Pushing forward with its mass deportation agenda, new administration said on Monday that it would pay $1,000 to immigrants who are in the United States illegally and return to their home country voluntarily.

The Department of Homeland Security said in a news release that it would also pay for travel assistance — and that people who use an app called CBP Home to tell the government they plan to return home will be “deprioritized” for detention and removal by immigration enforcement.

The DHS said it had already paid for a plane ticket for one migrant to return home to Honduras from Chicago and said more tickets have been booked for this week and next.

"Any illegal alien who uses the CBP Home App to self-deport will also receive a stipend of $1000 dollars, paid after their return to their home country has been confirmed through the app. ....Even with the cost of the stipend, it is projected that the use of CBP Home will decrease the costs of a deportation by around 70 percent. Currently the average cost to arrest, detain, and remove an illegal alien is $17,121.   The first use of travel assistance has already proven successful. An illegal alien that the Biden Administration allowed into our country recently utilized the program to receive a ticket for a flight from Chicago to Honduras. Additional tickets have already been booked for this week and the following week. "

​It’s often worse for people to leave the country and abandon their case in immigration court, if they’re already in removal proceedings. If migrants are in removal proceedings and don’t show up in court they can automatically get a deportation order and leaving the country usually counts as abandoning many applications for relief including asylum applications.

​A federal judge has temporarily halted the abrupt cancellation of a student visa for Krish Lal Isserdasani, a 21-year-old international student from India who is just weeks away from earning his computer engineering degree from the University of Wisconsin–Madison.

The decision, issued Tuesday by U.S. District Judge William Conley, came after Isserdasani’s visa was unexpectedly revoked by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on April 4. The cancellation would have forced him to leave the country by May 2—eight days before his scheduled graduation. The move left Isserdasani, who has studied in the U.S. since 2021, stunned and scrambling for answers.
Isserdasani’s attorneys say he received no prior notice or explanation from ICE or the U.S. State Department before being informed of the cancellation by UW–Madison’s International Student Services office. The court determined that this lack of due process violated his legal rights.

“Given the amount of Isserdasani’s educational expenses and potential losses from having to leave the United States without obtaining his degree, the court concludes that Isserdasani credibly demonstrates that he faces irreparable harm,” Judge Conley wrote in his ruling.

The visa cancellation stemmed from a disorderly conduct incident in November 2024 outside a Madison bar. Although Isserdasani was cited in connection with the argument, he was not convicted, nor was he given the opportunity to contest the visa termination. His name appeared in a criminal record database, which appears to have triggered the cancellation—one of over 1,000 visa revocations for international students across the U.S. since January, according to immigration lawyers tracking the cases.

“This ruling is a step toward ensuring fairness and legal protection for international students facing arbitrary actions,” said one of Isserdasani’s attorneys, speaking after the court’s decision.

UW–Madison confirmed that Isserdasani is among at least 26 international students at the university—and 40 across the University of Wisconsin system—whose visas were revoked in recent months. Many of these students were reportedly targeted over minor offenses or for participating in political activities, raising broader concerns about a systemic crackdown on international students under the Trump-era immigration agenda.
Though the administration has defended the revocations as necessary for national security and public safety, critics argue the policy lacks transparency and disproportionately harms students with no history of criminal behavior or intent to violate immigration laws.

Judge Conley’s order provides temporary relief, allowing Isserdasani to remain in the U.S. as his legal team challenges the visa revocation in court. A preliminary hearing is scheduled for April 28.

Isserdasani, who has maintained a strong academic record and was preparing for job interviews in the U.S. tech sector, expressed relief at the court’s ruling. His legal team is now focused on ensuring he can complete his degree without the looming threat of deportation.

The case has spotlighted growing concerns about the treatment of international students in the U.S. and the chilling effect such sudden policy changes can have on educational institutions that rely on global talent.
“This isn’t just about one student—it’s about protecting the integrity of our immigration system and the promise of opportunity that American universities offer,” said a spokesperson for the American Council on Education, which has been monitoring the uptick in student visa revocations. As legal proceedings continue, advocates hope the case will serve as a catalyst for broader reform in how student visas are managed and reviewed by federal agencies.
​Read here.

Today, Secretary of Homeland Security announced that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is launching the CBP Home app with a self-deportation reporting feature for foreigners illegally in the country. DHS advises that people should use the CBP Home mobile phone application to submit their intent to depart as indicated below.

​The CBP One app was updated into CBP Home app.

​From the official DHS' announcement:

Self-deportation is the safest option for illegal aliens, while preserving law enforcement resources. Not only is it safer, but it also saves U.S. taxpayer dollars and valuable Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) resources to focus on dangerous criminal aliens.
This self-deportation functionality is part of a larger $200 million domestic and international ad campaign encouraging illegal aliens to “Stay Out and Leave Now.”
All CBP One applications will automatically update to the CBP Home app. The new app is also available free across mobile application stores.
A Statement from Secretary Kristi Noem:
“The Biden Administration exploited the CBP One app to allow more than 1 million aliens to illegally enter the United States. With the launching of the CBP Home app, we are restoring integrity to our immigration system.
“The CBP Home app gives aliens the option to leave now and self-deport, so they may still have the opportunity to return legally in the future and live the American dream. If they don’t, we will find them, we will deport them, and they will never return.”

City of Omaha, Nebraska 2025 immigration policies were announced by the Mayor and the Chief of Police in this video address: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBHJUXlMIdE

​

The DHS has revoked Temporary Protected Status, or TPS for more than 300,000 Venezuelans in the United States (October 2023 TPS), leaving the Venezuelans vulnerable to potential deportation in the coming months. 

In September 2025, 2021 TPS for Venezuela will come to the end too.

This time, the administration has decided to make the changes more immediate. Those under TPS from Venezuela who received the protections in 2023 will lose their temporary status 60 days after the government publishes the termination notice.

The notice indicates that more than 300,000 Venezuelans had TPS until April 2025. Another group of more than 250,000 Venezuelans have protections through September and for now will not be affected, but could be in danger of losing their status in the future. 

On Feb. 1, 2025, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem decided to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) under the 2023 designation for Venezuela.
TPS and related benefits associated with the 2023 designation will no longer be in effect starting 60 days after publication of the termination notice in the Federal Register.

This announcement impacts approximately 600,000 Venezuelans currently in the United States with TPS.
Former Secretary Mayorkas designated Venezuela for TPS once on May 9, 2021, and a second time on Oct. 3, 2023. Under Secretary Mayorkas’ Jan. 17, 2025, notice, TPS was extended as follows:

• The 2021 designation expires Sept. 10, 2025. Employment authorization documents for individuals who registered under the 2021 designation expire April 2, 2026.
• The 2023 designation expires Oct. 2, 2026. Employment authorization documents for individuals who registered under the 2023 designation expire April 2, 2026.

2021 registrants were permitted to register under the 2023 designation. Secretary Noem’s announcement intends to vacate the Jan. 17, 2025, notice. Following Secretary Noem’s announcement, any 2021 registrants who registered under the 2023 designation will have their 2021 designations restored.

As a result of this announcement, USCIS will no longer accept Venezuela TPS re-registration applications (Form I-821) and Applications for Employment Authorization (Form I-765) filed under former Secretary Mayorkas’ Jan. 17, 2025, redesignation. USCIS will cease processing applications already submitted and return associated filing fees. Additionally, USCIS will invalidate Venezuela TPS work authorization documents, approval notices, and I-94 forms issued with Oct. 2, 2026, expiration dates.

It will be published in the Federal Register on February 5, 2025.

The USCIS webpage TPS for Venezuela.

Supreme Court Ruled That Texas and Louisiana Lack Standing to Block Biden Immigration Enforcement Guidelines
On June 23, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 8-1 in U.S. v. Texas that Texas and Louisiana lacked standing to block Biden administration immigration enforcement guidelines that prioritize national security, public safety, and border security threats over focusing on deporting anyone in the United States without authorization.
Justice Kavanaugh wrote, “The States have brought an extraordinarily unusual lawsuit. They want a federal court to order the Executive Branch to alter its arrest policies so as to make more arrests. Federal courts have not traditionally entertained that kind of lawsuit; indeed, the States cite no precedent for a lawsuit like this.” Justice also said that the Executive Branch “does not possess the resources necessary to arrest or remove all of the noncitizens covered by” federal law. “For the last 27 years since [the laws] were enacted in their current form, all five Presidential administrations have determined that resource constraints necessitated prioritization in making immigration arrests.” Justice Alito dissented.
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) would reinstate the guidelines, which were paused last summer by the Supreme Court. He said this would “enable DHS to most effectively accomplish its law enforcement mission with the authorities and resources provided by Congress.” Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said that Texas would “continue to deploy the National Guard to repel [and] turn back illegal immigrants trying to enter Texas illegally.”
US. v. Texas (June 23, 2023). https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22-58_i425.pdf
“The Supreme Court Sides With the Biden Administration in a Fight Over Immigration,” National Public Radio (June 23, 2023). https://www.npr.org/2023/06/23/1182015382/supreme-court-ruling-immigration

We often hear questions about DACA from our clients. Who is eligible to apply for DACA? What will happen if I have a DUI conviction? What will happen if I was accused of domestic violence against my partner and I have DACA? Can my application for renewal be denied?
Please see below a list of FAQs:

​ I. General Information for All Requestors
A. What Is Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals?

As the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) continues to focus its enforcement resources on those who pose the greatest threat to homeland security, DHS will exercise prosecutorial discretion as appropriate to ensure that enforcement resources are not expended on individuals who do not fall into this category, such as individuals who came to the United States as children and meet other key guidelines. Individuals who demonstrate that they meet the guidelines below may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA) for a period of 2 years, subject to renewal for a period of 2 years, and may be eligible for employment authorization.
USCIS may approve a request for DACA only if we determine, in our sole discretion, that you meet each of the following threshold criteria and merit a favorable exercise of discretion:

1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012 (that is, you were born on or after June 16, 1981);
2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the time of filing your request for DACA;
4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time you filed your request for DACA with USCIS;
5. Had no lawful immigration status on June 15, 2012, and at the time you filed your request for DACA, meaning that:

• You never had a lawful immigration status on or before June 15, 2012*, or
• Any lawful immigration status or parole that you had before June 15, 2012, expired on or before June 15, 2012, and
• Any lawful status that you had after June 15, 2012, expired or otherwise terminated before you submitted your request for DACA;

1. Are currently enrolled in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a General Educational Development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard or armed forces of the United States; and
2. Have not been convicted of a felony, a misdemeanor described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), or 3 or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

* Please review Q19 below if you are currently in a lawful immigration status.

​


If you have a pending request, we have online self-help tools you can use to check your case status and processing times, change your address, and send an inquiry about a case pending longer than posted processing times or about non-delivery of a card or document.
Q1: What is deferred action?
A1: Deferred action is a discretionary determination to defer removal of an individual as an act of prosecutorial discretion. For purposes of future inadmissibility based on prior periods of unlawful presence in the United States, an individual is not considered to be unlawfully present during the period when deferred action is in effect. An individual who has received deferred action is authorized by DHS to be in the United States for the duration of the deferred action period.  Deferred action recipients are also considered to be lawfully present as described in 8 C.F.R. sec. 1.3(a)(4)(vi) for purposes of eligibility for certain public benefits (such as certain Social Security benefits) during the period of deferred action. However, deferred action does not confer lawful immigration status upon an individual, nor does it excuse any previous or subsequent periods of unlawful presence they may have.
Under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(33), an individual who has been granted deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21 through 236.23, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, may receive employment authorization for the period of deferred action, provided they can demonstrate “an economic necessity for employment.”
Under 8 CFR 236.23(d), USCIS may terminate a grant of DACA at any time, at the agency’s discretion.  Please see Q28 for more information.
Q2: What is DACA?
A2: On June 15, 2012, the secretary of homeland security announced that certain people who came to the United States as children and meet several key guidelines may request consideration of deferred action for a period of 2 years, subject to renewal, and, if approved, will then be eligible for work authorization if they can demonstrate economic necessity. On Aug. 30, 2022, DHS issued the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Final Rule to preserve and fortify the DACA policy. This rule, which puts into effect regulations at 8 CFR 236.21-236.25, rescinds and replaces the DACA guidance set forth in the 2012 Napolitano Memorandum. The final rule is effective as of Oct. 31, 2022.
Individuals who can demonstrate through verifiable documentation that they meet these guidelines will be considered for deferred action. We will make determinations on a case-by-case basis under the DACA final rule.
All guidance in these FAQs stems from the regulations at 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q3: I currently have DACA. How does the DACA Final Rule impact me?
A3: If you are a current DACA recipient, your grant of deferred action and related work authorization, as well as any DACA advance parole document issued, will remain in effect and will expire according to their existing terms. Any requests for renewals of those grants are now governed by the regulations at 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 and not the 2012 Napolitano Memorandum.
Q4: Is there any difference between “deferred action” and DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A4: DACA is a form of deferred action. The relief an individual receives with a grant of DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 is identical for immigration purposes to the relief obtained by any person who receives deferred action as an act of prosecutorial discretion.
Q5: If my removal is deferred under the DACA final rule, am I eligible for employment authorization?
A5: Yes. Under the regulations at 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(33) , if you receive DACA under the DACA final rule, you may obtain employment authorization from USCIS provided you can demonstrate an economic necessity for employment.
Q6: If my case is deferred, am I in lawful status for the period of deferral?
A6: No. Although action on your case has been deferred and you do not accrue unlawful presence (for admissibility purposes) during the period of deferred action, deferred action does not confer any lawful immigration status.
The fact that you are not accruing unlawful presence does not change that you are in unlawful status while you remain in the United States. However, although deferred action does not confer a lawful immigration status, you may stay in the United States while your deferred action is in effect.  For admissibility purposes, you will not accrue “unlawful presence” while you have deferred action.  You are also considered to be “lawfully present” in the United States while you have deferred action for purposes of certain public benefits (such as certain Social Security benefits) as described in 8 C.F.R. sec. 1.3(a)(4)(vi). Federal law does not prevent individuals granted deferred action from establishing domicile in the United States.
Apart from the immigration laws, “lawful presence,” “lawful status” and similar terms are used in various other federal and state laws. For information on how those laws affect individuals who receive a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion under DACA, please contact the appropriate federal, state, or local authorities.
Note: It is a federal crime for a noncitizen who is “illegally or unlawfully in the United States,” among others, to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition, or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.  See 18 U.S. 922(g)(5)(A). This prohibition applies to DACA recipients.
Q7: Can I renew my period of deferred action and employment authorization under DACA?
A7: Yes. You may request consideration for a renewal of your DACA. We will consider your request for a renewal on a case-by-case basis under 8 CFR 236.22-23. If USCIS renews its exercise of discretion under DACA for your case, you will receive deferred action for another 2 years, and if you demonstrate an economic necessity for employment, you may receive employment authorization for that period.
Return to top.

