Update on Form I-134A

Release Date 01/28/2025

​Программа Ю4Ю для Украины временно приостановлена.
Если у вас есть возможность подать на ТПС, это остается лучший вариант для многих украинцев в США. 

Due to the Jan. 20, 2025 Executive Order, Securing Our Borders, USCIS is pausing acceptance of Form I-134A, Online Request to be a Supporter and Declaration of Financial Support, until we review all categorical parole processes as required by that order.

Read here.

On January 23, 2025, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a pause of the Uniting for Ukraine (U4U) Parole Program, a special program implemented after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that permits Ukrainians seeking temporary refuge to travel to and work in the United States.
The DHS directive halts the review and adjudication of both initial and renewal parole applications under the U4U program. While not officially terminated, the directive suggests that DHS will not accept new applications for initial parole periods or renewal (or “reparole”) applications for those seeking to extend their parole in the United States. During an undetermined review period, individuals outside the United States should not expect decisions on pending applications, and those currently in the United States are strongly encouraged to explore alternative options to maintain legal status and work authorization. 

The best policy at this time is to avoid International Travel: Foreign nationals with Advance Parole or similar travel authorizations are advised not to leave the United States. Due to heightened scrutiny at ports of entry, travelers risk being denied reentry and may face expedited removal proceedings. Those seeking reentry have reportedly been asked to voluntarily depart or risk detention. 

However, recently the CBP posted this update, advising travelers that the old form I-512, Advance Parole, are still acceptable documents for reentry to the United States.

​Please see here.  
​https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/2025-01/executive_order_on_securing_our_borders_20250122.pdf

Мы опубликовали видео про этут тут:

https://youtube.com/shorts/F0jxH2JbUcc?si=9XiLYtcS-LTEsJGY ​
​

Highlights of the New Executive Orders relating to immigration law and policies signed since January 2025.
​
National Emergency Declaration at the Southern Border
President Trump declared a national emergency to mobilize the U.S. military, expedite border wall construction, and bolster surveillance through drones and advanced technology. This measure aims to deter illegal crossings and improve border integrity and security.

Designation of Drug Cartels as Foreign Terrorist Organizations
The administration has classified drug cartels as “foreign terrorist organizations.” This designation will facilitate more robust measures against their operations and may influence broader immigration enforcement actions.

End of Humanitarian Parole Programs
The administration continues to affirm plans to terminate programs that had provided legal pathways for migrants from countries like Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, as well as similar programs for Afghans, Ukrainians, and other groups. This signals a shift away from temporary humanitarian admissions and toward stricter immigration controls.

Re-examination of Temporary Protected Status grants to ensure they “are appropriately limited in scope and made for only so long as may be necessary to fulfill the textual requirements of that statute”.

Changes to Asylum and Refugee Policies
The executive orders aim to end “catch and release” practices and significantly restrict asylum rights, reducing the ability of migrants to seek protection upon arrival. These measures may face legal challenges claiming they are inconsistent with existing U.S. and international law.
​
Additionally, the administration intends to suspend the refugee resettlement program for four months. The refugee resettlement program has, for several decades, allowed hundreds of thousands of people fleeing war and persecution to come to the United States. President Trump similarly suspended the refugee program at the beginning of his first term, and, after reinstating it, significantly reduced the number of refugees admitted annually.

Enhanced Interior Enforcement
Key actions include reinstating the “Remain in Mexico” policy, expanding the 287(g) program—which deputizes state and local officials as federal immigration enforcement agents—and issuing financial penalties to sanctuary cities that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities. Both actions reflect the Trump administration’s campaign promise to crack down on illegal immigration and carry out mass deportations.

A measure “ensuring that employment authorization is provided in a manner consistent with [existing employment authorization regulations], and that employment authorization is not provided to any unauthorized alien in the United States.”

A directive to “take all appropriate action. . .to encourage aliens unlawfully in the United States to voluntarily depart as soon as possible.”

Increased use of detention pending removal from the United States.

End Birthright Citizenship
One of the key announcements is the effort to end birthright citizenship. Birthright citizenship ensures that anyone born in the United States automatically becomes an American citizen. It is expected to face legal challenges.

The new Executive Order challenges this historical precedent, and seeks to limit citizenship to children of at least one U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident (green card holder), regardless of physical presence.
On January 20, 2025, Inauguration Day, President Trump signed an executive order entitled “Protecting the Meaning and Value of American Citizenship”, which interprets the language “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” in the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution to mean that U.S. citizenship does not extend to individuals born in the United States:
1. when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth,
2. or when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States at the time of said person’s birth was lawful but temporary (such as, but not limited to, visiting the United States under the auspices of the Visa Waiver Program or visiting on a student, work, or tourist visa) and the father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.
The Executive Order directs agencies not to “issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship” to individuals falling within these categories.

The Executive Order specifies that it applies “only to persons who are born within the United States after 30 days from the date of this order”, after February 19, 2025, and does not explain whether the U.S. citizenship of a child who has already been born to two non-U.S. citizen or LPR parents will continue to be recognized.
Based on the text of the EO, citizenship would also no longer be granted children born to individuals on temporary visas, including employment-based visas. The Executive Order is scheduled to take effect on February 19, 2025, however a legal challenge has already been filed. Other lawsuits are sure to follow, and the executive order may be blocked by federal courts. 

Visa applicants and employers can expect to see many of these policies implemented immediately, which may result in processing delays and even possible denials. The Executive Order also directs various agencies to -- within 60 days -- identify countries that may post a security risk and for which a suspension of admission may be warranted. This directive signals a potential return of policies similar to the travel ban that was implemented in 2017 against several countries. 

Florida’s Role in Supporting Federal Immigration Goals
Florida has proposed legislation designed to align Florida’s state policies with the Trump administration’s federal immigration priorities. These include:

• Maximum Participation in the 287(g) Program: Florida will mandate compliance from local officials, imposing penalties for non-compliance.
• State Crime for Illegal Entry: The legislation creates a state offense for illegal entry, coupled with a self-deportation mechanism.
• Unauthorized Alien Transport Program (UATP): Expansion of this program will facilitate the detention and deportation of unauthorized individuals.
• Repeal of In-State Tuition for Undocumented Students: This move underscores a stricter approach to benefits extended to unauthorized residents.
• Voter Registration Reforms: Measures will ensure identity verification and impose severe penalties for voter fraud.
• Restrictions on Financial Transfers: New rules will require identity verification for foreign remittance transfers, aiming to reduce potential misuse.

Implications and Challenges
These policies are expected to face legal challenges. Some of them can be declared invalid by the courts. 

On Monday, June 22, 2020, the Trump administration said that it was extending a ban on Immigrant Visas aka "green cards" issued outside the United States until December 31, 2020, and adding many nonimmigrant and work visas to the ban, including those used heavily by technology companies and multinational corporations (H-1B, L) and also H-2B, J-1.

The administration explained this ban a way to free up jobs in an economy reeling from the coronavirus. The ban is in effect since April 23, 2020. Original ban was for 60 days. New ban is valid until December 31, 2020.

The ban on new visas applies to H-1B visas, which are used by major American technology companies, and their immediate families, H-2B visas for nonagricultural seasonal workers, J-1 visas for exchange students and L-1 visas for managers of multinational corporations. There will be exemptions for food processing workers, which make up about 15% of H-2B visas.

The administration is proposing a new way of awarding H-1B visas, which are capped at 85,000 a year. The administration wants to award them by highest salary instead of by lottery.

Text of the June 22, 2020 Proclamation is here.   

.........................
Section 1.  Continuation of Proclamation 10014.  (a)  Section 4 of Proclamation 10014 is amended to read as follows:
“Sec. 4.  Termination.  This proclamation shall expire on December 31, 2020, and may be continued as necessary.  Within 30 days of June 24, 2020, and every 60 days thereafter while this proclamation is in effect, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Labor, recommend any modifications as may be necessary.”
(b)  This section shall be effective immediately.
Sec. 2.  Suspension and Limitation on Entry.  The entry into the United States of any alien seeking entry pursuant to any of the following nonimmigrant visas is hereby suspended and limited, subject to section 3 of this proclamation:
(a)  an H-1B or H-2B visa, and any alien accompanying or following to join such alien;
(b)  a J visa, to the extent the alien is participating in an intern, trainee, teacher, camp counselor, au pair, or summer work travel program, and any alien accompanying or following to join such alien; and
(c)  an L visa, and any alien accompanying or following to join such alien.
Sec. 3.  Scope of Suspension and Limitation on Entry.  (a)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 2 of this proclamation shall apply only to any alien who:
(i)    is outside the United States on the effective date of this proclamation;
(ii)   does not have a nonimmigrant visa that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation; and
(iii)  does not have an official travel document other than a visa (such as a transportation letter, an appropriate boarding foil, or an advance parole document) that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation or issued on any date thereafter that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission.
(b)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 2 of this proclamation shall not apply to:
(i)    any lawful permanent resident of the United States;
(ii)   any alien who is the spouse or child, as defined in section 101(b)(1) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1101(b)(1)), of a United States citizen;
(iii)  any alien seeking to enter the United States to provide temporary labor or services essential to the United States food supply chain; and
(iv)   any alien whose entry would be in the national interest as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.
..........


​Read here.

Here and here.

