Category: Fraudulent Asylum

Immigration Court Backlog Reached a Breaking Point of 3.2 million cases

2/5/2024

Immigrants are now far more likely to face the complexities of the immigration court system alone, without an attorney. As of December 2023, only 30% of immigrants with pending cases have immigration attorneys, down from 65% just four years ago. There are not enough judged and immigration courts.

This new data comes from Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC). On January 24, TRAC published data showing that representation rates at U.S. immigration courts have decreased significantly. These trends highlight concerns about migrants’ ability to obtain an attorney to navigate our immigration system.

Federal law generally provides immigrants the right to secure legal representation before federal immigration agencies, but immigrants must pay the cost—or secure the assistance of a pro bono (free) attorney, if they can find one. There is no right to have a free lawyer in Immigration Court.

he assistance of an attorney can be crucial to succeeding in one’s case. For example, in removal proceedings, immigrants not subject to immigration detention are five times more likely to obtain relief if they are represented. Attorneys also contribute to efficiencies in removal proceedings, including fewer hearings and more successful claims.

Cases before the immigration courts have grown substantially in the last decade. In 2013, there were 344,230 pending cases. Now the backlog stands at more than 3.2 million cases.

This is the result of many reasons. Recently, however, as undocumented migrant arrivals increase, a dramatic increase in newly filed cases during the past year--nearly 1.5 million—are causing concern about whether the supply of immigration attorneys can meet the current demand by asylum seekers.

In addition, many of those filing the asylum claims, don't see it necessary to consult or hire an attorney. Many migrants who spent US$15,000-$50,000 and more to travel to the USA to illegally cross the Southern border (many arriving from Asia or Europe), incorrectly assume that the lawyer will be provided to them for free, or take for granted that their status will be approved, or simply don't care as long as they are in the USA. Often, ethical attorneys refuse representation when the prospective clients have no legitimate claim for immigration benefits besides being interested in living in the United States. As a result, currently, only about 30% of immigrants with cases in Immigration Court have attorneys.

There is a deep and growing crisis at the Southern border, affecting our already ineffective immigration system, and creating many national security risks.

0 Comments

USCIS Updated Green Card Interview Requirements for Refugees and Asylees

12/15/2020

0 Comments

On December 15, 2020, USCIS announced updated guidance expanding the discretionary criteria USCIS officers use to determine whether to interview applicants filing Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status, based on refugee or asylee status. Whether an interview is necessary to determine the admissibility of an alien applying for lawful permanent resident status under INA § 209. The updates do not change the eligibility requirements to adjust status. 
The list of interview criteria can be found in the Policy Manual, Volume 7, Part L, Chapter 5, Part B. Each determination by USCIS to waive or require an interview will continue to be made at the discretion of the USCIS officer on a case-by-case basis. The updated criteria may result in more applicants requested to appear for an interview.

B. Interview Criteria

The decision to interview a refugee applicant for adjustment of status is made on a case-by-case basis.[1] Interviews are generally required when an officer is unable to verify identity or determine admissibility based solely on the immigration records available to the officer. Although the decision to conduct an interview is made on a case-by-case basis, an officer should generally refer a case for interview if it meets one or more of the following criteria:

The officer cannot verify the identity of the applicant through the information in the A-File.
The officer can verify the identity of the applicant through the information in the A-File, but the applicant is claiming a new identity.
Immigration records are insufficient for the officer to determine whether or not the applicant has refugee status.
The applicant has an approved Form I-730, but, if granted overseas, was not interviewed as part of the derivative refugee process or, if granted in the United States, was not interviewed prior to the approval.
The applicant’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) fingerprint results indicate that further processing is needed.
The officer cannot determine the applicant’s admissibility without an interview.
The officer determines that the applicant is inadmissible but that an interview is necessary to determine if a waiver is appropriate.
The applicant has an articulable national security or terrorism-related ground of inadmissibility concern.
Other eligibility fraud, identified on a case-by case basis, where Fraud Detection and National Security (FDNS), Center Fraud Detection Operations (CFDO), or Background Check Units (BCU) recommends interview.
Immigration records are insufficient for the officer to determine whether or not the applicant is inadmissible based on past or current placement in removal proceedings at any time.[2]
The applicant has conflicting or multiple identities, other than properly documented by legal name changes.
A sworn statement is required to address the applicant’s admissibility.
An interview would yield clarifying information, such as with an unclear response to a request for evidence concerning the applicant’s admissibility.
The applicant is a citizen of, or last habitually resided in, a country that is now, or was at the time of last residence, a State Sponsor of Terrorism.
The officer has any other articulable concern regarding identity, inadmissibility, national security, public safety, or fraud, and recommends an interview to help resolve that concern.