B. DACA Process
Q8: How do I request consideration of DACA?
A8: To request consideration of DACA (either as an initial request or to request renewal), you must submit Form I-821D, Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, to USCIS. Please visit the Form I-821D webpage before you begin the process to make sure you are using the most current version of the form available. You must complete this form, sign the form, and include the required filing fee of $85. With Form I-821D you must also submit Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization, the required Form I-765 filing fee, and Form I-765WS, Worksheet (PDF, 243.14 KB), establishing your economic need for employment. If you fail to submit a completed Form I-765 (along with the worksheet and accompanying filing fees for that form, please see the Form I-821D page for more information), we will not consider your request for deferred action. Please read the form instructions to ensure you answer the appropriate questions (determined by whether you are submitting an initial or renewal request) and that you submit all the required documentation to support your initial request.

If you are making an initial DACA request, you must file your request for consideration of DACA at the USCIS Lockbox. You can find the mailing address and instructions on the Form I-821D webpage. After we receive your Form I-821D, Form I-765, and Form I-765 Worksheet, we will review them for completeness, including submission of the required fee, initial evidence and supporting documents (for initial filings). Pursuant to current court orders, USCIS is accepting initial DACA requests but cannot adjudicate them at this time. If you are submitting a renewal DACA request, you may file your request at the USCIS Lockbox or online.
Instructions for Online Filing (DACA Renewal Requests Only)
DACA recipients may submit a DACA renewal request online. To file Form I-821D and Form I-765 online, you must first create a USCIS online account, which provides a convenient and secure method to submit Form I-821D, Form I-765 and Form I-765WS, pay fees, and track the status of any pending USCIS immigration request throughout the adjudication process. There is no cost to create an account, which offers a variety of features, including the ability to communicate with USCIS through a secure inbox and respond online to Requests for Evidence. For additional information on filing a DACA renewal request online, see the Form I-821D webpage.  To be considered for DACA, you must submit Form I-821D, Form I-765, and Form I-765WS with your online DACA renewal requests.
After You Submit Your Request
If we determine your request is complete, we will send you a receipt notice. If you need to visit an Application Support Center (ASC) for biometric services, we will send you an appointment notice. Please make sure you read and follow the instructions in the notice. If you fail to attend your biometrics appointment, it may take longer for us to process your request for consideration of deferred action, or we may deny your request. You may also choose to receive an email or text message or both notifying you that we have accepted your form by completing a Form G-1145, E-Notification of Application/Petition Acceptance.
We will review each request for consideration of DACA on an individual, case-by-case basis. We may request more information or evidence from you, or ask you to appear at a USCIS office. We will notify you of our determination in writing.
Note: All individuals who believe they meet the guidelines, including those in removal proceedings, with a final removal order, or with a voluntary departure order, may affirmatively request consideration of DACA from USCIS through this process. If you are currently in immigration detention and believe you meet the guidelines, you may request consideration of deferred action from USCIS, but we will not approve the request until you are released from detention. If you are requesting DACA, you should tell your deportation officer or follow directions at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) DACA webpage, which also has more information.
Q9: Can I obtain a fee waiver or fee exemption for this process?
A9: There are no fee waivers available for DACA requests or employment authorization applications connected to DACA. There are very limited fee exemptions available for Form I-821D and related Form I-765s. You must file a request for a fee exemption, and we must approve your request, before you file your Form I-821D and Form I-765 without fees. To be considered for a fee exemption, you must submit a letter and supporting documentation to USCIS demonstrating that you meet 1 of the following conditions:

• You cannot care for yourself because you suffer from a serious, chronic disability and your income is less than 150 percent of the U.S. poverty level; or
• You have, at the time of the request, accumulated $10,000 or more in debt in the past 12 months as a result of unreimbursed medical expenses for yourself or an immediate family member, and your income is less than 150 percent of the U.S. poverty level; or
• You are under 18 years of age, your income is less than 150% of the U.S. poverty level, and you are:
  • homeless, or
  • in foster care, or
  • otherwise lacking any parental or other familial support.

You can find additional information on our Fee Exemption Guidance webpage. Your fee exemption request must be submitted and decided before you submit a Form I-821D and related Form I-765 without fees. You must provide evidence that you meet any of the above conditions when you make the request. For evidence, we will accept:

• Affidavits from community-based or religious organizations establishing that you are homeless or lack parental or other familial financial support;
• Copies of tax returns, bank statement, pay stubs, or other reliable evidence of income level. Evidence can also include an affidavit from you or a responsible third party attesting that you do not file tax returns, have no bank accounts, or have no income to prove income level; and
• Copies of medical records, insurance records, bank statements, or other reliable evidence of unreimbursed medical expenses of at least $10,000.

We will address factual questions through Requests for Evidence (RFEs).
Q10: If individuals meet the guidelines for consideration of DACA and are encountered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or ICE, will they be placed into removal proceedings?
A10: Under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security, if an individual meets the guidelines for DACA, CBP or ICE should exercise their discretion on a case-by-case basis to prevent qualifying individuals from being apprehended, placed into removal proceedings, or removed. If individuals believe that, in light of this policy, they should not have been apprehended or placed into removal proceedings, contact your case officer or the ICE Detention Reporting and Information Line at 1-888-351-4024 (staffed 8 a.m. – 8 p.m., Monday – Friday); or email [email protected]
Q11: Does this process apply to me if I am currently in removal proceedings, have a final removal order, or have a voluntary departure order?
A11: This process is open to any individual who can demonstrate they meet the guidelines for DACA consideration under 8 CFR 236.21 – 236.25, including those who have never been in removal proceedings as well as those in removal proceedings, with a final order of removal, or with a voluntary departure order.
Q12: If I am not in removal proceedings but believe I meet the guidelines for consideration of DACA, should I seek to place myself into removal proceedings through encounters with CBP or ICE?
A12: No. If you are not in removal proceedings but believe that you meet the guidelines for DACA consideration under 8 CFR 236.21 – 236.25, you should submit your DACA request to USCIS under the process outlined below and at 8 CFR 236.23.
Q13: Can I request consideration of DACA from USCIS if I am in immigration detention under the custody of ICE?
A13: Yes. If you are currently in immigration detention, you may request consideration of DACA from USCIS. However, if we decide to grant you DACA, we will not approve your DACA request until you are released from detention. If you are requesting DACA, you should tell your deportation officer.
Q14: If I am about to be removed by ICE and believe that I meet the guidelines for consideration of DACA, what should I do to seek review of my case before removal?
A14: If you believe you can demonstrate that you meet the guidelines and are about to be removed, you should immediately contact your case officer or the ICE Detention Reporting and Information Line at 1-888-351-4024 (staffed 8 a.m. – 8 p.m. Eastern, Monday – Friday) or email [email protected].
Q15: What should I do if I meet the guidelines of this process and have been issued an ICE detainer following an arrest by a state or local law enforcement officer?
A15: If you meet the guidelines and have been served a detainer, you should immediately contact the ICE Detention Reporting and Information Line at 1-888-351-4024 (staffed 8 a.m. – 8 p.m. Eastern, Monday–Friday); or email [email protected]
Q16: If I accepted an offer of administrative closure under the case-by-case review process or my case was terminated or dismissed as part of the case-by-case review process, can I be considered for deferred action under this process?
A16: Yes. If you can demonstrate that you meet the guidelines, you will be able to request consideration of DACA even if you have accepted an offer of administrative closure or termination under the case-by-case review process.
Q17: If I declined an offer of administrative closure under the case-by-case review process, can I be considered for deferred action under this process?
A17: Yes. If you can demonstrate that you meet the guidelines, you will be able to request consideration of DACA even if you declined an offer of administrative closure under the case-by-case review process.
Q18: If my case was reviewed as part of the case-by-case review process but I was not offered administrative closure, can I be considered for deferred action under this process?
A18: Yes. If you can demonstrate that you meet the guidelines, you will be able to request consideration of DACA even if you were not offered administrative closure following review of your case as part of the case-by-case review process.
Q19: Can I request consideration of DACA under this process if I am in a nonimmigrant status (for example F-1, E-2, H-4) or have Temporary Protected Status (TPS) at the time I submit my request?
A19: No. You can only request consideration of DACA under this process if, at the time of submitting your request and at the time of adjudication of your request, you have no immigration status and were not in any lawful status on June 15, 2012. However, a pending petition or application for nonimmigrant status does not prevent you from requesting DACA, if you otherwise meet the threshold criteria at 8 CFR 236.22.
Q20: Will the information I share in my request for consideration of DACA be used for immigration enforcement purposes?
A20: Under 8 CFR 236.23(e)(1), DHS will not use information about a requestor in a request for DACA to initiate immigration enforcement proceedings against that requestor, unless DHS is initiating immigration enforcement proceedings  due to a criminal offense, fraud, a threat to national security, or public safety concerns. Individuals whose cases are deferred under DACA will not be referred to ICE. The information may be shared with national security and law enforcement agencies, including ICE and CBP, for purposes other than removal, including for assistance in the consideration of DACA, to identify or prevent fraudulent claims, for national security purposes, or to investigate or prosecute a criminal offense.
Q21: If my case is referred to ICE for immigration enforcement purposes or if I receive a Notice to Appear, will ICE receive information about my family members and guardians for immigration enforcement purposes?
A21: Under 8 CFR § 236.23(e)(2), information contained in your DACA request related to your family members or guardians will not be used for immigration enforcement purposes against them. However, we may share this information with national security and law enforcement agencies, including ICE and CBP, for purposes other than removal, including for assistance in the consideration of DACA, to identify or prevent fraudulent claims, for national security purposes, or for the investigation or prosecution of a criminal offense.
Q22: Will USCIS verify documents or statements I provide to support my request for DACA?
A22: We have the authority to verify documents, facts, and statements provided to support requests for DACA. We may contact education institutions, other government agencies, employers, or other entities to verify information.
Return to top.

C. Background Checks

Q23: Will USCIS conduct a background check when you review my request for DACA?
A23: Yes. You must undergo biographic and biometric background checks before we will consider your DACA request.
Q24: What do background checks involve?
A24: Background checks involve checking biographic and biometric information provided by an individual against a variety of databases maintained by DHS and other federal government agencies.
Q25: What steps will USCIS and ICE take if I engage in fraud through the new process?
A25: If you knowingly misrepresent information, or knowingly fail to disclose facts, in an effort to obtain DACA or work authorization through this process, DHS will treat you as an immigration enforcement priority to the fullest extent permitted by law, and you will be subject to criminal prosecution or removal from the United States or both.
Return to top.

D. After USCIS Makes a DecisionQ26: Can I appeal USCIS’ determination?
A26: No. You cannot file a motion to reopen or reconsider and cannot administratively appeal the decision if we deny your DACA request.
You may request a review of your Form I-821D denial by contacting the USCIS Contact Center at 800-375-5283 Monday to Friday, 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. Eastern. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing or have a speech disability: TTY 800-767-1833. USCIS will not review its discretionary determination to deny your request for DACA.  However, you can have a Service Request created if you believe that you actually met all of the DACA guidelines and that your request was denied because USCIS:

• Denied the request based on abandonment, when you actually responded to an RFE or Notice of Intent to Deny (NOID) within the prescribed time;
• Mailed the RFE or NOID to the wrong address although you had changed your address, either online at How to Change Your Address or with a customer service representative on the phone and submitted a Form AR-11, Change of Address, before USCIS issued the RFE or NOID.
  • To ensure the address is updated on a pending case as quickly as possible, we recommend that customers change your address online.  Please note that only an online change of address or a Form AR-11 submission will satisfy the legal requirements to notify us of an address change. Therefore, if you called a customer service representative to change your address, please be sure you also change your address online or with a Form AR-11.
• Denied the request on the grounds that you did not come to the United States before your 16th birthday, but the evidence submitted at the time of filing shows that you did arrive before reaching that age.
• Denied the request on the grounds that you were under age 15 at the time of filing but not in removal proceedings, while the evidence submitted at the time of filing show that you indeed were in removal proceedings when the request was filed;
• Denied the request on the grounds that you were 31 or older as of June 15, 2012, but the evidence submitted at the time of filing shows that you were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
• Denied the request on the grounds that you had lawful status on June 15, 2012, but the evidence submitted at the time of filing shows that you indeed were in an unlawful immigration status on that date;
• Denied the request on the grounds that you were not physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and up through the date of filing, but the evidence submitted at the time of filing shows that you were, in fact, present;
• Denied on the grounds that you are not currently in school, have not graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have not obtained a GED certificate, and are not an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard or armed forces of the United States;
• Denied the request due to your failure to appear at a USCIS ASC where we may collect your biometrics, when you in fact either did appear at a USCIS ASC to have this done or requested before the scheduled date of your biometrics appointment to have the appointment rescheduled; or
• Denied the request because you did not pay the filing fees for Form I-821D or Form I-765, when you actually did pay these fees.

Q27: If USCIS does not exercise deferred action in my case, will I be placed in removal proceedings?
A27: If USCIS denies your request for DACA under 8 CFR 236.23, we will not issue a Notice to Appear or refer your case to ICE for possible enforcement action based on our denial, unless we determine that your case involves denial for a criminal offense, fraud, a threat to national security, or public safety concerns. We may consider factors including, but not limited to, whether a misrepresentation is willful, material, and knowing in determining whether fraud is involved in a case.
Q28: Can USCIS terminate my DACA before it expires?
A28: Yes. DACA is an exercise of prosecutorial discretion, and under 8 CFR 236.23(d), we may terminate a grant of DACA at any time,  at USCIS’ discretion. We will provide a Notice of Intent to Terminate (NOIT) and an opportunity to respond before terminating a DACA grant, except we may terminate a grant of DACA without an NOIT and an opportunity to respond if you are convicted of a national security-related offense involving conduct described in 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(iii), (iv), or 1227(a)(4)(A)(i)), or an egregious public safety offense. If we terminate your grant of DACA without an NOIT and an opportunity to respond, we will notify you of the termination.
Q29: What happens to my employment authorization if USCIS terminates my DACA before it expires?
A29: A grant of employment authorization based on DACA, under 8 CFR 274a.12(c)(33), will automatically terminate when DACA terminates. See 8 CFR 236.23(d)(3).
Return to top.