Question/Вопрос:

Здравствуйте! Мой муж иммигрировал в США в декабре 2019 (воссоединение с сыном). В марте 2020 муж подал на воссоединение со мной(женой), и также ,,прицепом" по моей петиции идет моя назамужняя дочь которой 19,5 лет. Официально мы женаты 2 года. Есть ли у нас шанс воссоединиться в свете последних событий, в связи с указом Трампа, могут ли отменить воссоединение с гринкардхолдером, если так, то что будет с теми, кто уже подал петицию І-130? Заранее спасибо за ответ.
​
Answer/Ответ:

Добрый день!
Я понимаю, что сын вашего мужа американский гражданин. Сын подал петицию на отца, и ваш муж иммигрировал в США в декабре 2019. После получения грин карты он подал одну I-130 петицию на вас, и вы считаете, что ваша дочь включена в эту петицию.
Вашему мужу стоит проконсультироваться с адвокатом по поводу петиции на вашу дочь.
Что касается вашего вопроса об Указе президента и временном приостановлении иммиграции в США, включая вашу визовую категорию.
Этот запрет временный сроком на 60 дней. Когда этот период истечет, он может быть продлен. В любом случае, поданные петиции продолжают рассматриваться USCIS. Запрет на выдачу виз относится к посольствам и консульствам США, и пока является временным.
Всего доброго!
Мой овет опубликован тут 

​ALERT: Effective February 24, 2020, USCIS will implement the Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds final rule, except in Illinois, where the rule remains enjoined by a federal court as of Jan 31, 2020. DHS has sought a stay of this injunction from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in light of the Supreme Court decision to stay the last nationwide injunctions. USCIS will provide additional guidance if the injunction in Illinois is lifted.

The final rule will apply only to applications and petitions postmarked (or if applicable, submitted electronically) on or after Feb. 24, 2020. For applications and petitions sent by commercial courier (such as UPS, FedEx, and DHL), the postmark date is the date reflected on the courier receipt.

When determining whether an alien is likely to become a public charge at any time in the future, DHS will NOT consider an alien’s application for, certification or approval to receive, or receipt of certain non-cash public benefits BEFORE Feb. 24, 2020. Similarly, when determining whether the public benefits condition applies to applications or petitions for extension of stay or change of status, USCIS will only consider public benefits received on or after Feb. 24, 2020.

USCIS will post updated forms and submission instructions to the USCIS website during the week of Feb. 3 to give applicants, petitioners, and others time to review updated procedures and adjust filing methods. After Feb. 24, except in Illinois, USCIS will reject prior editions of forms if the form is postmarked on or after Feb. 24, 2020. If USCIS receives an application or petition for benefits using an incorrect edition of the forms, the petitioner or alien will need to submit a new application or petition.

DHS remains enjoined from implementing the final rule in Illinois. If the injunction in Illinois is lifted, USCIS will provide additional public guidance.

https://www.uscis.gov/i-864

Public Charge Toolkit.
​

​"An attorney recently reported the following: at a Master Calendar hearing, an immigration judge advised that if on the Individual Hearing date, both the court and the ICE attorney do not believe the respondent is prima facie eligible for asylum based on the written submissions, the judge will deny asylum summarily without hearing testimony.  The judge stated that other immigration judges around the country were already entering such summary judgments, in light of recent decisions of the Attorney General.I have been telling reporters lately that no one decision or policy of the AG, the EOIR Director, or the BIA should be viewed in isolation.  Rather, all are pieces in a puzzle.  Back in March, in a very unusual decision, Jeff Sessions certified to himself a four-year-old BIA precedent decision while it was administratively closed (and therefore off-calendar) at the immigration judge level, and then vacated the decision for the most convoluted of reasons.  Matter of E-F-H-L-, had held that all asylum applicants had the right to a full hearing on their application without first having to establish prima facie eligibility for such relief.  It was pretty clear that Sessions wanted this requirement eliminated.
On January 4 of this year,  Sessions certified to himself the case of  Matter of Castro-Tum, in which he asked whether immigration judges and the BIA should continue to have the right to administratively close cases, a useful and common docket management tool.  On January 19, the BIA published its decision in Matter of W-Y-C- & H-O-B-, in which it required asylum applicants to clearly delineate their claimed particular social group before the immigration judge (an extremely complicated task beyond the ability of most unrepresented applicants), and stated that the BIA will not consider reformulations of the social group on appeal.  
On March 5, 2018, Sessions vacated Matter of E-F-H-L-.  Two days later, on March 7, Sessions certified to himself an immigration judge’s decision in Matter of A-B-, engaging in procedural irregularity in taking the case from the BIA before it could rule on the matter, and then completely transforming the issues presented in the case, suddenly challenging whether anyone fearing private criminal actors could qualify for asylum.
On March 22, Sessions certified to himself Matter of L-A-B-R- et al., to determine under what circumstances immigration judges may grant continuances to respondents in removal proceedings.  Although this decision is still pending, immigration judges are already having to defend their decisions to grant continuances to their supervisors at the instigation of the EOIR Director’s Office, which is tracking all IJ continuances. 
On March 30, EOIR issued a memo stating that immigration judges would be subjected to performance metrics, or quotas, requiring them to complete 700 cases per year, 95 percent at the first scheduled individual hearing, and further requiring that no more than 15 percent of their decisions be remanded.  On May 17, Sessions decided Castro-Tum in the negative, stripping judges of the ability to manage their own dockets by administratively closing worthy cases.
On June 11, Sessions decided Matter of A-B-, vacating the BIA’s 2014 decision recognizing the ability of victims of domestic violence to qualify for asylum as members of a particular social group.  In that decision, Sessions included headnote 4: “If an asylum application is fatally flawed in one respect, an immigration judge or the Board need not examine the remaining elements of the asylum claim.”  The case was intentionally issued on the first day of the Immigration Judges training conference, at which the need to complete more cases in less time was a repeatedly emphasized.
Within the past few months, the immigration judges have been warned that their livelihood will depend on their completing large numbers of cases, without the ability to grant continuances or administratively close cases.  They have had the need to hold a full asylum hearing stripped away, while at the same time, having pointed out to them several ways to quickly dispose of an asylum claim that until weeks ago, would have been clearly grantable under settled case law.
There has been much discussion lately of EOIR’s improper politicized hirings of immigration judges.  The above developments have created something of a Rorschach test for determining an immigration judge’s ideology.  
The judges that conclude from the above the best practice is to summarily deny asylum without testimony are exactly the type of judges the present administration wants on the bench.  They can find a “fatal flaw” in the claim - either in the formulation (or lack thereof) of the particular social group, or in the lack of preliminary documentation as to the persecutor’s motive, the government’s inability to protect, or the unreasonableness of internal relocation, and simply deny the right to a hearing.  It should be noted that these issues are often resolved by the detailed testimony offered at a full merits hearing, which is the purpose of holding such hearings in the first place.
On the other hand, more thoughtful, liberal judges will find that in light of the above developments, they must afford more time for asylum claims based on domestic violence, gang threats, or other claims involving non-governmental actors. And in doing so, they will find it extremely difficult to meet the completion quotas set out by the agency with Sessions’ blessing. The removal of Castro-Tum’s case from the docket of Judge Morley is clearly a warning that the agency does not wish for judges to behave as independent and impartial adjudicators, but rather to act in lockstep with the agency’s enforcement agenda.
There is another very significant issue: most asylum claims also apply for protection under Article III of the U.N. Convention Against Torture.  Unlike asylum, “CAT” relief is mandatory, and as it does not require a nexus to a protected ground, it is unaffected by the AG’s holding in A-B-.  So won’t those judges pondering summary dismissal still have to hold full hearings on CAT protection?  It would seem that a refusal to hold a full CAT hearing would result in a remand, if not from the BIA, than at the circuit court level."
Opinion by Jeffrey S. Chase, immigration attorney and former immigration judge you can read here.

On January 9, 2018, a federal judge in San Francisco, CA temporarily blocked the Trump administration from ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program that protects certain immigrants from deportation. The decision applies NATIONWIDE.
​
Judge said the Obama-era program must remain in place while litigation over Trump’s decision to end the program is pending. In a court ruling, Judge W. Alsup said the Department of Homeland Security's "decision to rescind DACA was based on a flawed legal premise."

Judge ordered USCIS to publish new DACA renewal instructions on their website, and start accepting applications.
​
As a result of this court ruling, DACA grantees can renew expired DACA, but can't file a new DACA.
(1) DACA recipients who failed to renew their status by the last year’s deadline can submit renewal applications. It is better to wait for the instructions from USCIS, to avoid any possible erroneous denial or rejection by a USCIS employees. 
(2) The decision does not, however, allow new applications to be submitted.

Read an advisory here.

In Russian:  

9 января 2018 федеральный судья вынес решение о том, что президент превысил свои полномочия, когда 5 сентября 2017 отменил иммиграционную программу ДАКА / DACA для молодежи, кого привезли в США в детстве и кто вырос в США, но не имеет ни грин карты, ни гражданства. 

Судья приказал Департаменту госбезопасности (DHS - USCIS) опубликовать инструкции и порядок подачи заявлений на продление ДАКА статуса и получение разрешения на работу через ДАКА. Судья приказал USCIS начать прием заявлений немедленно, и опубликовать новые инструкции. 

Лучше всего будет дождаться выхода официальных инструкций на вебсайте USCIS, скорее всего на следующей неделе, чтобы избежать ошибочного отказа. Хотя некоторые адвокаты советуют, что подавать заявление можно уже сейчас, так как судья временно приостановил действие указа президента в отношении DACA, и приказал USCIS игнорировать решение от отмене DACA как незаконное, и возобновить прием заявлений.

Что можно -- подать заявление на продление - DACA renewal.
Что нельзя -- подать новое заявление (new DACA application), или заявление на advance parole (travel document).

On Monday, December 4, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two orders staying lower courts’ (Maryland & Hawaii) preliminary injunctions of President's September 24, 2017 presidential proclamation or 3rd travel ban. 

