Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri On January 19, 2021, a Final Rule issued by the Executive Office for Immigration Review EOIR will become effective that will “increase the fees for those EOIR applications, appeals, and motions that are subject to an EOIR-determined fee, based on a fee review conducted by the EOIR.”[1] These fee increases apply to Forms EOIR-26, 29, 40, 42A, 42B, 45 and motions to reopen or reconsider before the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge (OCIJ) and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).[2] Notably, this Rule was first
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri President Donald Trump issued a proclamation on December 31 of 2020, extending the bans on certain immigrant and non-immigrant visas that were previously banned as per his proclamations on April 22 and June 22 of 2020, respectively.[1] Although these orders were supposed to expire on December 31 of 2020 itself, the President invoked the COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on jobs in late 2020 to justify protecting US workers by continuing both of the bans.[2]While the ban would primarily hurt applicants for the H-1B visa, it would
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri A recent source of controversy in the Trump Administration’s typically hardline approach to illegal immigration concerns the surveillance of social media by Homeland Security Investigations to tracking down immigrant activity, violations, and the First-Amendment-protected expression disapproved of by authorities that lead to detention and deportation.[1] Recently, this has entailed tracking and gathering information from electronic devices such as laptops, tablets, thumb drives, and cell phones.[2] For instance, searching these devices and using tools to unlock encrypted information on these devices of those coming
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri As noted before on this blog site, on October 8, 2020, the Department of Homeland Security issued an interim final rule that was meant to revamp the H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa program.[1] Called Strengthening the H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa Classification Program, this interim final rule changed the definition requirements for “specialty occupations,” among other aspects, in order to make applications for the H-1B Nonimmigrant Visa more challenging.[2] The overall purpose behind the changes was to decrease reliance on the H-1B program and encourage employers to look more
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri In what came as a shock to immigration attorneys and clients applying to stay in the US and halt deportation proceedings, the Department of Justice imposed new deadlines for migrant children that critics say have left attorneys and clients in a mess.[1] Last week on November 24, 2020, the Justice Department’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which oversees US immigration courts, set up new deadlines by which migrants in certain cases must file an application with the immigration court to stay in the United States
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri Over the past year, immigration activists have steadfastly opposed the Trump Administration’s changes to the Public Charge Rule, which denied green card applicants who would likely use various types of public assistance, such as Medicaid, food stamps, and housing vouchers.[1] Legal challenges have been especially persistent, with the first wave of lawsuits leading to a hold placed on the policy by the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, which was in turn reversed by the Supreme Court by a 5-4 vote in January 2020.[2] Concern was
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri On November 17, 2020, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) updated their guidelines in their Policy Manual regarding what type of discretion the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) should use in adjudicating status application adjustments.[1] Typically, in order to get approval for adjustment of his/her/their immigration status, the applicant must show their eligibility and prove that an exercise of discretion in favor of his/her/their application is warranted.[2] Whether discretion is positive or negative depends on how the USCIS balances and weighs the
Written by Taher Kameli & Chathan Vemuri Mass surveillance and crackdown on immigration are not new phenomena in the United States and both have metastasized considerably over the last two decades in the wake of the war on terror and the broader debate over immigration to the US. Issues involving National Security Agency (NSA) spying of private telecommunications, use of older social media to place suspicion individuals and disproportionate targeting of certain minority groups have been hot button topics due in part to revelations by whistleblowers such as Edward Snowden, Julian Assange and Glenn Greenwald. Immigration in particular
Written by: Taher Kameli, Esq. It would not be a surprise to see that the Trump administration has simply decided to ban all immigration to the United States. While such is not yet actually the case, it seems that, with its continuing policies that are adverse to immigrant rights, the Trump administration is moving in that direction. As another potential example of the anti-immigration policies of the Trump administration, the Trump administration is considering a significant increase in the fees to appeal immigration cases. As reported by buzzfeednews.com on September 17, the Trump administration (from
Written by: Taher Kameli, Esq. The Federal judiciary has generally been the governmental branch that has done the most to protect immigrant rights since the election of President Trump. As another example of a Federal court ruling in favor of immigrant rights, on September 4, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recognized the right of EB-5 derivative beneficiaries to seek review of I-829 petition denials. The case, Mu v. Barr, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 26668 (9th Cir. 2019), involved the derivative beneficiary (the daughter) of