II. Initial Requests for DACAQ

30: What guidelines must I meet to be considered for DACA?
A30: Pursuant to current court orders, USCIS is accepting, but not adjudicating, initial requests for DACA. Under 8 CFR 236.22, to be considered for DACA you must submit evidence, including supporting documents, showing that you:

1. Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012 (that is, you were born on or after June 16, 1981);
2. Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
3. Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up until you filed your request for DACA;
4. Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and when you filed your request for DACA with USCIS;
5. Had no lawful immigration status on June 15, 2012,* and when you filed your request for DACA, meaning that:

• You never had a lawful immigration status on or before June 15, 2012, or
• Any lawful immigration status or parole that you had before June 15, 2012, expired as of June 15, 2012, and
• Any lawful status that you had after June 15, 2012, expired or otherwise terminated before you submitted your request for DACA;

1. Are currently enrolled in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a GED certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. Coast Guard or armed forces of the United States; and
2. Have not been convicted of a felony, a misdemeanor described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), or 3 or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

We consider on a case-by-case basis deferred action requests submitted under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25. Even if you meet the threshold criteria listed above and at 8 CFR 236.22(b), we retain the discretion to assess your circumstances and determine that any specific factor makes deferred action inappropriate. See 8 CFR 236.22(c).
* Please review Q19 if you are currently in a lawful immigration status.
Q31: I first came to the United States before I turned 16 years old, and I have been continuously residing in the United States since at least June 15, 2007. Before I turned 16 years old, however, I left the United States for some period of time before returning and beginning my current period of continuous residence. May I be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A31: Yes, but only if you established residence in the United States during the period before you turned 16 years old, as evidenced, for example, by records showing you attended school or worked in the United States during that time, or that you lived in the United States for multiple years during that time. In addition to establishing that you initially resided in the United States before you turned 16 years old, you must also have maintained continuous residence in the United States from June 15, 2007, until the present time to be considered for deferred action under this process. See 8 CFR 236.22(b)(1)-(2).
Q32: To prove my continuous residence in the United States since June 15, 2007, must I provide evidence documenting my presence for every day, or every month, of that period?
A32: To meet the continuous residence guideline under 8 CFR 236.22(b)(2), you must submit documentation that shows you have been living in the United States from June 15, 2007, up until the time of filing your request. You should provide documentation to account for as much of the period as reasonably possible, but there is no requirement that every day or month of that period be specifically accounted for through direct evidence.
It is helpful to USCIS if you can submit evidence of your residence during at least each year of the period. USCIS will review the documentation in its totality to determine whether it is more likely than not that you were continuously residing in the United States for the period since June 15, 2007. Gaps in the documentation for certain periods may raise doubts about your continued residence if they are lengthy or the record otherwise indicates that you may have been outside the United States for a period of time that was not brief, casual or innocent.
If gaps in your documentation raise questions, USCIS may issue a Request for Evidence to allow you to submit additional documentation that supports your claimed continuous residence.
You may submit affidavits to explain a gap in the documentation demonstrating that you meet the 5-year continuous residence requirement. If you submit affidavits related to the continuous residence requirement, you must submit 2 or more affidavits, sworn to or affirmed by people other than yourself who have direct personal knowledge of the events and circumstances during the period when there is a gap in the documentation. You may only use affidavits to explain gaps in your continuous residence; you cannot use them as evidence that you meet the entire 5-year continuous residence requirement.
Q33: I came to the United States when I was very young and before I began attending school, so I do not have primary evidence of the start of my continuous residence in the United States. Can I submit an affidavit as proof of the start of my continuous residence period?
A33: DHS will accept affidavits for the start of the continuous residence period if you are a new initial requestor who arrived in the United States at or before age 8. We recognize that age 8 is the highest age at which school attendance becomes required within the United States, and that it may be more challenging for individuals who arrived before that age to provide primary evidence of the start of their continuous residence period.
Q34: Does “currently enrolled in school” refer to the date when I file the request for consideration of deferred action?
A34: To be considered “currently enrolled in school” under 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5), you must be enrolled in school on the date you submit a DACA request.
Q35: Who is considered to be “currently enrolled in school” under 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5)?
A35: To be considered “currently enrolled in school” under 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5), you must be enrolled in:

• A public, private, or charter elementary school, junior high or middle school, high school, secondary school, alternative program, or homeschool program that meets state requirements;
• An education, literacy, or career training program (including vocational training) that has a purpose of improving literacy, mathematics, or English or is designed to lead to placement in postsecondary education, job training, or employment and where you are working toward such placement; or
• An education program helping students obtain a regular high school diploma or its recognized equivalent under state law (including a certificate of completion, certificate of attendance, or alternate award), or in passing a GED exam or other state-authorized exam (such as HiSet or TASC) in the United States.

Education, literacy, and career training programs (including vocational training), or education programs helping students obtain a regular high school diploma or its recognized equivalent under state law, or in passing a GED exam or other state-authorized exam in the United States, may include, but are not limited to, programs wholly or partially funded by federal, state, county or municipal grants or administered by nonprofit organizations. Programs funded by other sources may qualify if they have demonstrated effectiveness.
In assessing whether programs are of demonstrated effectiveness, USCIS will consider:

• The duration of the program’s existence;
• The program’s track record in:
  • Assisting students in obtaining a regular high school diploma or its recognized equivalent;
  • Passing a GED or other state-authorized exam (such as HiSet or TASC); or
  • Placing students in postsecondary education, job training, or employment; and
• Other indicators of the program’s overall quality.

If you seek to demonstrate that you are “currently enrolled in school” with your enrollment in such a program, you must show the program’s demonstrated effectiveness.
Q36: How do I establish that I am currently enrolled in school?
A36: Documentation demonstrating that you are currently enrolled in school may include, but is not limited to:

• Evidence that you are enrolled in a public, private, or charter elementary school, junior high or middle school, high school or secondary school, alternative program, or homeschool program that meets state requirements; or
• Evidence that you are enrolled in an education, literacy, or career training program (including vocational training) that:
  • Has a purpose of improving literacy, mathematics, or English, or is designed to lead to placement in postsecondary education, job training, or employment and where you are working toward such placement; and
  • Is wholly or partially funded by federal, state, county or municipal grants or administered by nonprofit organizations or, if funded by other sources, is of demonstrated effectiveness; or
• Evidence that you are enrolled in an education program assisting students in obtaining a high school equivalency diploma or certificate recognized under state law (such as by passing a GED exam or other state-authorized exam such as HiSet or TASC), and that the program is wholly or partially funded by federal, state, county or municipal grants or administered by nonprofit organizations or, if funded by other sources, is of demonstrated effectiveness.

Evidence of enrollment may include acceptance letters, school registration cards, letters from a school or program, transcripts, report cards, or progress reports that may show the name of the school or program, date of enrollment, and current educational or grade level, if relevant. See Chart #1, below, for examples of documents.

Q37: What documentation may be sufficient to demonstrate that I have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school?
A37: See Chart #1, below, for examples of documents. Documentation demonstrating that you have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school for purposes of 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5) may include, but is not limited to:

• A high school diploma from a public or private high school or secondary school; or
• A certificate of completion, a certificate of attendance, or an alternate award from a public or private high school or secondary school or a recognized equivalent of a high school diploma under state law, or a GED certificate or certificate from passing another such state authorized exam (e.g., HiSet or TASC) in the United States.

Q38: What documentation may be sufficient to demonstrate that I have obtained a GED certificate or certificate from passing a similar state-authorized exam (such as HiSet or TASC)?
A38: See Chart #1, below, for examples of documents. Documentation demonstrating that you have obtained a GED certificate or certificate from passing a similar state-authorized exam for purposes of 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5) may include, but is not limited to, evidence that you have passed a GED exam or other state-authorized exam (such as HiSet or TASC) and received the recognized equivalent of a regular high school diploma under state law.
Q39: If I am enrolled in a literacy or career training program, can I meet the guidelines at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5)?
A39: Yes, in certain circumstances. You may be able to establish that you meet the education guidelines at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5) if you are enrolled in an education, literacy, or career training program that has a purpose of improving literacy, mathematics, or English or is designed to lead to placement in postsecondary education, job training, or employment and where you are working toward such placement. Such programs include, but are not limited to, programs wholly or partially funded by federal, state, county or municipal grants or administered by nonprofit organizations, or if funded by other sources, are programs of demonstrated effectiveness.
Q40: If I am enrolled in an English as a second language (ESL) program, can I meet the guidelines?
A40: Yes, in certain circumstances. You may be able to establish that you meet the education criteria at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5) through enrollment in an ESL program if the ESL program is wholly or partially funded by federal, state, county or municipal grants or administered by nonprofit organizations, or is a program of demonstrated effectiveness. You must submit direct documentary evidence that the program is wholly or partially funded by federal, state, county or municipal grants, administered by a nonprofit organization, or of demonstrated effectiveness.
Q41: Will USCIS consider evidence other than that listed in Chart #1 to show that I have met the education guidelines at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5)?
A41: No. We will not accept evidence that is not listed in Chart #1 to establish that you are currently enrolled in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, or have obtained a GED or passed another state-authorized exam (such as HiSet or TASC) for purposes of 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5). You must submit any of the documentary evidence listed in Chart #1 to show that you meet the education guidelines at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(5).
Q42: Will USCIS consider evidence other than that listed in Chart #1 to show that I have met certain threshold criteria at 8 CFR 236.22(b)?
A42: You may use evidence other than those documents listed in Chart #1 to establish that you meet the following guidelines and factual showings, if available documentary evidence is insufficient or lacking and shows that:

• You were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012;
• You came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
• You satisfy the continuous residence requirement, as long as you present direct evidence of your continued residence in the United States for a portion of the required period and the circumstantial evidence is used only to fill in gaps in the length of continuous residence demonstrated by the direct evidence; and
• Any travel outside the United States during the period of required continuous presence was brief, casual, and innocent.

However, USCIS will not accept evidence other than the documents listed in Chart #1 as proof that you meet any of the following guidelines:

• You were under the age of 31 on June 15, 2012 (that is, you were born on or after June 16, 1981); and
• You are currently enrolled in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a GED certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or armed forces of the United States.

For example, even if you do not have documentary proof of your presence in the United States on June 15, 2012, you may still be able to demonstrate that you meet the guideline. You may do so by submitting credible documentary evidence that you were present in the United States shortly before and shortly after June 15, 2012, which may be enough to infer you were present June 15, 2012, as well. However, we will not accept evidence other than that listed in Chart #1 to establish that you have graduated high school. You must submit the designated documentary evidence to satisfy that you meet this guideline.
Chart #1 provides examples of documentation you may submit to demonstrate you meet the threshold criteria for DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25. Please see the instructions for Form I-821D, Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, for additional details of acceptable documentation.
Chart #1 Examples of Documents to Submit to Demonstrate You Meet the Guidelines
Proof of identity

• Passport or national identity document from your country of origin
• Birth certificate with photo identification
• School or military ID with photo
• Any U.S. government immigration or other document bearing your name and photo

Proof you came to U.S. before your 16th birthday

• Passport with admission stamp
• Form I-94, Form I-95, or Form I-94W
• School records from the U.S. schools you have attended
• Any Immigration and Naturalization Service or DHS document stating your date of entry (Form I-862, Notice to Appear)
• Travel records
• Hospital or medical records
• Rent receipts or utility bills
• Employment records (pay stubs, W-2 Forms, etc.)
• Official records from a religious entity confirming participation in a religious ceremony
• Copies of money order receipts for money sent in or out of the United States
• Birth certificates of children born in the United States
• Dated bank transactions
• Automobile license receipts or registration
• Deeds, mortgages, rental agreement contracts
• Tax receipts, insurance policies

Proof of lack of lawful immigration status on June 15, 2012, and at the time of filing your DACA request (8 CFR 236.22(b)(4))

• Form I-94/I-95/I-94W with authorized stay expiration date
• Final order of exclusion, deportation, or removal issued as of June 15, 2012
• A charging document placing you into removal proceedings

Proof of physical presence in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of filing your DACA request (8 CFR 236.22(b)(3))

• Rent receipts or utility bills
• Employment records (pay stubs, W-2 Forms, etc.)
• School records (letters, report cards, etc.)
• Military records (Form DD-214 or NGB Form 22)
• Official records from a religious entity confirming participation in a religious ceremony
• Copies of money order receipts for money sent in or out of the United States
• Passport entries
• Birth certificates of children born in the United States
• Dated bank transactions
• Automobile license receipts or registration
• Deeds, mortgages, rental agreement contracts
• Tax receipts, insurance policies
• Affidavits for the start of the continuous presence period if you arrived in the United States before age 8

Proof you continuously resided in the United States from June 15, 2007, to the time of filing your DACA request (8 CFR 236.22(b)(2))
Proof of your education status at the time of requesting consideration of DACA (8 CFR 236.22(b)(5))

• School records (transcripts, report cards, etc.) from the school that you are currently attending in the United States showing the name(s) of the school(s) and periods of school attendance and the current educational or grade level
• U.S. high school diploma, certificate of completion, or other alternate award
• High school equivalency diploma or certificate recognized under state law
• Evidence that you passed a state-authorized exam, including the GED or other state-authorized exam (such as HiSet or TASC) in the United States

Proof you are an honorably discharged veteran of the U.S. armed forces or the U.S. Coast Guard (8 CFR 236.22(b)(5))

• Form DD-214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty
• NGB Form 22, National Guard Report of Separation and Record of Service
• Military personnel records
• Military health records

Q43: May I file affidavits as proof that I meet the threshold criteria for consideration of DACA at 8 CFR 236.22(b)?
A43: Affidavits generally will not be sufficient on their own to demonstrate that you meet the threshold criteria at 8 CFR 236.22(b) for USCIS to consider you for DACA. However, you may use affidavits to support meeting the following guidelines if the documentary evidence available to you is insufficient or lacking:

• Demonstrating that you meet the 5-year continuous residence requirement;
• Establishing the start of the continuous residence period if you entered the United States before age 8; and
• Establishing that departures during the required period of continuous residence were brief, casual, and innocent.

If you submit affidavits related to the above criteria, you must submit 2 or more affidavits, sworn to or affirmed by people other than yourself, who have direct personal knowledge of the events and circumstances. If we determine that the affidavits are insufficient to overcome the unavailability or lack of documentary evidence with respect to either of these guidelines, we will issue a Request for Evidence, indicating you must submit further evidence to demonstrate that you meet these guidelines.

USCIS will not accept affidavits to satisfy the following guidelines at 8 CFR 236.22(b):

• You are currently enrolled in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion or other alternate award from high school, have obtained a high school equivalency diploma or certificate (such as by passing the GED exam or other similar state-authorized exam such as HiSet or TASC), or are an honorably discharged veteran from the U.S. Coast Guard or armed forces of the United States;
• You were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012;
• You came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
• You were under the age of 31 on June 15, 2012 (that is, you were born on or after June 16, 1981); and
• Your lack of disqualifying criminal history.