Accordingly, President's most recent travel ban, so-called Muslim Ban 3, will go into effect while the appeals are pending.  The U.S. Supreme Court encouraged the appeals courts to quickly decide whether the most recent travel ban was lawful.

The September 24, 2017, Presidential Proclamation on Enhancing Vetting Capabilities & Processes for Detecting Attempted Entry Into the United States by Terrorists or Other Public-Safety Threats indefinitely blocks the entry for certain individuals from eight countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Chad, North Korea, Syria, Somalia, Venezuela and Yemen. 

Travel Restriction for Nationals of Eight Countries – Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Somalia, Venezuela, Syria, and Yemen

General Rules:

• Only applies to individuals who are (i) outside of the U.S. on the day the travel ban goes into effect, and (ii) who do not have a valid visa on the day travel ban goes into effect, and (iii) who have not obtained a waiver under Section 3(c) of the Proclamation
• Does not apply to:
  • Lawful permanent residents (green card holders);
  • Individuals admitted or paroled into the U.S. on or after the effective date;
  • Those with a document other than a visa that allows them to travel to the U.S., if the document is dated on or after the effective date;
  • Dual-nationals traveling on a passport from a non-designated country;
  • Individuals granted asylum;
  • Refugees already admitted to the U.S.; or
  • Individuals granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention against Torture

Previously-Impacted Countries – Restrictions Effective Immediately:

• Iran
  • Effective immediately, immigrant and nonimmigrant entry are suspended for Iranian nationals except for those with F, J, or M visas.
  • Those with F, J, or M visas will most likely be subject to “enhanced screening and vetting requirements.”
• Libya
  • Effective immediately, immigrants and nonimmigrants on business (B-1), tourist (B-2), business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas are suspended except those with a bona fide relationship to the U.S.
• Somalia
  • Effective immediately, immigrant visas are suspended for Somali nationals
  • Non-immigrant visas are permitted, subjected to heightened screening.
  • The bona fide relationship exemption ends October 18, 2017.
• Syria
  • Effective immediately, immigrant and nonimmigrant entry is suspended for Syrian nationals
• Sudan
  • Sudan was removed from the list of restricted countries in MB-4.
  • Sudanese visa holders who were impacted by earlier Muslim Bans should now be able to reapply for visa.
• Yemen
  • Effective immediately, all immigrant visas and nonimmigrant business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas are suspended,

​Newly Impacted Countries (Added):

• Chad
  • All immigrant visas and with nonimmigrant business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas are suspended from entering the U.S.
• North Korea
  • All immigrant and nonimmigrant visa holders are suspended from entering the U.S.
• Venezuela
  • The entry of officials of government agencies of Venezuela involved in screening and vetting procedures and their immediate family members, as nonimmigrants on business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas, is suspended. Additionally, nationals of Venezuela who are visa holders are subject to additional measures.
  • Per Section 3(b)(v) of MB-4, certain Venezuelans traveling on diplomatic visas are not affected by this order.

Waivers:

If you are from one of the countries covered by the travel ban and do not yet have a valid U.S. visa, you cannot obtain a visa at this time unless you qualify for a waiver.  Consular officers may, on a case-by-case and discretionary basis, grant a waiver to affected individuals for certain reasons. To obtain a waiver and a visa, the person seeking admission must prove:

• denying entry to the U.S. would cause the foreign national undue hardship;
• admission would not pose a threat to the national security or public safety of the United States; 
• entry would be in the U.S. national interest.

 
Travel Risks for People from Affected Countries with Valid Visas:

If you are from one of the impacted countries and hold a valid visa, you may be able to apply for admission to the United States. The newest travel ban states that no visas will be automatically revoked and that those with a valid visa are not covered by the travel ban. However, travel outside the United States at this time carries risk. 

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled to partially uphold President's third attempt on a travel ban, so called Muslim Ban or Travel Ban 3.0.

Ruling on the injunction issued by the District Court in Hawaii that temporarily blocked the enforcement of the new ban, the Ninth Circuit held that the travel ban could go into effect, except with regard to people with a “bona fide relationship” with close family or with an entity in the U.S., such as an employer or a university. This standard was borrowed from the Supreme Court’s June 2017 decision on a previous travel ban.

Individuals from six countries (Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, and Yemen) may be banned from entry, unless they have a bona fide relationship with a U.S. family member or entity.

The Ninth Circuit decided that in addition to parents, spouses, and children living in the U.S., bona fide relationships could extend to grandparents, grandchildren, cousins, aunts, uncles, and brothers- or sisters-in-law. Entity relationships must be “formal, documented, and formed in the ordinary course,” including universities, businesses, and other institutions.

The travel bans on North Korea and Venezuela were not included in the original suit brought before the Hawaii District Court. Travel of immigrants or nonimmigrants from North Korea and Venezuela remains suspended (all travel for North Korea and entry in tourist or business visitor status remains suspended for officials of certain Venezuelan government agencies and their immediate family members).

​The court ruling is here.

​

The Omaha City Council (Omaha, Nebraska) approved a resolution today, on October 17, 2017, urging the U.S. Congress to act swiftly to protect "Dreamers", students protected by DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program).

The vote was 5-0, with two council members not voting.
​
Nebraska Republican Congressman Don Bacon submitted a letter in support of the resolution, saying he is committed to protecting law-abiding DACA youth from deportation.

This is good news for Omaha area DACA protected young people whose protection is set to expire on March 6, 2018, six months after September 6, 2017 announcement by the White House of their rescission of DACA program.

Briefly in Russian:

Городской совет города Омаха штата Небраска единогласно проголосовал сегодня за то, чтобы ходатайствовать Конгресс США о восстановлении недавно отмененной программы DACA, которая предоставляла защиту от депортации, разрешение на работу, номер соцстрахования, возможность получить водительские права молодежи, которые называются "Мечтатели", Dreamers. Президент отменил эту программу 6 сентября 2017, и дата закрытия программы 6 марта 2018.

Это хорошие новости для молодежи в городе Омаха, у которых был или есть статус DACA.

#DACA #Dreamers #Nebraska #Omaha

Read here.

On October 5, 2017, California officially became a first sanctuary state in the nation.

California Governor signed into law nearly several immigration bills, which prohibits California employers from cooperating with federal immigration authorities in the absence of a judicial warrant or court order.

For example:

• Prohibits employers from voluntarily consenting to an immigration enforcement agent’s entering nonpublic areas of the workplace without a warrant;
• Prohibits employers from voluntarily consenting to an immigration enforcement agent’s accessing, reviewing or obtaining employment records without a subpoena or court order;
• Prohibits employers from reverifying the employment eligibility of a current employee at a time or in a manner not required by federal law; and
• Requires employers to provide notice to current employees of an inspection of I-9 forms and other employment records by an immigration agency within 72 hours of receiving the federal notice of inspection.

Penalties for failure to comply with the new law range from $2,000 to $10,000 per violation.

​AB 450 can be found here.

​On September 28, 2017, the USCIS Office of the Ombudsman hosted a teleconference call that offered more details about the new personal interview requirements for employment-based adjustment of status applicants.

USCIS confirmed that only cases filed before March 6, 2017 will be adjudicated by the USCIS Service Centers (not local offices) under prior procedures without requiring an interview.

The new interview requirement is being rolled out nationwide, with interviews starting on October 2, 2017 due to President's March 6th 2017 Executive Order.

Each family member, including children, will be asked to appear at a USCIS local office for an interview. 

USCIS indicated it might consider waiving appearances for children under age 14. Each applicant must appear for screening and questioning concerning the underlying immigrant petition (I-140 Petition), which  would have adjudicated prior to forwarding to the local offices for adjustment of status interviews.

USCIS said that adjudicating officers may still question the bona fides and validity of the underlying I-140 petition, even if approved, maintenance of lawful status in the U.S, job portability issues, in addition to newly implemented security features.

In Russian:

Как следует из Указа Президента от 6 марта 2017 г, USCIS Иммиграционная Служба США уже 2 октября 2017 начала назначать интервью на грин карту для тех категорий заявителей, которые ранее не вызывались на интервью, а именно, в области рабочей иммиграции (или иммиграции через работодателя).

В ходе телеконференции 28 сентября, сотрудники USCIS объяснили некоторые детали:

- заявления поданные ДО 6 марта 2017 будут утверждены БЕЗ интервью.
- заявлениа поданные ПОСЛЕ 6 марта 2017 будут требовать интервью.
- дети тоже будут приглашаться на интервью
- USCIS оставляет за собой право не вызывать на интервью детей младше 14 лет
- по новой процедуре петиция работодателя, I-140, будет утверждаться в Service Center, и только заявление на грин карту, I-485, будет рассматриваться офицером в местном офисе, НО этот офицер будет иметь право задавать вопросы по уже утвержденной петиции, в том числе, касающиеся таких моментов как предложение от работодателя о постоянном трудоустройстве, все предыдущие смены работодателя, поддержание легального статуса всеми членами семьи и отсутствие нарушений иммиграционного законодательства (например, работа без разрешения), а также новые требования к национальной безопасности.

​USCIS August 28th announcement.

​

On September 24, 2017, the White House issued a Presidential Proclamation which replaced expiring portions of the President's March 6, 2017 Executive Order, Travel Ban 2.0, and expanded the list of the banned countries to eight. 

The following eight countries are now subject to travel restrictions (travel ban): Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia.

There was no clear explanation why the U.S. ally in Africa, Chad, was added to the list of the banned countries. 

Iraq and Sudan were removed from the travel ban list, but the Proclamation Travel Ban recommends “additional scrutiny” for nationals of Iraq and Sudan.

