair and impartial immigration system and rather supports a harsh and illegal system to deter others from coming. Why? Xenophobia. It obviously exists in presidential politics, but also works as a cultural bias in our government immigration system. The law is there to protect immigrants’ rights and is entrusted to people who are supposed to listen to people’s stories. If the story is is more likely than not true, that means 51% true, then they get to stay. The xenophobic cultural bias cannot allow that to happen or else the floodgates will open and all will be lost. Every one of these violations was perpetrated by the US government immigration system on a person, and also on the Constitution. These widespread violations – including taking of life – evidence a cultural intention to thwart the law. The US immigration system is broken at the place where xenophobic bias meets the enforcement of the immigration laws. Leadership and is needed to address xenophobia and explain the long term benefits of refugees living in the United States because the demagogues – supported by private prison funding – are fanning the flames of fear.

Client Testimonial: I-130 Expedite for Wife and Son

CINA logo on whiteWe are celebrating our client’s success!! A nice client testimonial popped up on Google Business:

“I highly recommend the immigration law services of Mark Daly of CINA. Mark was instrumental in the successful adjudication of my immigration petition. From providing consistent and timely advice in an easy to understand manner, to strongly advocating on my behalf, Mark was professional, thorough, and empathetic. He was collaborative in the preparation of my case file, and genuine in his engagement, sincerity and interest in my immigration case. Mark’s legal fees were very reasonable and his transparency with respect to time spent on my case was very much appreciated. If you require the services of a highly qualified and caring immigration attorney, I recommend that you contact Mark Daly.” R.S. CT, USA. I-130 Expedite for Wife and Son.

We will keep on our mission of providing high value immigration law services to millions of immigrants. – Mark C. Daly

Since 1995 I have been focusing my professional efforts on immigration law. I love being an immigration attorney and immigration law is all I do. I have a deep commitment to helping immigrants, their families and immigration attorneys by providing services that provide you with extremely high value for reasonable fees and our Client Testimonials indicate our success in meeting and exceeding our client’s expectations.  All of my services have our unique CINA performance guarantee: a 100% money back guarantee if you are not satisfied because of errors, omissions or poor customer service, I will refund your money after receiving your request in writing explaining your dissatisfaction. We also provide an Integrity Refund whereby if we break a promise to you – no matter how small – we pay you $100.

Click here for our Personal Immigration Questionnaire Form  or our Professional Immigration Questionnaire Form and send it to me at mdaly@cinapc.com and schedule yourself for your free consultation today with a Denver Immigration Attorney.

Our Denver office is located at 1624 Market Street, Suite 202, Denver, Colorado 80202 our offices are easily reached via the free Mall Ride. Our Denver office is accessible from I-25, I-70, Aurora, Lakewood, Arvada, Commerce City, the Denver Tech Center, Westminster, and Thornton.

CINA is moving to Denver!

We decided to change our home office from Golden Colorado to Downtown Denver. CINA will now be closer to the Denver Immigration Court and USCIS Denver District office and the Aurora Detention Center.

Our new address is

CINA

Community of Immigration and Naturalization Attorneys, PC

1624 Market Street

Suite 202

Denver, CO 80202

 

5th Circuit Fed Appeals Court Upholds Delay Of Obama’s DAPA Immigration program

A federal appeals court ruled against President Barack Obama’s DAPA immigration program, stating the negative economic impact on Texas is a valid claim.

This decision comes nearly a year after Obama announced it as a follow up measure to DACA and Congress’ failure to enact comprehensive immigration reform. Read the decision HERE

 The ruling sets back the Deferred Action for Parental Accountability program, known as DAPA. Obama has vowed to take it to the Supreme Court.

In the decision the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit agreed with a lower court judge that Texas had standing to challenge the executive action. The appeals court accepted Texas’ argument that expanding immigration relief to include a wider class of undocumented immigrants would cause the state to “incur significant costs in issuing driver’s licenses to DAPA beneficiaries” — satisfying the basic “harm” requirement for litigants seeking standing to sue.

 “If permitted to go into effect, DAPA would enable at least 500,000 illegal aliens in Texas to satisfy that requirement with proof of lawful presence or employment authorization,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Jerry Smith for the 2-to-1 appeals court. “Texas subsidizes its licenses and would lose a minimum of $130.89 on each one it issued to a DAPA beneficiary. Even a modest estimate would put the loss at several million dollars.”

USCIS Waivers for Extreme Hardship – new rules pending

On October 7, 2015 the USCIS issued a draft extreme hardship policy guidance for public comment. This guidance clarifies how USCIS waivers for extreme hardship will be determined once the guidance is finalized.

The draft guidance addresses which waivers require a showing of extreme hardship, how an applicant can establish extreme hardship to a qualifying relative, and which special circumstances often weigh heavily in favor of an extreme hardship finding, among other considerations.

Immigrants getting green cards through marriage need to show extreme hardship for waivers when they violate the following laws:

INA 212(a)(9)(B)(v)This provision can waive the three-year and ten-year inadmissibility bars for unlawful presence.Eligible qualifying relatives include the applicant’s U.S. citizen or LPR spouse or parentThis provision can waive inadmissibility for crimes involving moral turpitude, multiple criminal convictions, prostitution and commercialized vice, and certain serious criminal offenses for which the foreign national received immunity from prosecution. It can also waive inadmissibility for controlled substance convictions, but only when the conviction was for a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana. Eligible qualifying relatives include the applicant’s U.S. citizen or LPR spouse, parent, son, or daughter.

INA 212(i)(1) This provision can waive inadmissibility for certain types of immigration fraud. Eligible qualifying relatives include the applicant’s U.S. citizen or LPR spouse or parent

This is a welcomed event. Immigration attorneys have been receiving denials of I-601 and I-601A waiver applications of the 3 and 10 year bar that do not reflect the law. I plan on attending the stakeholder conference on November 3, 2015 to provide USCIS with feedback on how best to adjudicate these waivers fairly.

Here is the link to the notice document:

10-29-15 USCIS Proposed guidance on extreme hardship memo