If the only evidence you submit to demonstrate you meet any of the above guidelines is an affidavit, we will issue a Request for Evidence, indicating that you have not demonstrated that you meet these guidelines and that you must submit evidence to demonstrate that you meet that guideline.
Q44: Can I be considered for deferred action under this process if I had an application for asylum or cancellation of removal pending before either USCIS or the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) on June 15, 2012?
A44: Yes. If you had an application for asylum or cancellation of removal, or similar relief, pending before either USCIS or EOIR as of June 15, 2012, but had no lawful status, you may request consideration of DACA.
Q45: I was admitted for "duration of status" or for a period of time that extended past June 14, 2012, but I violated my immigration status (for example, by engaging in unauthorized employment, failing to report to my employer, or failing to pursue a full course of study) before June 15, 2012. May I be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A45: No, unless the Executive Office for Immigration Review terminated your status by issuing a final order of removal against you before June 15, 2012.
Q46: I was admitted for "duration of status" or for a period of time that extended past June 14, 2012, but I "aged out" of my dependent nonimmigrant status as of June 15, 2012.  May I be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A46: Yes. For purposes of satisfying the “had no lawful status on June 15, 2012," guideline at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(4) alone, if you were admitted for duration of status or for a period of time that extended past June 14, 2012, but aged out of your dependent nonimmigrant status on or before June 15, 2012, (meaning you turned 21 years old on or before June 15, 2012), you may be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q47: I was admitted for duration of status, but my status in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS) is listed as terminated on or before June 15, 2012. May I be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A47: Yes. For the purposes of satisfying the “had no lawful status on June 15, 2012,” guideline at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(4) alone, if your status as of June 15, 2012, is listed as “terminated” in SEVIS, you may be considered for DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q48: I am a Canadian citizen who was inspected by CBP but was not issued a Form I-94 at the time of admission. May I be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A48: In general, a Canadian citizen who was admitted as a visitor for business or pleasure and not issued a Form I-94, Arrival/Departure Record (also known as a “non-controlled” Canadian nonimmigrant) is lawfully admitted for a period of 6 months. For that reason, unless there is evidence, including verifiable evidence provided by the individual, that they were specifically advised that their admission would be for a different length of time, DHS will consider, for purposes of 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 only, that the noncitizen was lawfully admitted for a period of 6 months. If DHS is able to verify from its records that your last noncontrolled entry occurred on or before Dec. 14, 2011, DHS will consider your nonimmigrant visitor status to have expired as of June 15, 2012, and you may be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q49: I used my Border Crossing Card (BCC) to obtain admission to the United States and was not issued a Form I-94 at the time of admission. May I be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A49: Because the limitations on entry for a BCC holder vary based on location of admission and travel, DHS will assume that the BCC holder who was not provided a Form I-94 was admitted for the longest period legally possible—30 days—unless the individual can demonstrate, through verifiable evidence, that they were specifically advised that their admission would be for a different length of time. Accordingly, if DHS is able to verify from its records that your last admission was using a BCC, you were not issued a Form I-94 at the time of admission, and it occurred on or before May 14, 2012, DHS will consider your nonimmigrant visitor status to have expired as of June 15, 2012, and you may be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q50: Do I accrue unlawful presence if I have a pending initial request for consideration of DACA?
A50: You will continue to accrue unlawful presence while the request for consideration of DACA is pending unless you are under 18 years of age at the time of the request. If you are under 18 years of age at the time you submit your request, you will not accrue unlawful presence while the request is pending, even if you turn 18 while your request is pending with USCIS. If we grant your DACA request, you will not accrue unlawful presence during the period of deferred action. However, having deferred action will not excuse previously accrued unlawful presence.
Return to top.

III. Renewal of DACAQ51: When should I file my DACA renewal request?
A51: We strongly encourage you to submit your DACA renewal request between 120 and 150 days (4 to 5 months) before the expiration date located on your current Form I-797 DACA approval notice and EAD. Filing during this window reduces the risk that your current period of DACA will expire before you receive a decision on your renewal request. Filing earlier than 150 days before your current DACA expiration date will not result in a faster decision.
DACA recipients may submit a DACA renewal request online. To file Form I-821D and Form I-765 online, a DACA requestor must first create a USCIS online account, which provides a convenient and secure method to submit forms, pay fees and track the status of any pending USCIS immigration request throughout the adjudication process. There is no cost to set up an account, which offers a variety of features, including the ability to communicate with USCIS through a secure inbox and respond online to Requests for Evidence. For additional information on filing a DACA renewal request online, go to the Form I-821D webpage. All online DACA renewal requests must include Form I-821D, Form I-765, and Form I-765WS and accompanying fees.

• USCIS’ current goal is to process DACA renewal requests within 120 days. You may submit an inquiry online about the status of your renewal request after it has been pending more than 105 days. Please Note: Factors that may affect the timely processing of your DACA renewal request include, but are not limited to:
  • If you fail to appear at an ASC for a scheduled biometrics appointment to obtain fingerprints and photographs. It will take longer to process your request if you miss or reschedule your appointments;
  • Issues of national security, criminality or public safety discovered during the background check process that require further vetting;
  • Issues of travel abroad that need additional evidence or clarification;
  • Name or date of birth discrepancies that may require additional evidence or clarification; or
  • A renewal submission that is incomplete or contains evidence that suggests a requestor may not satisfy the DACA renewal guidelines and we must request additional evidence or an explanation.

Q52: Can I file a renewal request outside the recommended filing period of 120 to 150 days before my current DACA expires?
A52: USCIS strongly encourages you to file your renewal request within the recommended 120- to 150-day filing period to minimize the possibility that your current period of DACA will expire before you receive a decision on your renewal request. We will accept requests we receive earlier than 150 days before your current DACA expires; however, this could result in an overlap between your current DACA and your renewal. This means your renewal period may extend for less than a full 2 years from the date that your current DACA period expires.
If you file less than 120 days before your current period of DACA expires, there is more risk that your current period of DACA and employment authorization will expire before you receive a decision on your renewal request. If you file after your most recent DACA period expires, but within 1 year of its expiration, you may submit a request to renew your DACA. If you are filing beyond 1 year after your most recent period of DACA expired, or if your most recent grant of DACA was terminated at any time, you may still request DACA by submitting a new initial request.
Please note: An ongoing July 16, 2021, injunction (PDF, 401.59 KB) from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and, on Oct. 14, 2022, was extended by the district court to the DACA final rule, remains in effect and prohibits DHS from granting initial DACA requests and related employment authorization under the final rule. Due to the partial stay of the injunction, DHS presently may grant DACA renewal requests under the final rule.
Q53: How will USCIS evaluate my request for renewal of DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A53: We may consider renewing your DACA if you met the guidelines for consideration of Initial DACA (see above and 8 CFR 236.22(b)) and you:

• Did not engage in unauthorized travel outside the United States on or after Aug. 15, 2012;
• Have continuously resided in the United States since you submitted your most recent request for DACA that was approved up to the present time; and
• Have not been convicted of a felony, a misdemeanor described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), or 3 or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.

These guidelines must be met for consideration of DACA renewal. We consider deferred action requests submitted under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 on a case-by-case basis. Even if you meet the guidelines, we have discretion to assess your circumstances and determine that deferred action is inappropriate. See 8 CFR 236.22I.
Q54. Do I accrue unlawful presence if I am seeking renewal and my previous period of DACA expires before I receive a renewal of deferred action under DACA? Similarly, what would happen to my work authorization?
A54: Yes, if your previous period of DACA expires before you receive a renewal of deferred action under DACA, you will accrue unlawful presence for any time between the periods of deferred action, unless you are under 18 years of age at the time you submit your renewal request.
Similarly, if your previous period of DACA expires before you receive a renewal of deferred action under DACA, you will not be authorized to work in the United States regardless of your age at time of filing until and unless you receive a new EAD from USCIS.
Q55. Do I need to provide additional documents when I request renewal of deferred action under DACA?
A55. No, unless you have new documents pertaining to removal proceedings or criminal history that you have not already submitted to USCIS in a previously approved DACA request. However, we reserve the authority, at our discretion, to request additional documents, information or statements relating to a DACA renewal request determination.
CAUTION: If you knowingly and willfully provide materially false information on Form I-821D, you will be committing a federal felony punishable by a fine, imprisonment up to 5 years, or both under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001. In addition, you may be placed into removal proceedings, face severe penalties provided by law, and be subject to criminal prosecution.
Q56.; If I am no longer enrolled in school, can I still request to renew my DACA?
A56. Yes. Neither Form I-821D nor the instructions ask renewal requestors for information about continued school enrollment or graduation. The instructions for renewal requests specify that you may be considered for DACA renewal if you met the guidelines for consideration of initial DACA, including the educational guidelines and:

1. Did not engage in unauthorized travel outside the United States on or after Aug. 15, 2012, without advance parole;
2. Have continuously resided in the United States, up to the present time, since you submitted your most recent request for DACA that was approved; and
3. Have not been convicted of a felony, a misdemeanor described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6)or 3 or more other misdemeanors and are not a threat to national security or public safety.

Q57. If I initially received DACA and was under age 31 on June 15, 2012, but have since become 31 or older, can I still request renewal of DACA?
A57. Yes. You may request consideration for a renewal of DACA as long as you were under age 31 as of June 15, 2012.

IV. TravelQ58: May I travel outside the United States before I submit an initial DACA request or while my initial DACA request is pending with USCIS?
A58: Any unauthorized travel outside of the United States on or after Aug. 15, 2012, will interrupt your continuous residence, and you will not be considered for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25. We will assess any travel outside of the United States that occurred on or after June 15, 2007, but before Aug. 15, 2012, to determine whether the travel qualifies as brief, casual and innocent. (See Chart #2.)
CAUTION: You should be aware that if you have been ordered deported or removed, and you then leave the United States, your departure will likely mean you are considered deported or removed, with potentially serious future immigration consequences.
Q59: If my case is deferred under DACA, will I be able to travel outside of the United States?
A59: Not automatically. If we decide to defer action in your case and you want to travel outside the United States, you must apply for an advance parole document by filing Form I-131, Application for Travel Document, and paying the applicable fee. We will determine whether your purpose for international travel is justifiable based on the circumstances you describe in your request. Generally, we will only issue an advance parole document if your travel abroad is for:

• Humanitarian purposes, including travel to obtain medical treatment, attend funeral services for a family member, or visit an ailing relative;
• Educational purposes, such as semester abroad programs and academic research; or
• Employment purposes, such as overseas assignments, interviews, conferences or training, or meetings with clients overseas.

Travel for vacation is not a valid basis for advance parole.
Travel for educational purposes means travel affiliated with an institution that provides education as its primary purpose. The DACA recipient does not have to be enrolled in the institution that the program is affiliated with, but you must be enrolled in the program you will be traveling with.
You may not apply for an advance parole document unless and until USCIS approves your DACA request. If you are a current DACA recipient and submitting a renewal request, you may apply for advance parole at the same time to the separate filing address for advance parole requests. We will consider all advance parole requests on a case-by-case basis.
If USCIS has granted DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 after you have been ordered deported or removed, you may still request advance parole if you meet the guidelines for advance parole described above.
CAUTION: If you have been ordered deported or removed, before you actually leave the United States, you should seek to reopen your case before the EOIR and obtain administrative closure or termination of your removal proceeding. Even after you have asked EOIR to reopen your case, you should not leave the United States until after EOIR has granted your request. If you depart after being ordered deported or removed, and your removal proceeding has not been reopened and administratively closed or terminated, you may be considered deported or removed, with potentially serious future immigration consequences. If you have any questions about this process, you may contact ICE through the local ICE Office of the Principal Legal Advisor with jurisdiction over your case.
Q60: What happens to my DACA grant if I leave the United States without advance parole?
A60: CAUTION: When you leave the United States, you are no longer in a period of deferred action. DACA recipients who leave the United States without first obtaining an advance parole document run a significant risk of being unable to reenter the United States. We strongly encourage you to obtain an advance parole document before you leave to reduce the risk of being unable to return and resume DACA.
USCIS may terminate a grant of DACA, in its discretion and following issuance of a Notice of Intent to Terminate with an opportunity to respond, for DACA recipients who depart from the United States without first obtaining an advance parole document and subsequently enter the United States without inspection. See 8 CFR 236.23(d)(2). Generally, a recent entry without inspection will be a significant negative factor warranting termination of DACA as a threat to border security, but where there are exigent circumstances, such as accidental or involuntary border crossings, DHS may choose to continue exercising prosecutorial discretion and allow the grant of deferred action to continue.
DACA recipients who depart the United States without first obtaining advance parole but who are paroled into the United States may resume their DACA upon expiration of the period of parole.
Q61: Why does my advance parole document show a 1-day parole period?
A61: Your advance parole document may show a parole period of 1 day because it is to facilitate your reentry into the United States, at which time you will resume your current DACA validity period. This is different from the language on your advance parole document that authorizes a departure and reentry between specified dates. Please review your advance parole document carefully to understand the details of your travel authorization.
Q62: Do brief departures from the United States interrupt the continuous residence requirement?
A62: A brief, casual, and innocent absence from the United States will not interrupt your continuous residence. However, unauthorized travel outside of the United States on or after Aug. 15, 2012, will interrupt continuous residence, regardless of whether it was otherwise brief, casual, and innocent. Your absence from the United States will be considered brief, casual, and innocent if it was on or after June 15, 2007, and before Aug. 15, 2012, and:

1. The absence was short and reasonably calculated to accomplish the purpose for the absence;
2. The absence was not because of a post-June 15, 2007, order of exclusion, deportation, or removal;
3. The absence was not because of a post-June 15, 2007, order of voluntary departure, or an administrative grant of voluntary departure before you were placed in exclusion, deportation, or removal proceedings; and
4. The purpose of the absence and your actions while outside the United States were not contrary to law.