This travel ban applies differently to citizens of different banned countries:

** Citizens of North Korea are barred from all types of immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States;

** Citizens of Chad are only barred from entering on immigrant visas and on non-immigrant business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas; and

** Citizens of Iran are barred in all immigrant and nonimmigrant categories except for student (F and M) and exchange visitor (J) visas. Therefore, it is expected that visa issuance and entry in categories not subject to the ban will continue uninterrupted.

The Proclamation Travel Ban goes into effect on different dates for different countries.  

For foreign nationals already subject to the Travel Ban 2.0 and who do not have a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the US, the restrictions in the Proclamation Travel Ban went into effect immediately on September 24, 2017. For all nationals of the recently added countries, travel ban will apply on October 18, 2017.

Effective October 18, 2017, the proclamation appears to get rid of the “bona fide relationship” protection implemented by the Supreme Court under its temporary ruling on the EO Travel Ban 2.0, which exempted travelers with certain qualifying family and employment relationships in the US. Most likely, this issue will be litigated again.

Contrary to the Travel Ban 2.0, the new Proclamation Travel Ban has no expiration date.  Government agencies will be presenting reports every 180 days, and the Travel Ban 3.0 can be revised based on the reports and recommendations.

Additional countries may be added in the future. 

Countries may be removed if they are recommended for removal by the DHS, in consultation with US Department of State and other relevant US agencies.

The new Proclamation Travel Ban 3.0 does not apply to certain categories of travelers:

• Lawful permanent residents..
• Travelers who already hold a valid US visa.
• Dual citizens of the designated (banned) countries who are traveling on the passport of a non-designated country.
• People already granted asylum in the US or admitted to the US in refugee status, and those already granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
• People traveling with a document other than a visa valid on the effective date (for example, an advance parole document) that permits them to travel to the USA .
• Holders of diplomatic visas, NATA visas, UN C-2 visas, G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas;

​A case-by-case waiver may be issued by consular and border officers when determined to be appropriate. The waiver grant guidance is expected to be released soon by the US Department of State. The waiver guidance will consider the US national interest and potential security risks for each individual, among other categories.

Full test of the Presidential Proclamation is here.

​

On September 5, 2017, on behalf of the President and current White House administration, the U.S. Attorney General formally announced the end by rescission of the 2012 immigration deferred action program known as Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA").

DACA did not confer any legal immigration status nor it was a path to the U.S. citizenship. DACA provided protection from deportation and work permits and advance parole/travel documents to approximately 800,000 young, undocumented immigrants brought to the U.S. as children from deportation and provided them with legal work authorization. his is disheartening to youth who have contributed so much both economically and culturally.
​
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") and USCIS will stop processing any initial DACA accepted at the USCIS office after September 5, 2017.

Any applications already accepted by this date will be processed. DHS/USCIS indicated that current beneficiaries of DACA will not be impacted before March 5, 2018, so "Congress can have time to deliver on appropriate legislative solutions."

DHS has also announced that it plans to continue to accept DACA renewal applications for any DACA beneficiary whose status expires between September 5, 2017 and March 5, 2018, so long as these applications are accepted by October 5, 2017. Any applications received after October 5 will be rejected. 

Note: if your DACA work permit expires after March 5th 2018, you will not be able to renew it for additional two years, as those who can apply to renew IF their work permit expires before March 5th 2018.

In addition, DACA recipients whose valid employment authorization document is lost, stolen or destroyed may still request a replacement through the normal process.

Important: USCIS will no longer adjudicate advance parole request associated with DACA, any applications for advance parole that are currently pending will be administratively closed and filing fees refunded.

US Citizenship and Immigration Services says that information provided in support of the application will not be proactively provided to Immigration and customs Enforcement (ICE) or to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) for the purpose of immigration enforcement proceedings, unless the requestor meets the criteria for the issuance of a Notice to Appear or a referral to ICE. However, a DHS spokesman stated that if Congress does not act, then DACA beneficiaries would be treated as any other person who is in the country illegally, and therefore, subject to deportation or removal.

Additionally, all of the information provided to the government by DACA applicants will remain in the DHS system.

DHS has provided a Frequency Asked Questions webpage .

Briefly in Russian:

5 сентября 2017 Генеральный прокурор США заявил об окончании федеральной программы ДАКА, которая вступила в силу в 2012 году во время предыдущей администрации. По этой программе около 800,000 молодых людей получили разрешение на работу, поездки за границу и временную защиту от депортации.

ДАКА заявления поданные до 5 сентября 2017 будут рассмотрены, и утверждены, если соответствуют требованиям программы.

Заявления на продление разрешения на работу, находящиеся на рассмотрении на 5 сентября 2017, также будут рассмотрены.

Заявления на продление разрешения на работу, которое истекает между 5 сентября 2017 и 5 марта 2018, будут приняты и рассмотрены, если заявление на продление получено в иммиграционной службе ДО 5 октября 2017. То есть остался только месяц!

Помните, что если ваше разрешение на работу истекает после 5 марта 2018, вы уже не сможете его продлить на два года, как те, у кого они истекает до 5 марта 2018.

Заявления на разрешение на поездки за границу (advance parole) рассматриваться и утверждаться не будет.

Правительство заявило, что информация о молодых людях, подавших заявление ДАКА, не будет передаваться в соответствующие органы на депортацию (пока), но в будущем, если Конгресс не примет нового закона о защите иммигрантской молодежи, иммиграционная служба будет рекомендовать их на депортацию, так же как и всех других категорий лиц, проживающих в США нелегально.

Вопросы и ответы можно почитать тут.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will begin conducting in-person "green card" interviews for new categories of the applicants, who were approved without an interview in the past.

This change complies with Executive Order 13780, “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States,” and is part of the strategy to improve the detection and prevention of fraud and enhance the integrity of the immigration system.
 
Effective October 1, 2017, USCIS will begin to phase-in interviews for the following:
 
• Adjustment of status applications based on employment, EB categories (Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status).
 
• Refugee/asylee relative petitions (Form I-730) for beneficiaries who are in the United States and are petitioning to join a principal asylee/refugee applicant.
 
Previously, applicants in these categories did not require an in-person interview with USCIS officers in order for their application for permanent residency to be adjudicated.

Beyond these categories, USCIS is planning an incremental expansion of interviews to other benefit types. 

As a practical matter, this new rule may result in severe backlogs now in the USCIS system, and "green card" interview wait times going up to over a year or more in some field offices. 

Read more here.

Briefly in Russian:

Начиная с 1 октября 2017, USCIS вводит интервью на грин карту по всем рабочим категориям, а также для родственников тех, кто получил статус политическое убежище или статус беженца, и находится в США.

Ранее эти категорий заявителей на интервью не вызывали.

Также USCIS намекает, не вдаваясь в детали, что в будущем они введут обязательные интервью и для других категорий дел (не только грин карты).

На практике это приведет к задержкам по рассмотрению заявлений на грин карты. Если на сегодняшний день в некоторых городах и штатах США ожидание интервью на грин карту занимает 8-12 месяцев, то эти сроки могут увеличится вдвое. 

SCIS Asylum Division Quarterly Stakeholder Meeting took place on Tuesday, February 7, 2017. 

Please note that the answers were provided before the second "Muslim Ban" or "Travel Ban" was signed.

You can find the Questions and Answers here.

 On March 06, 2017, President signed a new Executive Order replacing the previous EO. 

On Monday, March 06, 2017, the President signed a new "Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States" (to replace the previous EO, so called "Travel Ban" or "Muslim Ban" which was placed on hold by the courts). 

New executive order narrowed a scope of the travel ban to block only new applicants for visas from 6 countries (LIst of Six instead of List of Seven), and removed Iraq from its coverage.

The new order, which goes into effect one minute after midnight on March 16, 2017, prohibits entry into the United States for citizens of six countries—Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen—for 90 days for those who do not already hold a valid visa. Iraq was removed from the "List of Seven".

New visas will not be issued and expired visas will not be renewed for citizens from the six countries during the 90-day period.

DHS had clarified the new ban: "If you're in the United States on the effective date of this order, which is March 16 2017, it does not apply to you. If you have a valid visa on the effective date of this order, it does not apply to you."

Like its predecessor, the new order shuts down the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days, effectively halting the admission of new refugees into the United States for four months. But March 6th order no longer includes the January 27 2017 order’s permanent ban on Syrian refugee admissions. Syrian refugees resettlement is temporarily halted for 120 days (not permanently as it was in the previous EO).

The new executive order will not apply to anyone who already holds a green card or a valid U.S. visa or has been granted official refugee or asylum status. 

The new executive order restores visas that were revoked “as a result of” the previous order. 

Sec.12 (d): "Any individual whose visa was marked revoked or marked canceled as a result of Executive Order 13769 shall be entitled to a travel document confirming that the individual is permitted to travel to the United States and seek entry.  Any prior cancellation or revocation of a visa that was solely pursuant to Executive Order 13769 shall not be the basis of inadmissibility for any future determination about entry or admissibility."

And it removes Iraq from the list of targeted countries, creating a "List of Six" from the previous "List of Seven".

Moreover, the new order expands the government’s ability to issue “case-by-case waivers” to immigrants affected by the ban. The old ban allowed these waivers only when they were “in the national interest”. Under the new order, Customs and Border Protection agents, as well as consular officers, may grant a waiver to immigrants from the six targeted countries if they fall under a number of categories. 

Those waiver categories include:

- foreign students stranded outside the United States on the day the order is signed; 
- immigrants with “previously established significant contacts” with the U.S. who are outside the country when the order is signed; 
- foreign nationals with “significant business or professional obligations” in the U.S.; 
- foreign nationals “seeking to enter the United States to visit or reside with a close family member … who is a United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, or alien lawfully admitted on a valid nonimmigrant visa”; 
- children and those in need of “urgent medical care", or “someone whose entry is otherwise justified by the special circumstances of the case”; and
- immigrants who have previously served on behalf of the U.S. government (if they can prove their service).

