Image via Wikipedia

Goldman & Loughlin, PLLC  Immigration Lawyers interview comments on the DHS’s plans to possible terminates as many as 17,000 removal cases.

When asked to comment on this ground breaking policy change, immigration attorney Peter J. Loughlin said “It is a common sense approach to immigration reform that has been far too long in the making—but welcome nonetheless.

According to the firm’s senior partner, Thomas W. Goldman, “The reason for the government’s huge backlog of cases (248,000 nationwide) is that so many of these proceedings are brought against immigrants with no criminal background and who pose little or no threat to the nation–instead of focusing on those with a criminal or terrorist history.

As great as this new policy seems to be, Loughlin is quick to point out that, “While several of the law firm’s clients currently in proceedings may benefit by being able to file for a green card if their immigration court case is terminated, the vast majority across the country may not be eligible.

Goldman added that “many of the proceedings to be terminated may be in cases where the respondents are not eligible to legalize their status at all. This would place them in a limbo status where they would simply return to living a lacuna of sorts until the government decides what to do with them.”

Tom and Peter
The Immigration Guys

Related articles by Zemanta

• “The Immigration Balancing Act: ICE Memo and High Removal Statistics Reveal a Stacked Immigration System” and related posts (immigrationimpact.com)
• Faced With Backlog, Feds Dismiss Deportation Cases Against Non-Criminal Immigrants (propublica.org)
• Homeland Sec. Dismisses Deportation Cases (judicialwatch.org)

Image via Wikipedia

The United States of America has filed  suit against the State of Arizona.

No more rumors today is the day it all starts. Some critics  have expressed concern that the  suit is drafted too broadly to succeed and thus premature. Others feel this this is  a frontal attack that will gain momentum and support once the issues are fully addressed before the American public.

Please take a moment to read US v Arizona now and report back to share your comment.

Immigration Guys

Related articles by Zemanta

• Justice Department Sues Arizona (legaltimes.typepad.com)
• U.S. Justice Department To Sue Arizona (alan.com)
• Obama Administration Sues Arizona Over Immigration Law (dailyfinance.com)
• Feds File Suit Against Arizona (michellemalkin.com)

This week the US Supreme Court limited the government’s ability to prosecute and deport workers in this country illegally. While the use of false documents can result in being jailed, the court ruled a charge of the more serious crime of “aggravated identity theft” cannot be made without proof that they knew the identification number belonged to someone else.

Removal from the United States through the Immigration Courts takes time, and the crime for which a person is convicted can have dramatic effects. Aggravated felonies can seriously limit the ability of a person to remain in the United States and for his or her ability to return at some later date.

During the Bush administration, a number of workplaces were targeted with some of those arrested being charged with possessing false documents and aggravated identity theft. One of the most publicized raids took place at a meatpacking plant in Iowa. Agents of Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested almost 400 undocumented immigrants in what government officials billed as the nation’s largest immigration raid ever. Agents stormed the meatpacking plant, rounding up mostly Guatemalan and Mexican immigrants.

As posted on our website  and recent broadcast on ICE worksite arrests, in over 6,000 worksite arrests made by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) last year only 135 were employers. The rest targeted were all illegal aliens.

The Obama administration is currently focusing on employers who knowingly violate the law by hiring illegals, and criminal aliens, rather than individual illegal workers.

Now, unless “knowledge” is established, an illegal worker may face civil charges related to illegally entering the United States or overstaying a visa, criminal charges of illegally reentering the country after being deported, or a combination of these.

Latest Immigration News:

NKEN v. HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion today in Nken v. Mukasey. The Court held that in considering requests for stays of deportation pending judicial review of orders of removal, the traditional standard should be applied.

This decision overrules the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals long standing precedent in Weng, which applied a more stringent standard requiring petitioners to show by clear and convincing evidence that the removal order was prohibited as a matter of law.

This will allow many petitioners to pursue immigration relief without fear of being removed while their case is pending judicial review.

The decision ushers in a long-awaited common sense approach to stays of deportation.