Once USCIS has approved your request for DACA, you may file Form I-131, Application for Travel Document, to request advance parole to travel outside of the United States.
CAUTION: If you travel outside the United States on or after Aug. 15, 2012, without authorization and subsequently enter without inspection, DHS will issue you a Notice of Intent to Terminate and may, barring exigent circumstances, terminate your deferred action under DACA in its discretion,
Travel Guidelines (Chart #2)Travel Dates
Type of Travel
Does It Affect Continuous Residence
On or after June 15, 2007, but before Aug. 15, 2012
Brief, casual and innocent
No
For an extended time
Because of an order of exclusion, deportation, voluntary departure, or removal
To participate in criminal activity
Yes
On or after Aug. 15, 2012, and before you have requested DACA
Any
Yes. You cannot apply for advance parole unless and until DHS has determined whether to defer action in your case, and you cannot travel until you receive advance parole.
In addition, if you have previously been ordered deported and removed and you depart the United States without taking additional steps to address your removal proceedings, your departure will likely mean you are considered deported or removed, with potentially serious future immigration consequences.
On or after Aug. 15, 2012, and after you have requested DACA
Any
On or after Aug. 15, 2012, and after receiving DACA
Any
It depends. If you travel after receiving advance parole, the travel will not interrupt your continuous residence. However, if you travel without authorization, the travel will interrupt your continuous residence.
Q63: May I file a request for advance parole concurrently with my DACA package?
A63: You may file your DACA renewal request and a request for advance parole at the same time. The filing addresses are different, so you must file the requests separately. USCIS may not concurrently adjudicate the 2 requests.
If you are filing an initial DACA request, you may not concurrently file an advance parole request.
Q64: Will USCIS expedite the processing of a DACA Form I-131 advance parole application currently pending with USCIS?
A64: USCIS considers all expedite requests on a case-by-case basis and generally requires documentation to support such requests. The decision to grant or deny an expedite request is within the sole discretion of USCIS.  Please visit the USCIS Policy Manual Chapter 5 - Requests to Expedite Applications or Petitions for more information and guidance on expedite requests.
Q65: What if I am experiencing an extremely urgent situation and have not filed my Form I-131 advance parole application?
A65:If you are experiencing an extremely urgent situation and need to travel within 90 days, you may request an emergency advance parole appointment at your local field office by contacting the USCIS Contact Center. You should bring the following items to your appointment:

• A completed and signed Form I-131, Application for Travel Document;
• The correct Form I-131 filing fee;
• Evidence to support the emergency request (such as medical documentation, death certificate, etc.); and
• 2 passport-style photos.

Return to top.

V. Criminal ConvictionsQ66: If I have a conviction for a felony offense, a misdemeanor offense described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), or multiple other misdemeanors, can I be granted DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A66: No. If you have been convicted of a felony offense, a misdemeanor offense described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), or 3 or more other misdemeanor offenses not occurring on the same date and not arising out of the same act, omission, or scheme of misconduct, we will not consider you for DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q67: What offenses qualify as a felony?
A67: A felony is a federal, state, or local criminal offense punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year.
A single conviction for a felony offense is disqualifying for purposes of DACA.
Q68: What offenses constitute disqualifying misdemeanors (as described at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6)) for purposes of DACA?
A68: For purposes of DACA, a misdemeanor (as described at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6)) is a misdemeanor as defined by federal law (specifically, a misdemeanor for which the maximum term of imprisonment authorized is 1 year or less but greater than 5 days) that meets the following criteria:

1. Regardless of the sentence imposed, is an offense of domestic violence; sexual abuse or exploitation; burglary; unlawful possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or trafficking; or driving under the influence; or
2. If not an offense listed above, is an offense for which you were sentenced to time in custody of more than 90 days. The sentence must involve time to be served in custody, and does not include a suspended sentence.

The time in custody does not include any time served beyond the sentence for the criminal offense based on a state or local law enforcement agency honoring a detainer issued by ICE.
A single conviction for a misdemeanor offense as described above is disqualifying for purposes of DACA.
A single misdemeanor conviction that is not a misdemeanor as described at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6) is not per se disqualifying for DACA purposes. However, we may consider such offenses in the totality of circumstances to determine whether a DACA requestor merits a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
Notwithstanding the above, the decision whether to defer action in a particular case is an individualized, discretionary decision that takes into account all the circumstances. The absence of any misdemeanor convictions as described in 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6) is not necessarily determinative, but it is a factor we will consider when we exercise our discretion.
Q69: What offenses constitute “other misdemeanors” at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6))?
A69: For purposes of 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), an “other misdemeanor” is any misdemeanor as defined by federal law (specifically, a misdemeanor for which the maximum term of imprisonment authorized is 1 year or less but greater 5 days) that meets the following criteria:

1. Is not an offense of domestic violence; sexual abuse or exploitation; burglary; unlawful possession or use of a firearm; drug distribution or trafficking; or driving under the influence; and
2. Is an offense for which the individual was sentenced to time in custody of 90 days or less. The time in custody does not include any time served beyond the sentence for the criminal offense based on a state or local law enforcement agency honoring a detainer issued by ICE.

Three or more convictions of “other misdemeanors” not occurring on the same date and not arising out of the same act, omission, or scheme of misconduct are disqualifying for purposes of DACA.
The decision to defer action in a particular case is an individualized, discretionary decision that takes into account all the circumstances. The absence of three or more convictions of “other misdemeanors”  is not necessarily determinative, but it is a factor we will consider when we exercise our discretion.
A single misdemeanor conviction that is not a misdemeanor as described at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6) is not per se disqualifying for DACA purposes. However, we may consider such offenses in the totality of circumstances to determine whether a DACA requestor merits a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
Q70: If I have a minor traffic offense, such as driving without a license, will it be considered a misdemeanor that counts towards the “3 or more other misdemeanors” and make me unable to receive consideration for an exercise of prosecutorial discretion under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25?
A70: We will not consider a minor traffic offense a misdemeanor for purposes of 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), and it is not per se disqualifying for DACA purposes. However, we can consider your entire offense history along with other facts to determine whether, under the totality of the circumstances, you warrant a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
It is important to emphasize that driving under the influence is a disqualifying misdemeanor as described at 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), regardless of the sentence imposed.
Q71: What qualifies as a national security or public safety threat?
A71: If the background check or other information uncovered during the review of your request for deferred action indicates that your presence in the United States threatens public safety or national security, we will not grant your DACA request. Indicators that you pose such a threat include, but are not limited to, gang membership, participation in criminal activities, or participation in activities that threaten the United States.
Q72: Will offenses criminalized as felonies or misdemeanors by state immigration laws be considered disqualifying convictions for purpose of DACA?
A72: No. Under 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), convictions under state laws (including U.S. territories) for immigration-related offenses are not considered convictions for purposes of DACA.
Q73: Will USCIS consider my expunged conviction or juvenile delinquency adjudication as a disqualifying conviction for purposes of DACA?
A73: No. Under 8 CFR 236.22(b)(6), we do not consider expunged convictions and juvenile delinquency adjudications disqualifying convictions for purposes of DACA. However, we will assess expunged convictions and juvenile delinquency adjudications on a case-by-case basis to determine whether, under the particular circumstances, you present a national security or public safety concern and a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion is otherwise warranted. If you were a juvenile, but tried and convicted as an adult, we will not consider your conviction a juvenile delinquency adjudication.
Return to top.

VI. MiscellaneousQ74: Can USCIS terminate my DACA grant?
A74: DHS may seek to terminate a grant of DACA at any time in its discretion. However, in most cases USCIS will provide DACA recipients with a Notice of Intent to Terminate (NOIT), with an opportunity to respond, before termination. We have discretion to terminate without providing a DACA recipient a NOIT and opportunity to respond if you were convicted of a national security-related offense involving conduct described in 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(iii), 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv), or 1227(a)(4)(A)(i), or an egregious public safety offense.
Q75: Does deferred action provide a path to permanent resident status (a Green Card) or citizenship?
A75: No. Deferred action is a form of prosecutorial discretion that does not confer lawful permanent resident status or a path to citizenship. Only Congress, acting through its legislative authority, can confer these rights.
Q76: Can I be considered for deferred action even if I do not meet the guidelines to be considered for DACA?
A76: The process at 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 is only for individuals who meet the specific guidelines for DACA. Other individuals may, on a case-by-case basis, request deferred action from USCIS or ICE in certain circumstances, consistent with longstanding practice.
Q77: How will ICE and USCIS handle cases involving individuals who do not satisfy the guidelines of this process but believe they may otherwise warrant an exercise of prosecutorial discretion?
A77: If USCIS determines that you do not satisfy the DACA guidelines at 8 CFR 236.22(b) or otherwise determines you do not warrant a favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion, then we will decline to defer action in your case. If you are currently in removal proceedings, have a final order, or have a voluntary departure order, you may then request ICE consider whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion. Guidance on requests to ICE for prosecutorial discretion is available at ICE’s Prosecutorial Discretion webpage.
Q78: How should I fill out question 9 on Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization?
A78. When you are filing a Form I-765 as part of a DACA request, question 9 is asking you to list those Social Security numbers that were officially issued to you by the Social Security Administration.
Q79: Is there supervisory review of decisions by USCIS under this process?
A79: Yes. USCIS has implemented a successful supervisory review process to ensure a consistent process for considering requests for DACA under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25.
Q80: Do USCIS personnel responsible for reviewing requests for DACA receive special training?
A80: Yes. USCIS personnel responsible for considering requests for consideration of DACA have received special training.
Q81: Must attorneys and accredited representatives who provide pro bono services to deferred action requestors at group assistance events file a Form G-28 with USCIS?
A81: Under 8 C.F.R. §§ 292.3 and 1003.102, practitioners are required to file Form G-28, Notice of Entry of Appearance as Attorney or Accredited Representative, when they engage in practice in immigration matters before DHS, either in person or through the preparation or filing of any brief, application, petition, or other document. Under these rules, a practitioner who consistently violates the requirement to file a Form G-28 may be subject to disciplinary sanctions; however on Feb. 28, 2011, USCIS issued a statement indicating that it does not intend to initiate disciplinary proceedings against practitioners (attorneys and accredited representatives) based solely on the failure to submit a Form G-28 in relation to pro bono services provided at group assistance events. DHS is in the process of issuing a final rule, at which time this matter will be reevaluated.
Q82: When must an individual sign a Form I-821D as a preparer?
A82: Anytime someone other than the requestor prepares or helps fill out the Form I-821D, that individual must complete Part 5 of the form.
Q83: If I provide my employee with information regarding their employment to support a request for consideration of DACA, will that information be used for immigration enforcement purposes against me or my company?
A83: You may, as you determine appropriate, provide individuals requesting DACA with documentation which verifies their employment. This information will not be shared with ICE for civil immigration enforcement purposes under section 274A of the Immigration and Nationality Act (relating to unlawful employment) unless there is evidence of egregious violations of criminal statutes or widespread abuses.
Q84: Can I request consideration for deferred action under 8 CFR 236.21-236.25 if I live in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)?
A84: Yes, in certain circumstances. The CNMI is part of the United States for immigration purposes and is not excluded from this process. However, because of the specific guidelines for consideration of DACA, individuals who have been residents of the CNMI are in most cases unlikely to meet the criteria at 8 CFR 236.22(b). You must, among other things, have come to the United States before your 16th birthday and have resided continuously in the United States since June 15, 2007.
Under the Consolidated Natural Resources Act of 2008, the CNMI became part of the United States for purposes of immigration law only on Nov. 28, 2009. Therefore, entry into, or residence in, the CNMI before that date is not entry into, or residence in, the United States for purposes of 8 CFR 236.22(b).
USCIS has used parole authority in a variety of situations in the CNMI to address particular humanitarian needs on a case-by-case basis since Nov. 28, 2009. If you live in the CNMI and believe that you meet the guidelines for consideration of deferred action under this process, except that your entry or residence to the CNMI took place entirely or in part before Nov. 28, 2009, USCIS is willing to consider your situation on a case-by-case basis for a grant of parole. If this situation applies to you, you should make an appointment  in Saipan to discuss your case with an immigration officer.
Q85: Will USCIS expedite the processing of my pending DACA request?
A85: USCIS considers all expedite requests on a case-by-case basis and generally requires documentation to support such requests. The decision to grant or deny an expedite request is within the sole discretion of USCIS. Please visit the USCIS Policy Manual Chapter 5 - Requests to Expedite Applications or Petitions for more information and guidance on expedite requests.
Evidence demonstrating the humanitarian need for expediting your DACA request may include, but is not limited to, evidence of loss of employment, disenrollment from an educational program, or medical or health-related emergencies.
USCIS continues to strongly recommend that you submit your DACA renewal requests between 120 and 150 days before your current period of DACA expires to minimize the risk of your DACA lapsing.
Q86: Someone told me if I pay them a fee, they can expedite my DACA request. Is this true?
A86: No. While practitioners may charge a fee for preparation of your DACA request, including a request to expedite, an attorney or accredited representative who guarantees faster processing by USCIS if you pay them a fee may be trying to scam you and take your money. Visit our Avoid Scams page to learn how you can protect yourself from immigration scams.
Although you may request that USCIS expedite processing of your DACA request, there is no fee to request expedited processing. Make sure you seek information about requests for consideration of DACA from official government sources such as USCIS or DHS. If you are seeking legal advice, visit our Find Legal Services page to learn how to choose a licensed attorney or accredited representative.
Q87: Am I required to register with the Selective Service?
A87:  Most male persons residing in the United States, who are ages 18 through 25, are required to register with Selective Service. Visit the Selective Service System website for more information.
Q88: How can I tell if an employer is discriminating against me because I am a DACA recipient?
A88: An employer may be engaging in discrimination if they:

• Demand that an employee show specific documents or ask for more or different documents than are required to complete Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, or create an E-Verify case; or
• Reject documents from the Lists of Acceptable Documents that reasonably appear to be genuine and relate to the employee, including documentation showing work authorization because it has a future expiration date or because of an employee’s prior unauthorized status.

The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice has an office dedicated to ensuring that employers do not discriminate against individuals who are permitted to work in the United States. These include DACA recipients who have been granted work authorization. If you think your employer may be discriminating against you, contact the Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER) at 1-800-255-7688 (TDD for the deaf and hard of hearing: 1-800-237-2515).
For more information about unfair employment practices against DACA recipients, please read IER’s factsheet in English (PDF) or Spanish (PDF).
For additional resources and information about workers’ rights, visit the Department of Justice Reminders for DACA Recipients and Employers webpage.

TPS for Ukraine Updates: Новости по ТПС для Украины.

Today, on July 14, 2022, I attended a conference call with the USCIS headquarters, and they provided important updates about TPS for Ukraine. Below are some of the talking points in English and Russian.

Cегодня 14 июля 2022 USCIS ответили на многие вопросы по ТПС для Украины во время конференции с адвокатами, которую я посетила.

1) USCIS is expecting that the processing time for TPS for Ukraine will be about 6 months. Soon, the processing times will be available at USCIS website. Ожидается, что сроки рассмотрения ТПС для Украины будут 6 месяцев. Скоро даты будут опубликованы онлайн на сайте USCIS.