The updated and revised executive order on immigration took into consideration many legal objections to its predecessor, and the court of appeals decision. However, the second revised EO is not immune to litigation. We will keep you posted.
​
#EO #executiveorder #travelban #muslimban

The answers below were provided to AILA on February 27, 2017 by the U.S. Department of State, in response to issues raised by the president's January 27th executive order, so called "Travel Ban", which resulted in numerous visa cancellations and revocations.

The first January 27th executive order was replaced by March 06th executive order. Some answers provided by the U.S. Department of State still stand because they addressed several important issues which arose during the previous executive order's travel ban enforcement. Some answers would have to be adjusted because of a new March 6th executive order.

To clarify visa revocation and cancellation matters, the DoS provided the following answers:
​
Q1: What happened to the passports of applicants who had been cleared for visa issuance and were awaiting the return of their passports at the time the January 27, 2017, Presidential Executive Order (EO) was signed? If passports were returned to the applicants without the visa, what is the process for reinstating the application and receiving the visa at this time?

Answer: If visa issuance had been authorized, but the passport and visa remained in the consular section, we would have expected the consular section to spoil the visa, deny the application, and call the applicant in to pick up the passport with any issued visa having been revoked. Visa denials under the Executive Order were final, but the applicant may reapply without prejudice.

Q2: Do nonimmigrant visa applicants whose visa interviews were scheduled and then cancelled when the EO was signed need to reschedule their interviews, or are posts taking steps to reschedule them affirmatively? If visa applicants must take affirmative steps to reschedule their interviews, what is the process? What is the process for immigrant visa applicants?

Answer: We instructed our embassies and consulates to resume regular processing of visas for nationals of the seven countries subject to Executive Order 13769. Nonimmigrant visa applicants should contact their nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate for information about scheduling an interview. The National Visa Center cancelled all scheduled immigrant visa interviews for these applicants scheduled in February 2017. The National Visa Center or U.S. Embassy will contact those affected to reschedule interview appointments.

Q3: In lieu of issuing a new nonimmigrant visa, can posts assist individuals whose nonimmigrant visa was physically cancelled (as opposed to provisionally revoked) in obtaining a boarding or transportation letter to facilitate embarkation to travel to the U.S.? Are boarding letters available for individuals with physically cancelled immigrant visas?

Answer: Visa cancellation by CBP constitutes visa revocation precluding travel. In certain situations, consular sections have issued boarding letters at CBP’s request. Other affected visa holders should apply for a new nonimmigrant visa, or contact the U.S. Embassy or Consulate where they received an immigrant visa for further instruction.

Q4: For dual nationals, please confirm that only nonimmigrant visas issued in a passport of a restricted country were provisionally revoked, and that nonimmigrant visas issued in a passport of an unrestricted country continued to remain valid. 

Answer: Given that the provisional revocation was reversed on February 3, 2017, any visas that were not canceled or revoked on other grounds were reinstated. If you have concerns about a particular case, please explain the circumstances and current status of the visa holder.

Q5: Were the nonimmigrant visas of citizens or nationals of the seven restricted countries who were present in the U.S. when the EO took effect provisionally revoked? If so, please confirm whether they have been reinstated.

Answer: When the provisional revocation was reversed on February 3, 2017, any visas that were not canceled or revoked on other grounds were reinstated.

Q6: Are individuals whose visas were provisionally revoked and then reinstated as a result of the TRO required to indicate on future applications that they have had a visa revoked?

Answer: Holders are not required to indicate on future applications that they have had a visa revoked.

Q7: Has DOS taken any additional steps has to notify individuals that their visas have been revoked other than the general notice on state.gov? Have these individuals been notified that their visas have been reinstated? If no notices have been provided, what steps can an individual take to proactively determine if his or her visa has been provisionally revoked and/or reinstated? 

Answer: When the provisional revocation was reversed on February 3, 2017, any visas that were not canceled or revoked on other grounds were reinstated. Individuals with any questions should contact their nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate.

Q8: Did the EO have any effect on the processing of J-1 waiver applications for applicants from the restricted countries? 

Answer: The Waiver Review Division in the Visa Office generally continued processing of J-1 waiver applications while the EO was in effect.
​
******************************************************

P.S. On March 06, 2017, President signed a new Executive Order replacing the previous EO. 

On Monday, March 06, 2017, the President signed a new Executive Order on Immigration (to replace the previous EO, so called "Travel Ban" or "Muslim Ban" which was placed on hold by the courts). 

New executive order narrowed a scope of the travel ban to block only new applicants for visas from 6 countries (LIst of Six instead of List of Seven), and removed Iraq from its coverage.

The new order, which goes into effect on March 16, 2017, and bans entry into the United States for 90 days for citizens of six countries—Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen-- for those people who do not already hold a valid visa. 

Visas revoked under the first executive order have been declared "restored".

Sec.12 (d): "Any individual whose visa was marked revoked or marked canceled as a result of Executive Order 13769 shall be entitled to a travel document confirming that the individual is permitted to travel to the United States and seek entry.  Any prior cancellation or revocation of a visa that was solely pursuant to Executive Order 13769 shall not be the basis of inadmissibility for any future determination about entry or admissibility."

Read more at our blog here.

#EO #executiveorder #travelban #muslimban

DACA: CURRENT STATUS AND OPTIONS as of March 1, 2017

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is still available and the government is still accepting and approving DACA initial and renewal applications. However, the program could be terminated at any time.

As a result, the information in this document could change so always stay up to date.

At this time, DACA should continue to provide you the same benefits–protection from deportation, work authorization and more.

However, even if you have DACA, immigration authorities may detain you and terminate your DACA if you, after receiving a DACA grant:
 are arrested or convicted for any criminal offense,
 admit to any criminal offense,
 are determined to pose a threat to public safety or national security,
 admit to fraud in connection with a government agency (such as use of a false social security number), or
 admit to gang affiliation.

According to DHS, if you disclosed the above information in previous DACA applications and your case was approved, you will continue to hold DACA.

If you failed to disclose any criminal history in your application or experience new criminal issues after receiving DACA, you should speak to an attorney as you may be at risk.

Initial DACA Applications – Recommended Only With Attorney Representation

Applying for DACA for the first time presents both benefits and risks. You should only apply after consulting with an attorney and considering the risks and benefits of your case. Be sure to have an attorney help you prepare your application. Prior criminal, immigration, fraud or gang issues could be particularly risky.

Be sure to consult an expert before applying if you have:
 previous criminal arrests or charges (even without a conviction);
 any type of criminal conviction (including either misdemeanors or felonies);
 any history of fraud related to a government agency (such as use of a false social security number); or  been deported or been ordered deported from the United States before.

Initial applications may take anywhere from a few weeks to several months to be processed. If a new application is not approved before the DACA program is changed or terminated, you may lose your application $495 fee. Furthermore, you risk exposure to immigration authorities by sending them your personal data. If pending federal legislation (the BRIDGE Act) passes to replace DACA, you may be eligible for another, less risky opportunity to be protected from deportation and receive a work permit. 

See DACA guide updated on 03/01/2017 here.

​​

​
​On February 20 and 21, 2017, DHS USCIS had published several Memorandums, Fact Sheets and Q&As at their official website, explaining changed border and interior immigration policies and priorities, following the executive branch's January 2017 executive orders. 

Two USCIS Memorandums, both dated February 20, 2017, and signed by the DHS Secretary John Kelly, authorize CBP, ICE and USCIS to significantly increase interior and border enforcement efforts:

Border protection and enforcement, building the wall and hiring at least 10,000 more ICE agents; expedited removal will apply to a broader class of undocumented immigrants; changes to asylum application process and credible fear interview, intended to make it more difficult to get a grant of asylum; criminal sanctions for parents of unaccompanied children; anyone present in USA without a proper visa or status will be subject to deportation; changing old DHS removal priorities from criminal aliens to all undocumented aliens; DACA grantees are safe from deportation at present time.

• Implementing the President's Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements Policies
• Enforcement of the Immigration Laws to Serve the National Interest
• Fact Sheet: Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements
• Fact Sheet: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States
• Q&A: DHS Implementation of the Executive Order on Border Security and Immigration Enforcement
• Q&A: DHS Implementation of the Executive Order on Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States

Actions (Fact Sheet, 02/21/2017, Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements ):