0 Comments

DHS USCIS Memos: New Border and Interior Enforcement Immigration Policies

2/21/2017

0 Comments

Image by Bryan Cox via AP

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.

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)

0 Comments

Submitting fraudulent asylum application is a serious federal crime of immigration fraud

8/30/2016

0 Comments

A case from New York: a couple of immigration attorneys, paralegals and other office workers in three law firms in NY were convicted in 2014 for a conspiracy to commit immigration fraud pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 371. The group was a part of a multi-year conspiracy helping Chinese clients to submit fraudulent asylum applications to federal immigration authorities.

In 2015, the Second Court of Appeals upheld the convictions.

This is the most widely-spread kind and unethical kind of immigration fraud. Stay away from the lawyers or "consultants" who offer to help to prepare and submit on your behalf any fraudulent immigration application, petition or form. Never sign any blank immigration forms. Beware of immigration fraud. It can end in a criminal conviction, deportation to follow and other serious consequences.

Briefly in Russian: Несколько адвокатов, юристов, помощников адвоката и сотрудников 3-х юридических фирм в Нью-Йорке были признаны виновными и приговорены к тюремному заключению от 1 года до 4 лет за оказание "услуг", заключающихся в подготовке обманных заявлений на политическое убежище для клиентов из Китая. Они составляли заведомо ложные заявления, придумывали истории своим клиентам, разучивали с ними истории преследования и тренировали их как отвечать на вопросы, чтобы убедить офицера в asylum office или судью в реальности их выдуманных историй, с целью получения политического убежища и затем вида на жительство, и гражданства США.

Держитесь подальше от адвокатов, фирм и "консультантов" или "нотариусов", которые предлагают такие нелегальные и неэтичные услуги. Помните, что и для них и для вас это может закончится печально: судимость, тюремное заключение, депортация и т.п. Такие преступные группировки существуют во многих штатах, не только в Нью-Йорке. За многими из них следит ФБР и сотрудники Департмента Гос Безопасности DHS.

Помните, что поодача заведомо ложного или обманного заявления на политическое убежище или другого иммиграционного заявления или петиции - это уголовнонаказуемое преступление.

Read more here.

Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said, “As the jury found, Feng Ling Liu, Vanessa Bandrich, and Rui Yang assisted immigrants in obtaining asylum status under false pretenses, including by using concocted tales of persecution. These defendants will now join the 27 others who have been convicted in connection with this sprawling immigration fraud scheme.”

According to the Indictment filed in Manhattan federal court, public court filings, and the evidence admitted at trial:

Liu, a lawyer, operated two law firms—the Law Offices of Feng Ling Liu and Moslemi and Associates Inc.—both of which assisted aliens from China in obtaining asylum status through fraud. Liu and her employees profited by creating and submitting asylum applications containing false stories of persecution purportedly suffered by alien applicants. Bandrich worked as a lawyer at one of Liu’s firms, Moslemi and Associates Inc. In that capacity, she prepared certain clients to tell false stories of persecution in immigration court proceedings related to their asylum application. Bandrich also opened a separate law firm, Bandrich and Associates Inc. (Bandrich firm), that assisted clients in obtaining asylum status through fraud. Yang was an office worker at the Bandrich firm and helped the firm’s clients prepare their false asylum applications.

The appelate court upheld the convictions and sentences of a New York City attorney and three law office workers alleged to have been part of an elaborate scheme to fraudulently secure asylum for hundreds of Chinese immigrants.

The appeals court said the evidence was “more than sufficient” to support the conviction of Vanessa Bandrich, the named partner and lone attorney at Bandrich & Associates, on one count of conspiracy to commit immigration fraud.

In the same ruling, the panel upheld an 11-month prison sentence for office worker Guo Qin Miao and a 41-month prison term given to Yuchang Miao. Yuchang Miao, an alleged ringleader of the scheme, managed a Manhattan law office and was married to Feng Ling Liu, another lawyer convicted in the scheme.

And more details here.

Any suspected immigration fraud, including asylum fraud, or other criminal activity can be reported by phone or email to ICE, a law enforcement branch of DHS. Click here.

0 Comments

Immigration Court Backlog Reached a Breaking Point of 3.2 million cases

USCIS Updated Green Card Interview Requirements for Refugees and Asylees

DHS USCIS Memos: New Border and Interior Enforcement Immigration Policies

Submitting fraudulent asylum application is a serious federal crime of immigration fraud

Author

Archives

Categories