2) Some TPS applications will be denied. The reasons for denial are inadmissibility grounds, criminal, frivolous asylum application (it is important!), reinstatement of a prior deportation order, etc. Некоторые заявления на ТПС получат отказ. Например, если у вас открыто решение по депортации, вы подавали фривольное заявление на полит убежище в прошлом, у вас есть судимости и другие основания для признания вас невъездным в США. Проконсультируйтесь с адвокатом.

3) Application for TPS can be filed online. However, if you are requesting a fee waiver, currently, it can be only filed by mail. However, USCIS is working on making a Fee Waiver request available for online filing soon. Заявление на ТПС может быть подано как онлайн так и по почте. Если вы хотите подать бесплатно - только по почте. USCIS планируют скоро поменять правила - и разрешить подачу бесплатно онлайн (подать заявление на fee waiver).

4) Be careful preparing your application and what documents you are submitting with your application.
Внимательно готовьте свое заявление и документы для подачи.

5) Avoid immigration scams. Consult licensed attorneys, not notarios or someone says that they are a "paralegal" or "immigration consultant". USCIS sees a lot of fraudulent activity.
Избегайте иммиграционного мошенничества. Многие нотариусы, паралигалы и так называемые "иммиграционные консультанты" на самом деле не являются адвокатами, не имеют права давать юридический совет, но занимаются иммиграционными услугами. Обращайтесь за помощью к адвокату. USCIS видит много нарушений и мошенничества по делам ТПС.

6) If your application is pending too long or you didn't receive a Receipt Notice, form I-797, they might be investigating your case more closely. Consult an attorney. Если ваше заявление слишком долго ждет решения или вы даже не получили письмо с номером дела, возможно какие-то проблемы именно с вашим заявлением, и оно требует больше времени. Проконсультируйтесь с адвокатом.

7) You can travel to Ukraine and return back to the USA if you have an advance parole (if TPS is pending) or travel authorization (if TPS is granted). Вы можете путешествовать в Украину и обратно в США, если у вас есть travel document. А именно, advance parole (если ТПС все еще на рассмотрении) или travel authorization (если ТПС уже утвержден). Помните, что это требует особого заявления, госпошлины и времени для получения.

8) If you applied for TPS online and made a mistake that you noticed too late, there is a way to correct it through your online account.
Если вы сделали ошибки в своем заявлении онлайн, то есть способы их исправить через ваш аккаунт онлайн.

9) YES, you can have another valid Non-immigrant status while in TPS. However, you must maintain that status. There are rules to follow. Да, вы можете одновременно с ТПС поддерживать другой неиммиграционный статус. Помните, что важно не нарушать это второй статус, чтобы его не потерять (например, студенческий).

10) If you left Ukraine in a hurry and do not have some important documents, there is a way to submit "secondary evidence", and if accepted, it could be used instead of the missing documents from Ukraine.
Если вы оставили на Украине какие-то важные документы и у вас их нет с собой, их можно заменить другими документами. Проконсультируйтесь с адвокатом.

11) In some instances, people without Ukrainian citizenship could be granted TPS. В некоторых ситуациях человек не являющийся гражданином Украины может получить статус ТПС для Украины. Это узкие исключения.

12) TPS is issued individually to each applicant (to parents and children separately). You need to submit an application for each family member. There is no "derivative" TPS status. Статус ТПС это не семейный статус. Он не выдается на всю семью. Каждый должен подать индивидуальное заявление, включая детей. Кому-то могут отказать, не взирая на родственные связи, если они не соответствуют требованиям ТПС.

Для консультации с адвокатом, пишите по адресу.[email protected]  ​

Information in Russian: how to apply for adjustment of status in the U.S. Brief overview, including recent changes, effective October 1st and November 19th, 2018.

Информация по русски о том, как подать заявление на грин карту, разрешение на работу и на поездки за границу, не выезжая из США.

(1) Первое видео - информация о грин-карте - краткий обзор с учетом недавних изменений в законе:
ВИДЕО О ГРИН-КАРТЕ

​
(2) Второе видео - продолжение о разрешении на работу и на поездки - как избежать ошибок, отказа или передачи дела на депортации, после новых изменений, которые вступили в силу с 1 октября и 19 ноября 2018:
ПРОДОЛЖЕНИЕ О РАЗРЕШЕНИИ НА РАБОТУ И ПОЕЗДКИ.

​

On June 28, 2018, USCIS published Policy Memorandum entitled “Updated Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Deportable Aliens.” 

Starting October 1, 2018, USCIS started issuing NTA (referrals for deportation) in some cases where they denied a I-485 or I-539 application and the applicant is out-of-status.

Now, USCIS is expanding its right to issue a NTA to other applications as well. It will result in more cases being referred for deportation (removal) to Immigration Court.

Beginning November 19, 2018, USCIS will apply the memorandum to the following denied applications and petitions:

I-914/I-914A, Application for T Nonimmigrant Status
I-918/I-918A, Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status
I-360, Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er), and
I-360 VAWA Special Immigrant (Violence Against Women Act self-petitions) and 
I-360 Special Immigrant Juvenile Status petitions)
I-730, Refugee/Asylee Relative Petitions when the beneficiary is present in the US
I-929, Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant
I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status (with the underlying form types listed above).

U, T, VAWA, SIJS are humanitarian applications. Previously, a denial usually didn't result in deportation. This policy changes on November 19, 2018.

Read here.

On September 10, 2018, USCIS changed the filing location for Form I-751, Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, to Chicago lockbox address.

This petition must be filed by all conditional residents within the 90-day window before expiration of their conditional green card. Not filing the petition or not filing it during the required 90-day period can result in revocation of the lawful permanent status and can lead to deportation.

I-751 petition was previously filed at the California and Vermont Service Centers. Now, petitioners must send Form I-751 to a USCIS Lockbox facility. However, the California, Nebraska, Vermont, and Texas Service Centers will be the adjudicating offices. When filing at a Lockbox facility, petitioners have the option to pay the fee with a money order, personal check, cashier’s check, or credit card. 

The USCIS plans to establish an office in Los Angeles, California to focus on denaturalization. The office will take away U.S. citizenship from certain naturalized American citizens.

USCIS will look for cases where it believes a person obtained U.S. citizenship by error, fraud, mistake , using false name or identity - and will refer potential denaturalization cases to the US Department of Justice.

The USCIS couldn't assure compliance with the law because old paper-based records containing fingerprint information from the FBI and DHS can’t be searched electronically. All old paper-only records need to be digitized bfore they can be searched electronically.

In 2008, USCIS identified 206 people who used different names or other biographical information to gain US citizenship or other immigration benefits. This was possible because ICE did not consistently add digital fingerprint records of immigrants whom agents encountered until 2010.

On September 18, 2016, the DHS Office of the Inspector General issued a report entitled Potentially Ineligible Individuals Have Been Granted U.S. Citizenship Because of Incomplete Fingerprint Records.

The report found that that "USCIS granted U.S. citizenship to at least 858 individuals ordered deported or removed under another identity when, during the naturalization process, their digital fingerprint records were not available."Overall, the report found that fingerprint records were missing from hundreds of thousands of cases.

In June 2018, USCIS Director L. Francis Cissna told in an interview that USCIS is hiring several dozen lawyers and immigration officers to review cases of immigrants who were ordered deported and are suspected of using fake identities to later get green cards and citizenship through naturalization.Cissna said the cases would be referred to the U.S. Department of Justice, whose attorneys could then seek to remove the immigrants' citizenship in civil court proceedings. In some cases, government attorneys could bring criminal charges related to fraud.

Until now, the agency has pursued cases as they arose but not through a coordinated effort. It is expected that USCIS new denaturalization office Los Angeles will be running by next year but investigating and referring cases for prosecution will likely take longer.

More about denaturalization effort here.

On June 28, 2018, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued updated guidance that aligns its policy for issuing Form I-862, Notice to Appear, with the immigration enforcement priorities of the Department of Homeland Security.
​
A Notice to Appear (NTA) is a document given to a foreign national that instructs them to appear before an immigration judge on a certain date.

The issuance of an NTA commences removal proceedings against the foreign national. Under the new guidance, USCIS officers will now issue an NTA for a wider range of cases where the individual is removable and there is evidence of fraud, criminal activity, or where an applicant is denied an immigration benefit and is unlawfully present in the United States.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and requestors are exempted from this updated guidance when: (1) processing an initial or renewal DACA request or DACA-related benefit request; or (2) processing a DACA recipient for possible termination of DACA. As explained in the concurrently issued DACA-specific guidance, USCIS will continue to apply the 2011 NTA guidance to these cases. USCIS will also continue to follow the existing DACA information-sharing policy regarding any information provided by a DACA requestor in a DACA request or DACA-related benefit request.

USCIS, along with ICE and CBP, has legal authority under current immigration laws to issue NTAs. New USCIS Policy Memorandum updates the guidelines USCIS officers use to determine when to refer a case to ICE or to issue an NTA.

​The revised policy generally requires USCIS to issue an NTA in the following categories of cases in which the individual is removable:

• Cases where fraud or misrepresentation is substantiated, and/or where an applicant abused any program related to the receipt of public benefits. USCIS will issue an NTA even if the case is denied for reasons other than fraud.
• Criminal cases where an applicant is convicted of or charged with a criminal offense, or has committed acts that are chargeable as a criminal offense, even if the criminal conduct was not the basis for the denial or the ground of removability. USCIS may refer cases involving serious criminal activity to ICE before adjudication of an immigration benefit request pending before USCIS without issuing an NTA.
• Cases in which USCIS denies a Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, on good moral character grounds because of a criminal offense.
• Cases in which, upon the denial of an application or petition, an applicant is unlawfully present in the United States.

The revised policy does not change the USCIS policy for issuing an NTA in the following categories:

• Cases involving national security concerns;
• Cases where issuing an NTA is required by statute or regulation;
• Temporary Protected Status (TPS) cases, except where, after applying TPS regulatory provisions, a TPS denial or withdrawal results in an individual having no other lawful immigration status;
• DACA recipients and requestors when: (1) processing an initial or renewal DACA request or DACA-related benefit request; or (2) processing a DACA recipient for possible termination of DACA.

Under separate policy guidance issued concurrently, USCIS officers will continue to apply PM 602-0050, Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Removable Aliens, dated November 7, 2011, to the issuance of NTAs and Referrals to ICE for DACA recipients and requestors.

New memo 1 ,general NTAs, and memo 2, DACA NTAs (both issued on June 28, 2018).

Under new June 28 2018 USCIS policy memo, USCIS will issue a Notice to Appear or NTA on its own initiative without referral to ICE, and place individuals in removal or deportation proceedings in immigration court upon denial of an application, if a person is deemed removable on the date of denial.

It will affect many people on H-1B work visa, their spouses, foreign students on F-1 student visa. This new policy will further backlog our immigration courts, and can result in more people becoming inadmissible and requiring waivers if applying for a visa at the U.S. embassy or consulate.

Briefly in Russian:

В соответствии с новыми правилами, опубликованными USCIS 28 июня 2018, Иммиграционная служба США будет передавать дела в иммиграционный суд и выдавать повестки в суд сами, без участия иммиграционной полиции ICE. Такие повестки в суд на депортацию будут выдаваться после отказа в заявлении поданном в USCIS, если заявитель потерял легальный статус на момент получения отказа. Ожидается, что суды станут еще более перегружены, и многие иностранные студенты F-1 student visa, и люди на рабочих визах H-1B получат повестки на депортацию, что ранее было крайне редко. 

#USCIS #ICE #NTA #NoticetoAppear #immigration #immigrant #immigrationcourt #deportation #removal

On April 06, 2018, in Matter of Jose MARQUEZ CONDE,  BIA reaffirmed our holding in Matter of Pickering and reiterated that we interpret the definition of a “conviction” to include convictions that have been vacated as a form of post-conviction relief—for example, for rehabilitative purposes—and we will continue to give them effect in immigration proceedings.

However, we consider convictions that have been vacated based on procedural and substantive defects in the underlying criminal proceeding as no longer valid for immigration purposes.

In addition, to promote national uniformity in the application of the immigration laws, BIA will now apply Matter of Pickering, which we have applied in every circuit except for the Fifth Circuit, on a nationwide basis. In this regard, BIA modified Pickering insofar as it exempts the application of its holding in cases arising in the Fifth Circuit. See Matter of Pickering, 23 I&N Dec. at 624 n.2.

BIA decision.

On Friday, June 23, 2017, in Jae Lee v United States the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of an immigrant, a lawful permanent resident for over 30 years, whose lawyer (criminal defense attorney) falsely told him that pleading guilty to a drug distribution charge in a criminal case would not lead to his deportation. 

The court ruled that attorney's incompetence and ineffective assistance of counsel will give an immigrant another chance to reopen his criminal case.

Two justices dissented: the evidence in criminal case was exceptionally strong. The police had found large quantities of drugs (ecstasy) at his home, the defendant was preparing to distribute these drugs at his restaurant, and prosecutors were prepared to present a witness ready to testify. 

“In the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt and in the absence of a bona fide defense, a reasonable court or jury applying the law to the facts of this case would find the defendant guilty,” Justice Thomas wrote. “There is no reasonable probability of any other verdict.”

“A defendant in petitioner’s shoes, therefore, would have suffered the same deportation consequences regardless of whether he accepted a plea or went to trial,” he wrote. “He is thus plainly better off for having accepted his plea: Had he gone to trial, he not only would have faced the same deportation consequences, he also likely would have received a higher prison sentence.”

Read more here.

Read the court decision here.

Briefly in Russian:

23 июня 2017 Верховный Суд США опубликовал решение по делу иммигранта, постоянного жителя США более 30 лет, родом из Южной Кореи, который был обвинен в попытке распространения и прожажи огромного количества наркотических веществ (экстази) в своем ресторане. Так как иммигрант получил неверный совет от своего защитника в уголовном деле, который ему сказал "ты был постоянным жителем США более 30 лет, никто тебя не депортирует, признавай свою вину и получишь меньше лет в тюрьме". В результате признания своей вины по делу о наркотиках иммигрант был направлен на депортацию.

По решению Верховного Суда, уголовное дело против иммигранта будет открыто опять, и ему будет предоставлена возможность доказать свою невиновность в суде.

Двое судей выразили несогласие с мнением большинства, объяснив это тем, что доказательства и свидетельские показания по делу были настолько серьезные, что у иммигранта просто не было никаких шансов выиграть свое дело в суде присяжных, и приговор возможно был бы намного более серьезный, если бы он не признал свою вину и пошел с суд.

​Решение суда тут.

​

​Expedited removal is a procedure that allows a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official to summarily remove a noncitizen without a hearing before an immigration judge or review by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). See 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1).