• Enforcing the law. Under this executive order, with extremely limited exceptions, DHS will not exempt classes or categories of removal aliens from potential enforcement. All of those in violation of the immigration laws may be subject to enforcement proceedings, up to and including removal from the United States. The guidance makes clear, however, that ICE should prioritize several categories of removable aliens who have committed crimes, beginning with those convicted of a criminal offense. 
• Establishing policies regarding the apprehension and detention of aliens. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will release aliens from custody only under limited circumstances, such as when removing them from the country, when an alien obtains an order granting relief by statute, when it is determined that the alien is a U.S. citizen, legal permanent resident, refugee, or asylee, or that the alien holds another protected status, when an arriving alien has been found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture and the alien satisfactorily establishes his identity and that he is not a security or flight risk, or when otherwise required to do so by statute or order by a competent judicial or administrative authority.
• Hiring more CBP agents and officers. CBP will immediately begin the process of hiring 5,000 additional Border Patrol agents, as well as 500 Air & Marine agents and officers, while ensuring consistency in training and standards.
• Identifying and quantifying sources of aid to Mexico. The President has directed the heads of all executive departments to identify and quantify all sources of direct and indirect federal aid or assistance to the government of Mexico. DHS will identify all sources of aid for each of the last five fiscal years.
• Expansion of the 287(g) program in the border region. Section 287(g) of the INA authorizes written agreements with a state or political subdivision to authorize qualified officers or employees to perform the functions of an immigration officer. Empowering state and local law enforcement agencies to assist in the enforcement of federal immigration law is critical to an effective enforcement strategy, and CBP and ICE will work with interested and eligible jurisdictions.
• Commissioning a comprehensive study of border security. DHS will conduct a comprehensive study of the security of the southern border (air, land, and maritime) to identify vulnerabilities and provide recommendations to enhance border security. This will include all aspects of the current border security environment, including the availability of federal and state resources to develop and implement an effective border security strategy that will achieve complete operational control of the border.
• Constructing and funding a border wall. DHS will immediately identify and allocate all sources of available funding for the planning, design, construction, and maintenance of a wall, including the attendant lighting, technology (including sensors), as well as patrol and access roads, and develop requirements for total ownership cost of this project.
• Expanding expedited removal. The DHS Secretary has the authority to apply expedited removal provisions to aliens who have not been admitted or paroled into the United States, who are inadmissible, and who have not been continuously physically present in the United States for the two-year period immediately prior to the determination of their inadmissibility, so that such aliens are immediately removed unless the alien is an unaccompanied minor, intends to apply for asylum or has a fear of persecution or torture in their home country, or claims to have lawful immigration status. To date, expedited removal has been exercised only for aliens encountered within 100 air miles of the border and 14 days of entry, and aliens who arrived in the United States by sea other than at a port of entry. The Department will publish in the Federal Register a new Notice Designating Aliens Subject to Expedited Removal Under Section 235(b)(1)(a)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act that expands the category of aliens subject to expedited removal to the extent the DHS Secretary determines is appropriate, and CBP and ICE are directed to conform the use of expedited removal procedures to the designations made in this notice upon its publication.
• Returning aliens to contiguous countries. When aliens apprehended do not pose a risk of a subsequent illegal entry, returning them to the foreign contiguous territory from which they arrived, pending the outcome of removal proceedings, saves DHS detention and adjudication resources for other priority aliens.  CBP and ICE personnel shall, to the extent lawful, appropriate and reasonably practicable, return such aliens to such territories pending their hearings.
• Enhancing Asylum Referrals and Credible Fear Determinations. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officers will conduct credible fear interviews in a manner that allows the interviewing officer to elicit all relevant information from the alien as is necessary to make a legally sufficient determination. USCIS will also increase the operational capacity of the Fraud Detection and National Security Directorate.
• Allocating resources and personnel to the southern border for detention of aliens and adjudication of claims. CBP and ICE will allocate available resources to expand detention capabilities and capacities at or near the border with Mexico to the greatest extent practicable. CBP will focus on short-term detention of 72 hours or less; ICE will focus on all other detention capabilities.
• Properly using parole authority. Parole into the United States will be used sparingly and only in cases where, after careful consideration of the circumstances, parole is needed because of demonstrated urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit. Notwithstanding other more general implementation guidance, and pending further review by the Secretary and further guidance from the Director of ICE, the ICE policy directive with respect to parole for certain arriving aliens found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture shall remain in full force and effect.
• Processing and treatment of unaccompanied alien minors encountered at the border. CBP, ICE, and USCIS will establish standardized review procedures to confirm that alien children who are initially determined to be unaccompanied alien children continue to fall within the statutory definition when being considered for the legal protections afforded to such children as they go through the removal process.
• Putting into place accountability measures to protect alien children from exploitation and prevent abuses of immigration laws. The smuggling or trafficking of alien children into the United States puts those children at grave risk of violence and sexual exploitation.  CBP and ICE will ensure the proper enforcement of our immigration laws against those who facilitate such smuggling or trafficking.
• Prioritizing criminal prosecutions for immigration offenses committed at the border. To counter the ongoing threat to the security of the southern border, the directors of the Joint Task Forces-West, -East, and -Investigations, as well as the ICE-led Border Enforcement Security Task Forces (BESTs), are directed to plan and implement enhanced counter-network operations directed at disrupting transnational criminal organizations, focused on those involved in human smuggling.
• Public Reporting of Border Apprehensions Data. In order to promote transparency, CBP and ICE will develop a standardized method for public reporting of statistical data regarding aliens apprehended at or near the border for violating the immigration law.

Actions (Fact Sheet, 02/21/2017: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States)

• Enforcing the law. Under this executive order, with extremely limited exceptions, DHS will not exempt classes or categories of removal aliens from potential enforcement. All of those in violation of the immigration laws may be subject to enforcement proceedings, up to and including removal from the United States. The guidance makes clear, however, that ICE should prioritize several categories of removable aliens who have committed crimes, beginning with those convicted of a criminal offense. 
• The Department’s Enforcement Priorities. Congress has defined the Department’s role and responsibilities regarding the enforcement of the immigration laws of the United States. Effective immediately, and consistent with Article II, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution and Section 3331 of Title 5, U.S. Code, Department personnel shall faithfully execute the immigration laws of the United States against all removable aliens. 
• Strengthening Programs to Facilitate the Efficient and Faithful Execution of the Immigration Laws of the United States. Facilitating the efficient and faithful execution of the immigration laws of the United States—and prioritizing the Department’s resources—requires the use of all available systems and enforcement tools by Department personnel.
• Exercise of Prosecutorial Discretion. Unless otherwise directed, Department personnel may initiate enforcement actions against removable aliens encountered during the performance of their official duties. Department personnel should act consistently with the President’s enforcement priorities as identified in his executive order and any further guidance issued by the director of ICE, the commissioner of CBP, and the director of USCIS prioritizing the removal of particularly dangerous aliens, such as convicted felons, gang members, and drug traffickers.
• Establishing the Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) Office. The Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE) Office within the Office of the Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will create a programmatic liaison between ICE and the known victims of crimes committed by removable aliens. The liaison will facilitate engagement with the victims and their families to ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that they are provided with information about the offender, including the offender’s immigration status and custody status, and that their questions and concerns regarding immigration enforcement efforts are addressed.
• Hiring Additional ICE Officers and Agents. To effectively enforce the immigration laws in the interior of the United States in accordance with the president’s directives, additional ICE agents and officers are necessary. The director of ICE shall—while ensuring consistency in training and standards—take all appropriate action to expeditiously hire 10,000 agents and officers, as well as additional mission support and legal staff necessary to support their activities.
• Establishment of Programs to Collect Authorized Civil Fines and Penalties. As soon as practicable, the director of ICE, the commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) shall issue guidance and promulgate regulations, where required by law, to ensure the assessment and collection of all fines and penalties for which the Department is authorized under the law to assess and collect from removable aliens and from those who facilitate their unlawful presence in the United States.
• Aligning the Department’s Privacy Policies with the Law. The Department will no longer afford Privacy Act rights and protections to persons who are neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents. 
• Collecting and Reporting Data on Alien Apprehensions and Releases. The collection of data regarding aliens apprehended by ICE and the disposition of their cases will assist in the development of agency performance metrics and provide transparency in the immigration enforcement mission.
• No Private Right of Action. This document provides only internal DHS policy guidance, which may be modified, rescinded, or superseded at any time without notice.

QUESTIONS & ANSWERS.

Q20: How does the expansion of expedited removal account for those who may be eligible for immigration benefits?
A20: The Secretary’s intentions regarding expedited removal are under development and will be set forth and effective upon publication of a notice in the Federal Register.
Q21: How soon will DHS make changes to more closely align its use of the expedited removal authority with Congressional intent?
A21: DHS is working to issue appropriate parameters in which expedited removal in these kinds of cases will be used.

Q22: Is it true that DHS is going to make the threshold for meeting credible fear in asylum cases more difficult to meet?
A22: The goal of DHS is to ensure the asylum process is not abused. Generally speaking, to establish a credible fear of persecution, an alien must demonstrate that there is a “significant possibility” that the alien could establish eligibility for asylum, taking into account the credibility of the statements made by the alien in support of the claim and such other facts as are known to the officer.
Asylum officers are being directed to conduct credible fear interviews in a manner that allows the interviewing officer to elicit all relevant information from the alien as is necessary to make a legally sufficient determination. In determining whether the alien has demonstrated a significant possibility that the alien could establish eligibility for asylum or torture protection, the asylum officer shall consider the statements of the alien and determine the credibility of the alien’s statements made in support of his or her claim and shall consider other facts known to the officer, consistent with the statute.

Q23: How will the enhancements to asylum referrals and credible fear determinations under INA section 235(b)(1) affect the work of USCIS?
A23: The Secretary’s memorandum outlines several points:

• The director of USCIS shall ensure that asylum officers conduct credible fear interviews in a manner that allows the interviewing officer to elicit all relevant information from the alien as is necessary to make a legally sufficient determination.
• The director shall also increase the operational capacity of Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS) and continue to strengthen its integration to support the Field Operations Directorate (FOD), Refugee Asylum and International Operations (RAIO), and Service Center Operations (SCOPS), consulting with Operational Policy and Strategy (OP&S) as appropriate.
• The USCIS director, CBP commissioner, and ICE director shall review their agencies’ fraud detection, deterrence, and prevention measures and report to the Secretary within 90 days regarding fraud vulnerabilities in the asylum and benefits adjudication processes, and propose measures to enhance fraud detection, deterrence, and prevention.
• The asylum officer, as part of making a credible fear finding, shall determine the credibility of statements made by the individual in support of his or her claim. This determination should include, but is not limited to, consideration of the statistical likelihood that the claim would be granted by the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).
• The asylum officer shall make a positive credible fear finding only after the officer has considered all relevant evidence and determined, based on credible evidence, that the alien has a significant possibility of establishing eligibility for asylum, or for withholding or deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture, based on established legal authority.