Under the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), any individual who arrives at a port of entry in the United States and who is inadmissible under either 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(C) (misrepresentations and false claims to U.S. citizenship) or § 1182(a)(7) (lack of valid entry documents), is subject to expedited removal. See 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(1)(A)(i).

Additionally, the Secretary of DHS has the authority to apply expedited removal to any individual apprehended at a place other than a port of entry, who is inadmissible under either of those grounds, has not been admitted or paroled, and cannot show that he or she has been continuously present in the United States for two or more years. See 8 U.S.C. §§ 1225(b)(1)(A)(i), (iii).

A detailed 12-page Expedited Removal Guidance dated 02-17-2017 from National Immigration Project, ACLU, and American Immigration Council can be seen here. EXPEDITED REMOVAL: WHAT HAS CHANGED SINCE EXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 13767, BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IMPROVEMENTS (ISSUED ON JANUARY 25, 2017).

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the defendant had no Fifth Amendment due process right to hire counsel in the expedited removal proceeding under 8 U.S.C. § 1225, and that he cannot demonstrate prejudice from the failure to notify him of the right to withdraw his application for admission under 8 U.S.C. § 1225(a)(4).

As a result, the panel concluded that the defendant’s 2012 expedited removal could be used as a predicate for his illegal reentry conviction, and affirmed the denial of the defendant’s motion to dismiss the indictment and the subsequent judgment and sentence as well as the revocation of his supervised release. 

"We find that Peralta had no Fifth Amendment due process right to hire counsel in the expedited removal proceeding and that he was not prejudiced by the government’s failure to inform him of the possibility of withdrawal relief."

"When we refer to the “right to counsel” in this case, we mean the right of an alien to hire counsel at no expense to the government. We do not refer to a right to government-appointed counsel."

The decision was published on Feb 7, 2017 and can be found here.

In Russian:

Апелляционный суд 9-го федерального округа опубликовал решение 7 февраля 2017, где решил, что обвиняемый не имеет конституционного права на адвоката когда он находится в иммиграционном процессе "ускоренной депортации" из США, так называемая expedited removal.

Суд уточнил, что это решение распространяется на тех, кто находится под ускоренной депортацией, не пробыл в США более двух лет, и здесь имеется в виду право нанять адвоката за свой счет (так как в иммиграционном праве США не существует права на бесплатного защитника, как, например, в уголовном процессе). В иммиграционном суде США в процессе, который не является "ускоренной депортацией", у обвиняемого обычно есть конституционное право нанять адвоката за свой счет. Решение суда тут.

​What is a Sanctuary city or a county? Sanctuary cities or counties offer safe harbor for undocumented immigrants who might otherwise be deported by federal immigration law enforcement officials, and refuse to participate in federal efforts to deport city's or county's residents without a proper warrant.  Usually, police in a sanctuary city is not interested in immigration status of people arrested or detained, or refuse to honor ICE "detainer" (request "to hold" an alien for ICE without a proper warrant).
There are approximately 140 sanctuary jurisdictions -- cities and counties -- across the U.S., including at least 37 cities -- San Francisco, New York, Chicago, Seattle, Boston and Los Angeles, among others. 

You can view a Map of Sanctuary cities, counties and states here .

Новый указ президента от 25 января 2017, касающийся прекращения федерального финансирования городов и округов в США, которые не выдают нелегальных иммигрантов иммиграционной полиции без ордера - Sanctuary Cities and Counties. Read in Russian below.

On Wednesday, January 25, 2017, President Trump signed an executive order that would withhold federal grant money from sanctuary cities.

"Jurisdictions that willfully refuse to comply with federal immigration laws," the order says, “are not eligible to receive Federal grants, except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes by the attorney general or the secretary."

Many mayors, including Chicago, Bay Area's largest cities, Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose, and the City of Berkeley said they’d defy the order.

However, this Executive Order scared many city officials who are afraid to lose federal funding for their programs. A day after president signed the order, Miami-Dade County Mayor ordered officials to abandon a sanctuary city status, and ordered county jails to begin complying with federal immigration detention demands, becoming the first mayor to abandon the sanctuary status over the fear that his city would lose millions in federal funds. 

The Executive Order does not specify how much or what kind of funding would be or could be blocked, although White House press secretary said that the homeland security secretary would “look at funding streams that are going to those cities and look at how we can defund those streams.”

Just a bit of statistics. In 2016, a Justice Department inspector general’s report investigated how much in Justice Department federal grants some sanctuary jurisdictions receive (as of Mar. 2016). Over 60 percent of the funding goes to 10 jurisdictions identified by the report:

• Connecticut: $69,305,444
• California $132,409,635
• Orleans Parish, Louisiana: $4,737,964
• New York, New York: $60,091,942
• Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: $16,505,312
• Cook County, Illinois: $6,018,544
• Chicago, Illinois: $28,523,222
• Miami-Dade County, Florida: $10,778,815
• Milwaukee, Wisconsin: $7,539,572
• Clark County, Nevada: $6,257,951

As reported by The Hill, new Executive Order on sanctuary cities is unlikely to threaten their federal funding.

Sec. 9 of the Order clarifies that “sanctuary jurisdictions” are those that “willfully refuse to comply with 8 U.S.C. 1373.” The administration intends to withhold Federal grants from those jurisdictions, “except as deemed necessary for law enforcement purposes,” and from any that have a policy that “prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law."

In fact, the EO is extremely narrow in scope, and the many reports of cities like Boston and Los Angeles being under threat of losing millions of dollars are simply wrong.

8 U.S.C. 1373 bans state and local policies that prohibit the sharing of information with the federal government about the immigration status of an individual.

However, while there is no uniform set of actions being implemented by sanctuary cities, few, if any, have policies in place that actually conflict with this particular federal law. Instead, they generally do one of two things, or both:
1) Ban law enforcement from asking a person about their immigration status.
2) Prohibit keeping a person in jail beyond the time they’re required to be there upon receipt of a federal immigration detainer request.
Number one basically creates an end-run. This won’t trigger a withdrawal of federal funds under 8 U.S.C. 1373 because agencies can’t share information they don’t have.
Number two has already proven to be particularly troublesome for the federal government, and will likely continue to be so.

Sec. 7 of his order calls for the hiring of 10,000 additional ICE immigration officers.
It is important to keep in mind that under the anti-commandeering doctrine, the Supreme Court has long-held that the federal government cannot force state or local governments to implement or enforce federal laws or regulatory programs.

For example, in the 1842 case, Prigg v. Pennsylvania, the Court held that while the federal Fugitive Slave Act could not be physically impeded by states, they simply weren’t required to help the federal government capture runaway slaves and return them to bondage in the South.

And in the 2012 case, N.F.I.B v. Sebelius, the Court held that states can’t be forced to expand their Medicaid programs, even under the threat of losing federal funding, as the Affordable Care Act attempted to do.

Sec. 8 of new EO explains how the new administration intends to do so: the federal government intends to “empower State and local law enforcement agencies … to perform the functions of an immigration officer.” To achieve that goal the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is directed to work with governors and local officials to “enter into agreements” to perform federal immigration enforcement duties. The order also includes a big caveat, the agreements will be made “with the consent of State or local officials, as appropriate.”

In short, while Trump is certainly ramping up the pressure to fulfill campaign promises to take on “sanctuary cities,” should cities and states hold fast in their policies, they’ll likely come out on top in court, and on the ground. 

 Briefly in Russian:
​
Новый указ президента от 25 января 2017, касающийся прекращения федерального финансирования городов и округов в США, которые не выдают нелегальных иммигрантов иммиграционной полиции без ордера - Sanctuary Cities and Counties.

25 января 2017 новый президент подписал указ о прекращении федерального финансирования некоторых программ в тех городах и округах США, которые отказываются выдавать нелегальных иммигрантов полиции.

Что такое город или округ, кторый не выдает нелагальных иммигрантов федеральной иммиграционной полиции США? Как именно они это делают?

В США около 140 городов и округов, которые считаются sanctuary cities. Карта таких городов может быть найдена тут.  Например, Чикаго, Сан Франциско, Сиэттл, Бостон, Лос Анджелес.

По некоторым данным, даже округ Дуглас, в котором находится город Омаха, штат Небраска, а также Сарпи округ и Ланкастер округ все они в настоящий момент являются такими округами.

Но Мэр города Омаха и прокурор округа Ланкастер сразу же после выхода нового указа выступили с заявлением, что город Омаха не является sanctuary city, и поэтому новый указ президента на Омаху не распространяется, и в результате город не должен потерять никаких федеральных грантов.

Как города о округа поддерживают такой статус и зачем это нужно?

Полиция в таких городах считает, что их основная работа - это борьба с преступностью и обеспечение порядка. И в их обязанности не входит выяснение иммиграционного статуса (или отсутствие статуса/визы) у нарушителей закона (например, при обычной остановке водителя за нарушение правил). То есть полиция в таких городах просто этих вопросов не задает задержанным лицам.

Или же второй вариант, полиция и тюрьмы в таких городах и округах отказываются держать в заключении иностранца (за счет города) после того, как его срок задержания под стражей истек, и если иммиграционная полиция вместе с дитейнером (запросом "подержать этого гражданина под стражей подольше для ICE") не получила официальный ордер на арест и задержание.

Это конституционная норма, что отдельные штаты не могут устанавливать свои иммиграционные законы (это прерогатива федерального правительства), и как следствие, во многих случаях штаты и города не обязаны помогать федеральному правительству с депортацией иммигрантов (так как это дело федеральных органов власти и полиции).

Суть нового указа президента заключается в том, что хотя федеральное правительство США не имеет право заставить отдельные штаты помогать им в области иммиграции и депортации, НО они пытаются принудить города и штаты к сотрудничеству, путем угрозы удержания федерального финансирования. ​

AAO issued a decision in a case involving grant of U visa, I-918 approval, where a U visa applicant had a previous deportation or removal order reinstated after second illegal entry.

In the new case decided on 01-12-2017, AAO held that once USCIS grants U nonimmigrant status to an individual, any prior or reinstated exclusion, deportation, or removal order is CANCELLED by operation of law. 8 C.F.R. § 214.14(c)(5)(i ).

Accordingly, it is not proper to subsequently revoke U nonimmigrant status based on a reinstated order that was issued prior to the approval of the U petition.

See full text of the decision here.

Briefly in Russian:

12 января 2017 Офис Административных апелляций по иммиграционным делам США вынес решение по делу выдачи визы для жертвы преступления, U виза, которая также имела ордер о депортации, и нелегально въехала в США после депортации, из-за чего старый ордер о депортации был восстановлен.

​ААО принял решение, что если иммиграционная служба США утвердила визу U для жертвы преступления, то все предыдушие ордеры о депортации автоматически аннулируются, и она не может быть депортирована из США.

Текст судебного решения тут.
​

A an adult Korean adoptee who is awaiting deportation from an immigration detention center in Washington State because he lacks American citizenship, even though he has lived in the United States since he was 3 years old.

Last month, an immigration court denied his final request to stay in the United States.

Officials at South Korea’s Ministry say they know of at least five adoptees who were deported back from the United States. But advocates for Korean adoptees say there may be more than twice as many, some undocumented.
Tossed back to a country they had left decades ago, these adoptees were once again foreigners struggling to adapt to an unfamiliar culture and language.

This can happen to a person who was adopted from a foreign country without following a proper procedure for applying for legal document, a proof his or her US citizenship. Sometimes people don't even realize the seriousness of their situation and lack of legal status in the United States until it's too late.

​Read more here. 

Post-Election DACA update and resources provided by ILRC.

November 10, 2016
 

• President-elect Donald Trump pledged to end DACA immigration program when he becomes President. He will be inaugurated on January 20, 2017. Until that time, DACA will remain in place and USCIS will continue to process both initial and renewal DACA requests. 

The risk. Those who receive or apply for DACA will not necessarily be targeted for deportation. Administrative programs like this have never been used for wholesale deportation in the past. It would be extremely costly for the government to try to deport all 700K+ DACA recipients. However, we do not really know what to expect. Anything is possible.
 
Initial DACA applications. For those who have not yet applied for DACA, the processing of those applications is taking long enough now that they would likely not be adjudicated until after January 2017, and it is possible the DACA program will not exist by then. Therefore, at this point potential applicants’ efforts to assemble an initial DACA application and pay the filing fees (which go up in December 2016) may result in no benefit and expose them to DHS.
 
DACA renewals. It is unknown whether the next Administration will terminate existing DACA grants or instead not allow DACA recipients to renew. Those who have already received DACA are known by the government. Therefore, renewing DACA does not carry a new risk. In fact, renewing DACA may mean a DACA recipient can have a work permit until it expires one to two years into the next Administration. One risk, however, is again that the renewal might not be adjudicated before Trump becomes President, and the effort and money to renew will be for nothing. People who file to renew soon may be successful, as DACA renewals are currently being processed in 8 weeks with USCIS' upgraded system. The cost may be offset by loans and other funding available through Mission Asset Fund, the Mexican Consulate, some DACA collaboratives and/or other programs.
 
Advance parole. At this point, advance parole may be a little bit harder to get, because processing time is three months or more, which would put approvals (even if filed today) and subsequent travel in February 2017. Emergency advance parole requests, however, may still be useful in helping people travel and subsequently adjust status under 245(a). 
 

•  What the Future Holds

 

• Based on Trump’s campaign rhetoric and the new composition of Congress, we do not expect a comprehensive immigration reform that includes legalization to be introduced in the coming years.

 

• We do not expect expanded DACA or DAPA to make it through the courts.

 
It is possible that some states will try to introduce additional state legislation creating benefits and some protections for immigrants like California has done. Some other states may introduce legislation that increases immigration enforcement at the local level.
 

• What Immigrants Can Do Now

 
People should go to a legal services provider to be screened for any possible immigration options other than DACA for which they may already be eligible.
 
The ILRC has a comprehensive client intake form to assist practitioners in screening. It can be found online at https://www.ilrc.org/screening-immigration-relief-client-intake-form-and-notes.
 
The Immigration Advocates Network maintains a national directory of more than 950 free or low-cost nonprofit immigration legal services providers in all 50 states. It can be found online at https://www.immigrationlawhelp.org.
 
Community members should be warned of fraudulent service provider schemes and educated about how to seek competent immigration help. The ILRC has created community education flyers about this available in English and Spanish available online at https://www.ilrc.org/anti-fraud-flyers.
 

• People should know their rights when in contact with an immigration agency.

 
The ILRC has created Red Cards to help both citizens and noncitizens defend themselves against constitutional violations during ICE raids. These cards provide citizens and noncitizens with information about how to assert their constitution rights and an explanation for ICE agents that the individuals are indeed asserting their constitutional rights. Go https://www.ilrc.org/red-cards for more information and contact us at[email protected] to order.
 

• People should continue to avoid negative interaction with law enforcement. Something like a DUI or conviction related to drugs can have irreversible negative immigration consequences.

 

• If filing to renew DACA, applicants need to be aware that the filing fee increases to $495 on December 23, 2016.

 
Information provided by ILRC.
 

Putro v. Lynch, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decided this case on July 07, 2016. This case clarified application of a joint filing exemption for an alien seeking to obtain unconditional lawful permanent resident status as a result of her marriage to a U.S. citizen, when applying as a widow after the death of her/his US citizen husband (USCIS Petition I-751).

Vera Putro, a citizen of Latvia, married a U.S. citizen in 2004 and based on that marriage gained conditional permanent residency. Her residency did not become unconditional, however, because her husband passed away before they could petition jointly to remove the conditions. Putro petitioned on her own to have the conditions removed. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services construed the petition as a request for a discretionary waiver of the joint-petition requirement, denied the waiver, and ordered Putro removed.

Decision: The Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit decided that in fact, Putro did not need a waiver because her husband’s death during the conditional period exempted her from the joint-filing requirement. In mistakenly evaluating her petition as a request for a waiver, the agency erroneously placed on Putro the burden of proving that the marriage was bona fide.

The Court of Appeals granted petition and remanded the case to Immigration Judge for determination under the proper standard. 

Finally, after 8 years the petitioner might have her petition for unconditional permanent resident status approved (it's not approved yet, merely was remanded for another review and decision following the correct standard of proof by the same IJ immigration judge). When the I751 is approved, she will become eligible to apply for USA citizenship as well (because it's been over five years since the grant of her conditional residence in 2006).

********************************
To read in Russian - please scroll down. По-русски смотрите внизу страницы.
*******************************

Facts: Ms. Putro first entered the U.S. on a 4-month, foreign exchange student visa in 1999 and overstayed. In November 2004 she married Michael Zalesky, a U.S. citizen. Putro was granted conditional legal permanent residence (“LPR”) status as the spouse of a U.S. citizen in July 2006, see 8 U.S.C. § 1186a(1); 8 C.F.R. § 216.1. Four months later, in November, Zalesky died. Zalesky’s untimely death complicated Putro’s immigration status. To gain unconditional LPR status, Putro and Zalesky had to jointly petition the agency for removal of the conditions within the 90-day period before the second anniversary of her obtaining conditional permanent residency (i.e., between mid-April and mid-July of 2008). See 8 U.S.C. § 1186(c)(1)(A), (d)(2); 8 C.F.R. § 216.4(a)(1). Of course filing a joint petition was no longer possible, so in June 2008 Putro filed a Form I-751 Petition to Remove Conditions on Residence, checking the box specifying that she sought a waiver of the joint-filing requirement because her spouse had died.

USCIS had denied her I-751 petition filed as a waiver for failure to prove a good faith marriage.

She reapplied in Immigration court removal proceedings, and was denied again. The IJ immigration judge denied Putro’s application for the waiver of the joint-filing requirement and concluded that she was removable. The IJ found that Putro had failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she and Zalesky had a bona fide marriage. Her testimony and that of her witnesses, he said, was “unpersuasive.” The government, in contrast, had presented “reliable” evidence that family members and Armstrong had told investigators that the marriage was a fraud.

Putro appealed to the Board of Immigration Appeals, but it upheld the IJ’s ruling and dismissed her appeal.

On petition for review, Putro argued that the IJ had misapplied the standard of proof, and at oral argument we ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefing on how this case is affected by the decision in Matter of Rose, and particularly the portion of the decision in which the Board states:
[T]he death of a petitioning spouse during the 2-year conditional period excuses the general requirement that a petition to remove the conditional basis of an alien spouse’s status must be “joint.” Thus, a separate waiver under section 216(c)(4) of the Act is not required if the surviving spouse timely files an I-751 petition requesting removal of the conditional basis of his or her status and appears for a personal interview. 25 I. & N. Dec. 181, 182 (BIA 2010).
We agree with Putro that the IJ mishandled her petition to remove conditions on her status by construing it as a request for a waiver of the joint-filing requirement rather than recognizing that she qualified for an exemption of that requirement. Because Zalesky died within the two-year conditional period and Putro timely petitioned to remove her conditional status, she should have been excused from the joint-filing requirement. Matter of Rose, 25 I. & N. Dec. at 182.

This conclusion was applied in the only federal appellate decision (an unpublished one) to address the issue. See Zerrouk v. U.S. Att’y. Gen., 553 F. App’x. 957, 959 (11th Cir. 2014) (recognizing exemption of “joint” filing requirement for alien whose spouse dies within two-year conditional period, but concluding that substantial evidence supported determination that marriage was not bona fide).
Moreover, the discretionary waiver does not even apply to Putro, because that waiver requires that the marriage be “terminated (other than through the death of the spouse).” 8 U.S.C. § 1186(c)(4)(B). That requires divorce or annulment, see Memorandum from Donald Neufeld, Acting Assoc. Director, USCIS, to Directors, I-751 Filed Prior to Termination of Marriage (Apr. 3, 2009). Though Putro separated from her husband before his death, they never divorced, and the marriage was terminated by his death.

The error was significant because it had the effect of shifting the burden of proof that Putro’s marriage to Zalesky was bona fide. Because the IJ thought that Putro needed a waiver, he placed the burden of proof on her and ultimately found that she failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she had a bona fide marriage. Had the burden of proof properly been applied, the government would have had to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the marriage was not bona fide. See Matter of Rose, 25 I. & N. Dec. at 185; 8 U.S.C. § 1186a(c)(3)(D); cf. Lara v. Lynch, 789 F.3d 800, 804 (7th Cir. 2015) (noncitizen applying for discretionary waiver of joint filing petition bears burden of proving that marriage at time of inception was bona fide). Moreover, unlike a grant of the waiver—which is discretionary—the agency “shall” remove the conditional basis of the petitioner’s status as long as he or she meets the petitioning requirements and the government cannot disprove that the marriage is bona fide. See 8 U.S.C. § 1186(a)(3)(B).

This case must be remanded to the agency so that the IJ can evaluate her petition under the proper standard of proof. See Matter of Rose, 25 I. & N. Dec., at 184–85. Accordingly, we GRANT the petition and REMAND the case for determination under the proper standard.

Read the text of the decision of the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals here. 
Or you can download file here.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2016/D07-07/C:14-2430:J:Williams:aut:T:fnOp:N:1788032:S:0

Вкратце по-русски:

Вера Путро, гражданка Латвии, приехала в США в 1999 году по летней программе по обмену студентов,  J1 summer work-travel program. Она осталась в США нелегально, и через много лет вышла замуж за американского гражданина. Ее первая условная грин карта была утверждена без особых проблем в 2006. Через 4 месяца после этого ее американский муж умер от передозировки наркотиков. В 2008 Вера подала петицию на постоянную грин карту сама, без участия мужа (так как он к тому времени уже не мог поставить свою подпись по причине своей смерти). По фактам дела не понятно, но скорее всего Вера не проконсультировалась со знающим адвокатом перед подачей петиции, и подавала петицию либо сама, либо при помощи кого-то, кто не является экспертом в этой области права.

В результате, Вера получила отказ от USCIS и ее дело передали на депортацию с иммиграционный суд. 

Судья также приняла решения отказать Вере в виде на жительстве (постоянной грин карте) и приказала ей выехать из США (депортация).

Вера подала аппеляцию в следующую инстанцию, и там тоже получила отказ и указание покинуть страну.

В конце концов через 8 лет после начала этой эпопеи (дело тянется с 2008 г), Аппеляционный Суд 7 Округа США принял решение в пользу Веры. Но это еще не конец пути. Суд передал ее дело на повторное рассмотрение в суд нижестоящей инстанции с указаниями пересмотреть дело еще раз, и принять решение на основании ПРАВИЛЬНОЙ ИНТЕРПРЕТАЦИИ ЗАКОНА. Как оказалось, все предыдущие суды просто напросто неверно трактовали закон и неправильно применяли закон к Вериной ситуации. Вот такая простая ошибка стоила человеку 8 лет ее жизни и многих тысях долларов, потраченных на адвокатов и судебные разбирательства.

В конце концов, если ее петицию утвердят (пока еще только передали на повторное рассмотрение), то Вера сможет сразу же подать заявление на американское гражданство (так как прошло более 5 лет), если она докажет, что соответствует всем требованиям закона о гражданстве.

​Текст судебного решения на английском тут: 

On November 20, 2014, the President announced a series of executive actions. However, not all of these initiatives have been implemented, and USCIS is not accepting any DAPA or expanded DACA applications at this time. 

Beware of anyone who offers to help you submit an application or a request for any of these actions before they are available. You could become a victim of an immigration scam. 

If you need legal advice on immigration matters, make sure that the person you rely on is an attorney who is authorized to give you legal advice. Only an attorney or an accredited representative working for a Board of Immigration Appeals-recognized organization can give you legal advice. An immigration attorney can be licensed in any state because immigration law is federal law. It's important to consult an experienced and knowledgeable attorney before submitting any immigration applications.

The Internet, newspapers, radio, community bulletin boards and local businesses storefronts are filled with advertisements offering immigration help. Not all of this information is from attorneys and accredited representatives. There is a lot of information that comes from organizations and individuals who are not authorized to give you legal advice, such as “notarios” and other unauthorized representatives. The wrong help can hurt. Here is some important information that can help you avoid common immigration scams.

Here are some examples of common immigration scams:

**Telephone Scams**.

Do not fall victim to telephone scammers posing as USCIS personnel or other government officials. In most instances, scammers will:

• request personal information (Social Security number, Passport number, or A-number);
• identify false problems with your immigration record; and
• ask for payment to correct the records.

If a scammer calls you, say “No, thank you” and hang up. These phone calls are being made by immigration scammers attempting to take your money and your credit card information. USCIS will not call you to ask for any form of payment over the phone. Don’t give payment over the phone to anyone who claims to be a USCIS official.

If you have been a victim of this telephone scam, please report it to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). Learn more about telephone scams and telephone scammers’ techniques by visiting Federal Trade Commission-Telemarketing-Scams. 

**"Notario Publico"**.

In many Latin American countries, the term “notario publico” (for “notary public”) stands for something very different than what it means in the United States. In many Spanish-speaking nations, “notarios” are powerful attorneys with special legal credentials. In the U.S., however, notary publics are people appointed by state governments to witness the signing of important documents and administer oaths. "Notarios publico,” are not authorized to provide you with any legal services related to immigration.

Please see the National Notary Association website "What is a Notary Public" for more information.

**Local Businesses who are not law firms and not attorneys or lawyers**.

Some businesses in your community “guarantee” they can get you benefits such as a:

• Visa
• Green Card
• Employment Authorization Document

These businesses sometimes charge you a higher fee to file the application than even a licensed attorney (but will tell you that attorneys charge more "for the same work"). They claim they can do this faster than if you applied directly with USCIS. These claims are false. 

**Dot-com websites - operated by non-attorneys or people not authorized to give legal advice**.

Some websites offering step-by-step guidance on completing a USCIS application or petition will claim to be affiliated with USCIS. Many of these websites are scammers or fraudsters, often taking money for blank forms or minimal assistance without attorney supervision.

USCIS has its own official website: www.uscis.gov with:

• Free downloadable forms
• Form Instructions
• Information on filing fees and processing times

Do not pay for blank USCIS forms either in person or over the Internet. You can download forms for free at www.uscis.gov.

Do not pay to a non-attorney (not a lawyer) for help with immigration paperwork, applications, affidavit. Oftentimes, they give you wrong advice and can potentially damage your chances of ever becoming a permanent resident (getting a green card).

**Green Card Lottery or DV Lottery scams**.

Once a year in fall, the Department of State (DOS) makes 50,000 diversity visas (DVs) available via random selection to persons meeting strict eligibility requirements and who come from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. During this time or often around the year, it is common for immigration scammers to advertise in emails or websites that reference either the:

• DV lottery
• Visa lottery
• Green Card lottery

These emails and websites often claim that they can make it easier to enter the annual Diversity Immigrant Visa Program. Some scammers even identify you as a DV lottery “winner” and ask for significant amount of money "helping get a visa". These emails and websites are fraudulent. 

The only way to apply for the DV lottery is through an official government application process (Department of State website, and only when it's open, during an application period which is usually in October-November only). DOS does not send emails to applicants. 

On or after May 1st, you can visit the Department of State website to verify if you are actually a winner in the DV lottery. 

If need help, consult a licensed attorney (not one of the "green card lottery" websites).

**INS doesn't exist. It's been replaced by DHS and USCIS**.

To this day, some local businesses, websites, "notarios"  and individuals make reference to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). This agency no longer exists! 

If someone refers to USCIS as "INS", it's a sign that they are not an attorney, but rather someone unqualified with little knowledge in immigration matters.

INS was dismantled on March 1, 2003, and most of its functions were transferred from the Department of Justice to three new components within the newly formed Department of Homeland Security. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is the component that grants immigration benefits. The other two components are U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

All official correspondence regarding your immigration case will come from USCIS. USCIS will communicate with you and your attorney by mail, by mailing you notices, approved work permit and green card through USPS (postal service).

If you need a legal assistance, we will be glad to help. Our contact information is here.

Read here. 

Obama administration’s immigration policy faces a shake-up next week—and the court’s ruling could reverberate in the 2016 presidential campaign.

At issue is whether it’s legal to essentially lock up women and children who have crossed the border illegally, part of the administration’s response to summer 2014 unaccompanied-minors crisis. 

Lawyers for some of these families sued the government, and last month, a U.S. District judge in Los Angeles issued a tentative ruling, a summary of which was obtained by Newsweek, stating that the administration policy violates a settlement in a 1997 immigration case, Flores v. Meese.

Judge gave the two sides 30 days to negotiate an agreement that would lead the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency to release the minors and their parents from the family detention centers where they are being held. Those 30 days run out on Sunday, May 24, 2015.

The judge issued a gag order, so it’s quite difficult to know whether or not there will be a real settlement by May 25, 2015. 

Obama’s detention and deportation of hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants remains a sore spot for immigrant rights and Latino activists, even after the president granted a reprieve, via executive order and under DACA program, to millions of young people who came to the United States as children and to those who have children who were born here and thus are American citizens (DAPA, which is not effective yet, pending another court case). 

The practice of holding thousands of women and their children in detention for many months—it’s just mothers and their kids in these detention facilities (in Texas and Pennsylvania), most of them fleeing dire circumstances in Central America—has prompted a particularly strong backlash.

Immigrant rights groups have been very critical of this practice.

Read more at Newsweek.