• Q25: Is it true that in cases of UACs (unaccompanied children) who travel to the U.S. to reunite with a parent, if a parent is identified by ORR as an appropriate guardian, that parent could also be prosecuted for possibly having their child smuggled into the U.S.?

• A25: Correct. The parents and family members of these children, who are often illegally present in the United States, often pay smugglers several thousand dollars to bring their children into this country. Tragically, many of these children fall victim to robbery, extortion, kidnapping, sexual assault, and other crimes of violence by the smugglers and other criminal elements along the dangerous journey through Mexico to the United States. Regardless of the desires for family reunification, or conditions in other countries, the smuggling or trafficking of alien children is intolerable. Accordingly, DHS shall ensure the proper enforcement of our immigration laws against those who—directly or indirectly—facilitate the smuggling or trafficking of alien children into the United States. This includes placing parents or guardian who are removable aliens into removal proceedings, or referring such individuals for criminal prosecution, as appropriate.
  and report to the Secretary within 90 days regarding fraud vulnerabilities in the asylum and benefits adjudication processes, and propose measures to enhance fraud detection, deterrence, and prevention.

Q12: Will ICE still be hiring the 10,000 officers called for in the executive orders?
A12: ICE is currently developing a hiring plan.

Q13: What is the 287(g) program and how will it be used by ICE?A13: The 287(g) program allows local law enforcement agencies to participate as an active partner in identifying criminal aliens in their custody, and placing ICE detainers on these individuals. ... To strengthen the 287(g) program, ICE field leadership has begun examining local operational needs and liaising with potential 287(g) partners and will collaborate with CBP in these efforts. Existing 287(g) applications are also undergoing an expedited review process. 

Q14: Are 287(g) officers now going to do ICE’s job?A14: The 287(g) program, one of ICE’s top partnership initiatives, enables state and local law enforcement agencies to enter into a partnership with ICE, under a joint memorandum of agreement. The state or local entity receives delegated authority for immigration enforcement within their jurisdictions.

Q15: When will 287(g) task force agreements be available to local jurisdictions? Will these new task force agreements be modeled after the previously canceled task force model?A15: ICE and CBP will be  is developing a strategy to further expand the 287(g) Program, to include types of 287(g) programs, locations, and recruitment strategies.  ... Existing 287(g) applications are also undergoing an expedited review process. ...

Q16: How will ICE accommodate an immigration judge in each of its facilities? How about asylum officers?A16: ICE is working with the Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to review current procedures and resources in order to identify efficiencies and best practices to improve the system. Most dedicated detention facilities already house immigration courts and have enough space to accommodate asylum officers. ICE is also seeking to increase the use of technology, mainly through the use of video teleconferencing, in locations with insufficient space or staffing.

Q&A: DHS Implementation of the Executive Order on Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States Release Date: February 21, 2017

Q2: How is ICE conducting interior enforcement operations based on this executive order?A2: Effective immediately, ICE will direct its personnel as well as its state and local partners through the 287(g) program to apply the enforcement priorities stated in Executive Order No. 13768. 
To that end, within 180 days, ICE will carry out a number of actions to implement the enforcement priorities stated in the executive order. Some of those actions include, but are not limited to, conducting targeted enforcement operations and allocating resources to work in jurisdictions with violent crime tied to gang activities.
​
Q3: Does this new memoranda substantively change the authority of immigration enforcement officers throughout DHS to exercise traditional law enforcement discretion?A3: DHS officers and agents maintain discretion to determine which action(s) to take against removable aliens, but they have been provided with additional guidance by the president and secretary. 

Q5: What are ICE’s priorities under this executive order?A5: Under this Executive Order, ICE will not exempt classes or categories of removal aliens from potential enforcement. All of those in violation of the immigration laws may be subject to immigration arrest, detention and, if found removable by final order, removal from the United States. 

Q14: When is the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) being terminated (Previous Administration's policy)?
A14: ICE has terminated the Priority Enforcement Program (PEP) and restored Secure Communities, directing its personnel to take enforcement action consistent with the priorities set forth in the executive orders. 

Q18: What threshold of abuse of a public benefit program will render someone removable?
A18: Those who have knowingly defrauded the government or a public benefit system will be priority enforcement targets.

Q22: Do these memoranda affect recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA)?
A22: No. (Presently, new immigration enforcement policies do not affect DACA grantees. However, there have been recent arrests of DACA grantees)

ЗНАЙ СВОИ ПРАВА: ИММИГРАЦИОННЫЕ РЕЙДЫ И ОБЛАВЫ НА ОСНОВАНИИ УКАЗОВ ПРЕЗИДЕНТА ОБ УСИЛЕНИИ ИММИГРАЦИОННОГО КОНТРОЛЯ ОТ 25 ЯНВАРЯ 2017.

25 и 27 января 2017 Президент США Трамп подписал три важных указа, касающихся иммиграции, виз и национальной безопасности страны.
 
Полный текст этих указов можно прочитать по линкам:

1. Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements (01-25-2017)
2. Enhancing Security in the Interior of the United States (01-25-2017)
3. Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States (01-27-2017)

Указ номер 1 касается постройки стены на границе между США и Мексикой. 
 
Указ номер 2 касается новых приоритетов в депортации из США, а также изменения во взаимоотношении федерального правительства и так называемых "sanctuary cities", городов, не выдающих нелегальных иммигрантов. Если такие города будут отказываться сотрудничать с федеральными орнанами, и не согласятся передавать им информацию о нелегалах, федеральное правительство угрожает отменой федерального финансирования для некоторых программ. Следует помнить, что это касается только тех программ, которые финансируются федералным правительством США, так как большая часть программ в любом штате финансируется за счет бюджета штата.

Указ номер 3 был подписан и вступил в силу 27 января 2017, и получил самую большую огласку и вызвал шквал негодования и возмущения граждан и политиков как в нутри США, так и за пределами (после 3 февраля 2017 применение этого указа временно приостановлено). Указ предусматривает следующее: (1) вводится временный на 90 дней запрет на въезд в США лиц имеющих отношение к семи исламским странам Ближнего Востока (указ не расшифровал, что значит national): Иран, Ирак, Сирия, Судан, Ливия, Йемен и Сомалия; (2)временно на 120 дней приостанавливается въезд беженцев в США изо всех стран мира; (3) на неопрееленное время запрещен въезд в США лиц, имеющих отношение к Сирии (важно подчерктунть, что запрет неограничен по времени, он относится как к лицам, имеющим гражданство Сирии, так и рожденным там, и может относится к лицам, которые имеют паспорта или travel documents, выданные Сирией, но рожденным в других странах, (4) отменена процедура выдачи виз в США без интервью.
 
Как известно, 9 февраля 2017 г апелляционный суд 9-го федерального округа вынес единогласное решение оставить в силе запрет федерального судьи на выполнение многих положений Указа президента номер 3 (суд признал многине положение указа недействительными, как противоречащие Конституции США). 

Федеральный апелляционный суд 9 округа собирается провести еще одно рассмотрение этого дела, в полном составе 11 судей, так называемое заседание суда en banc. 
 
Решение апелляционного суда Президент собирается либо обжаловать в вышестоящий суд или, по сообщениям из Белого Дома, готовится новый проект Указа Президента США, который заменит собой Указ номер 3. Даты подписания этого нового "передаланного" Указа может быть уже на следующей неделе (13 февраля или позже). Если новый указ будет подписан, то ожидается повторение ситуации с запретом на въезд беженцев и запрет на въезд лиц из определенных стран!

ИММИГРАЦИОННЫЕ РЕЙДЫ:
 
Вчера 9 февраля 2017 во многих городах и штатах в США прошли иммиграционные рейды ICE. Иммиграционная полиция арестовывала нелегальных иммигрантов в домах и на работе. Это был первый день таких усиленных рейдов в исполнение Указа президента от 25 января 2017, BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT IMPROVEMENTS.
 
По сообщениям медиа, ICE рейды прошли в южной Калифорнии, Лос Анджелес, Остин. Техас, Атланта, Джорджия, Чикаго, Иллинойс, во многих городах штатов Нью-Йорк и Нью-Джерси, Северной Каролине, Финикс, Аризона и мнгогих других.
 
Рейды и облавы на иммигрантов стали готовиться уже после 25 января 2017, после выхода указа. По результатам рейдов 9 февраля, складывается впечатление, что задерживали, арестовывали и депортировали всех тех, кто "под руку" попался. Не было строгой и логичной системы, как ранее, когда например, приоритет был на депортации уголовников и лиц с судимостями. В этот раз депортировали также и лиц без судимостей и матерей, у которых остались в США американские граждане дети. Депортировали и тех, кто пришел отметиться в местный участок ICE, как они делали годами до этого.
 
Помните, что могут депортировать не только тех, кто въехал в США без визы, например, путем нелагального пересечения границы с Мексикой. Депортированы могут быть и те, кто приехал по визе, но срок пребывания по визе истек (например, приехал по гостевой визе на 6 месяцев и остался в США, ожидая пока муж или ребенок получит гражданство, чтобы самому получить грин карту через них, или приехал как студент, но прекратил посещать колледж и статус был аннулирован и т.п.).
 
В некоторых штатах 9 февраля устраивались облавы на водителей автомобилей, так называемые checkpoints или roadblocks на дорогах. Эта практика была признана нелегальной в прошлом, когда такие облавы проводились в борьбе с наркоманами и водителями в нетрезвом состоянии (так как обычно полиция должна иметь причину для остановки именно вашей машины и для проверки именно ваших документов). Но пока не было судебных запретов на облавы на иммигрантов. Это значит, что если вы ведете машину, и вас остановят на таком roadblock с единственной целью проверить ваши документы и узнать какой у вас иммиграционный статус, вам придется показать свои документы иммиграционной полиции, и они могут обыскать вас, ваших пассажиров и машину.

ЗНАЙ СВОИ ПРАВА:

Помните, что у вас есть права в соответствии с Конституцией США, а именно: право хранить молчание и не отвечать на вопросы (кроме как правдиво предоставить свое имя и фамилию), право нанять адвоката (нет права на бесплатного адвоката, и на адвоката в ситуации "ускоренной депортации (expedited removal),  что применяется в отношении нелегальных иммигрантов, находящихся в США менее двух лет и нередко на границе с Мексикой), право не открывать дверь если к вам пришли без ордера на арест или обыск, право отказаться подписывать документы если вы не понимаете, что вы подписываете.

Если вас пытаются депортировать по правилам "ускоренной депортации" (expedited removal), полезно иметь при себе доказательства своего длительного непрерывного проживания в США более двух лет (налоговые декларации, счета, платежки и т.п.
 
Помните, что если полиция спрашивает ваше имя, вы обязаны ответить и представиться (назвать свое настоящее имя и фамилию).
 
Помните, что нельзя иметь при себе фальшивые или поддельные документы (например, если вас зовут Сергей Иванов, а карточка соц страхования или водительские права в вашем бумажнике на имя Джордж Смит).
 
Но вы не обязаны отвечать на другие вопросы: например, адрес или страна где вы родились, или семейное положение, или где вы работаете. Если вы скажете, что вы родились в России, на Украине, или в Казахстане - это автоматически дает основания иммиграционой полиции подозревать вас в том, что вы не гражданин США, и начать расспрашивать вас о визе, грин карте, вашем иммиграционном статусе.
 
Заранее найдите список общественных организаций в вашем городе и штате, и имейте при себе телефон иммиграционной клиники или адвоката, а также телефон консульства вашей страны. Также оставьте номера телефонов дома для своей семьи, и составьте план на случай непредвиденной ситуации, emergency plan, если вас задержит иммиграционная полиция.
 
Во многих семьях в США один из супругов американец, дети американские граждане, а второй супруг иностранец. И реальность такова, что по иммиграционному законодательству многие иммигранты не могут получить грин карту даже если они женаты или замужем за американцем (например, если иностранец приехал в США нелегально). Наличие американских граждан детей и супруга не дает автоматического права на грин карту и автоматическую защиту от депортации. В таких ситуациях всегда полезно иметь emergency plan, и оставить телефоны и инструкции своему мужу или жене.
 
Если к вам домой пришла иммиграционная полиция, вы имеете право не открыть им дверь и не пускать к себе в дом, если у них нет ордера на обыск именно вашего дома по вашему адресу (случаются ошибки, когда приходят с обыском в соседний дом или квартиру по ошибке). Возможно, что безопаснее не открывать дверь вообще, так как это может быть расценено как предложение войти в дом. Безопаснее попросить их показать вам ордер через окно, стекло, или просунуть под дверь. В ситуации как это развивается сейчас, из-за огромного количества рейдов на практике может быть множество отступлений от обычной практики проведения обысков и арестов, поэтому стоит быть готовым ко всему. Следует запомнить или записать имена агентов, дату и время рейда, название агентства (ICE, FBI, местный шериф или полиция).
 
Если иммиграционный рейд происходит на вашей работе, обычно полиции нужен или ордер или разрешение вашего работодателя. На практике работодатели обычно дают свое согласие и разрешают обыск и опрос сотрудников без ордера.
 
Если вас задержала иммиграционная полиция, позвоните своей семье и попросите их связаться с адвокатом, или сами звоните адвокату. Имейте при себе карточку с номером телефона адвоката или организации, с которой вы сможете связаться в случае ареста или задержания.
 
Если вы плохо говорите по-английски, тем более не следует отвечать на вопросы кроме как ответить на вопрос "ваше имя и фамилия". Они могут часами повторять те же вопросы, дожидаясь когда вы выдохнитесь, устанете или потеряете терпение и подпишите, чтобы поскорее закончить допрос.

​Вы можете подготовить карточку и иметь при себе, чтобы дать агенту ICE с текстом приблизительно такого содержания:
 
Please be informed that I am choosing to exercise my right to remain silent and the right to refuse to answer your questions.
If I am not detained, I will choose to leave now (спросите если они вас задерживают официально, и если ответ "нет", вы можете уходить, и не задерживаясь уходите).
If I am detained, I request to contact an attorney immediately.
I am also exercising my right to refuse to sign anything until I consult with my attorney.
I would like to contact a lawyer at this number: ....................................................
(Телефон вашего адвоката или организации)
Thank you
 
Если вас задержали и вы подписали какие-то документы в отсутствие адвоката, настаивайте, чтобы вам предоставили копию. По закону вам обязаны предоставить копию, на практике они это редко делают. Особенно важно получить копию своего NTA Notice to Appear, если вам такой дали. Этот документ поможет вашему адвокату соориентироваться какие обвинения против вас были выдвинуты, и как можно добиться в суде выхода под залог (если это возможно).
 
Полезная информация для иммигрантов на английском: знай свои права, когда имеешь дело с сотрудниками иммиграционной полиции. Подробное практическое руководство и пример как выглядит ордер на обыск тут.

На официальном вебсайте иммиграционной полиции ICE существует поисковик, с помощью которого вы можете попытаться разыскать своих близких, если вы знаете или подозреваете, что они были задержаны ICE. Для поиска лучше всего иметь при себе номер А и страну рождения человека, которого вы разыскиваете. Также можно искать по имени и фамилии плюс дата и страна рождения. Во втором случае могут быть ошибки, если имя было написано неверно, или произошла ошибка с датой рождения.

​ЧТО ДЕЛАТЬ, ЕСЛИ ВЫ ПОСТОЯННЫЙ ЖИТЕЛЬ США (У ВАС ГРИН КАРТА), И НА ВЪЕЗДЕ В США, СОТРУДНИК ИММИГРАЦИОННОЙ СЛУЖБЫ ПЫТАЕТСЯ ОТОБРАТЬ ВАШУ ГРИН КАРТУ, ЗАСТАВЛЯЕТ ВАС ПОДПИСАТЬ ФОРМУ I-407, И ПЫТАЕТСЯ ВЫДВОРИТЬ ВАС ИЗ СТРАНЫ.

Полезная памятка для грин карт холдеров (постоянных жителей США), которые возвращаются в США и которых принуждают к отказу от грин карты и сдаче грин карты прямо в аэропорту сотруднику CBP. Эта ситуация случается нередко в аэропортах, но в последнее время требования к отказу участились, и нередко без веских оснований.

Помните, что если вас принуждают к подписи на форме I-407, Отказ от грин карты, вы не обязаны ее подписывать. Если вы не согласны и не хотите лишаться вида еа жительство в США, то не подписывайте эту форму.

Если сотрудник CBP продолжает настаивать, что вы потеряли свое резиденство (вид на жительство) в США, например, из-за длительного отсутствия за пределами США (более года), или потому, что вы являетесь лицом родившимся или имеющим паспорт из одной из семи стран на Ближнем Востоке, указанных в недавнем указе президента от 27 января 2017 г  - то они должны вас все же впустить в страну и выписать форму NTA, приглашение на явку в иммиграционный суд США, куда они должны передать ваше дело для решения вопроса о том, потеряли ли вы статус постоянного жителя или нет.

Помните, что хотя существует презумпция, что статус "автоматически" теряется после более одного года, проведенного за границей, но на самом деле все не так уж автоматически. Государство должно это доказать, и у вас есть право на доказательство своей правоты в иммиграционном суде США. Только судья может принять решение  том, чтобы отобрать у вас грин карту, а не сотрудник в аэропорту (естественно, вы можете решить отказаться от своей грин карты и добровольно ее отдать и подписать форму I-407).

Мы будем держать вас в курсе!

​Если вам нужна консультация или совет адвоката, свяжитесь с нами по электронной почте.

On February 9, 2017, the 9th circuit court of appeals ruled that President's travel ban (aka Muslim Ban) will remain blocked and unenforceable, and the temporary injunction granted by the federal district judge will remain in place (Washington v. Trump, No. C17-0141-JLR, 2017 WL 462040 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017).  

The ruling means that citizens and nationals of seven Muslim majority countries will continue to be able to travel to the U.S. (on any non-immigrant or immigrant visa), and refugees will be admitted to the United States of America, despite president's January 27th executive order (Executive Order 13769, “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States”. 82 Fed. Reg. 8,977).

Text of the court order (29 pages) is here.

9 февраля 2017, апелляционный суд 9-го федерального округа вынес решение, и поддержал федерального судью, который запретил выполнение некоторых положений указа президента от 27 января 2017 (так называемый Muslim Ban).

Таким образом, запрет на въезд граждан семи мусульманских стран не действителен (и они могут приезжать в США как и раньше, до попытки президента запретить их въезд).

Въезд беженцев в США также разрешен (запрет на въезд беженцев считается недействителен, и все государственные агенства обязаны следовать решению суда)..

Следующий этап - президент уже объявил сегодня на твиттере - правительство и президент подадут апелляцию в Верховный Суд США, который в настоящий момент имеет только 8 судей (нужно 9 для кворума). Решение 4-4 оставит в силе решение нижестоящего суда. Кандидат на 9-ую должность судьи Верховного Суда уже есть, но пока не утвержден. Продолжение следует....

Текст решения суда (29 страниц) тут: 
https://www.scribd.com/document/338916954/Washington-vs-Trump#