Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Injunctions

by

judgment-8442199_1280We have new developments to report relating to pending litigation for parole in place applications in the case Texas et. al. vs. DHS et. al., Case No. 6:24-cv-00306 (E.D. Tex.).

Yesterday evening, federal Judge J. Campbell Barker of the Eastern District Court of Texas issued a court order extending his previous administrative stay on parole in place (PIP) approvals for an additional 14-day period expiring on September 23, 2024.

The judge’s initial stay (of August 26th), which was set to expire on September 9, 2024, will now continue through September 23rd.

What does this mean for parole in place applications?

While the administrative stay is in place, those eligible for parole in place under the Keeping Families Together program can continue to submit the online Form I-131F, Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

USCIS will also continue to issue biometrics appointment notices to capture applicant biometrics during the administrative stay.

However, USCIS is prohibited from approving applications received for as long as the administrative stay is in place (currently until September 23rd)

This is because the Texas lawsuit challenges the legality of the Keeping Families Together program and approvals must be paused while the parties in the case make their arguments before the court, and a final ruling is made.

What’s next in the Texas lawsuit?

The court has ordered an accelerated hearing where motions for preliminary and permanent relief will be heard on September 18th.  The accelerated proceedings in this case mean that the judge could make a decision on the merits of the case in the coming months. However, despite the outcome in this case appeals are likely to be filed in district court.

Can the judge extend the administrative stay past September 23rd?

Yes. The judge may decide to extend the administrative stay past September 23rd in the future if it finds that good cause exists to do so throughout the litigation process.

Continue reading

by

hands-7107606_1280-2

Parole in Place – Keeping Families Together Updates

As previously reported, a federal judge in Texas has temporarily blocked the Biden administration from approving parole requests under the Keeping Families Together program.

What does this mean for parole in place applications?

Due to a 14-day administrative stay handed down by District Court Judge J. Campbell Barker on August 26, 2024, in the case, Texas v. Department of Homeland Security, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) cannot approve parole in place applications filed under the Keeping Families Together program.

The order may be extended by the judge at the conclusion of the 14-day period.

USCIS has stated on its webpage that during the district court’s administrative stay, USCIS will:

USCIS also reminds the public that the administrative stay does not affect any parole in place applications that were approved before the court’s administrative stay order was issued at 6:46 p.m. Eastern Time on August. 26, 2024.

Those who are eligible must consult with an immigration attorney as soon as possible to determine whether to proceed with applying for parole in place while applications are still being accepted by USCIS.

For more information about this lawsuit, please click here.

EB-1 Visa Updates

Recently, the State Department confirmed that all numbers in the EB-1 preference category have been utilized for fiscal year 2024 and that no further EB-1 visas/green cards will be issued for the remainder of this fiscal year which ends on September 30, 2024.

It is also foreseeable that the EB-2 and EB-4 categories will become unavailable in the near future.

Continue reading

by

IMPORTANT ALERT: On August 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in Texas v. Department of Homeland Security, Case Number 24-cv-306 administratively stayed DHS from granting parole in place under Keeping Families Together for 14 days; the District Court might extend the period of this administrative stay.

While the administrative stay is in place, USCIS will:

  • Not grant any pending parole in place requests under Keeping Families Together.
  • Continue to accept filings of Form I-131F, Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens.

The District Court’s administrative stay order does not impact parole applications that were approved before the administrative stay order was issued by the court.

WARNING:

The court expects that good cause may exist to extend the administrative stay for additional periods through mid-October. The court is also scheduled to decide whether the plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Summary Judgment will be issued during the month of October.

Immediate Call to Action

If you are eligible for parole in place under the Keeping Families Together program, you must take immediate action and submit the online application Form I-131F, Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens, as soon as possible before time runs out. A court order may soon prohibit USCIS from accepting applications for parole in place. For assistance with your application, contact us at 619-819-9204 or text 619-569-1768 for a consultation. 

gavel-7233485_1280We bring you this breaking news to announce that on Friday, August 23, 2024, Texas along with 15 other Republican-led states filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, seeking to invalidate the parole in place program established by President Biden’s June executive order.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began accepting applications for parole in place on Monday August 19th to keep families of U.S. Citizens together. This program allows certain undocumented spouses and stepchildren of U.S. Citizens who entered the country without inspection, to legalize their status without departing the United States.

Those eligible can apply for parole in place using the new online Form I-131F, and if approved, are given three years to apply for temporary work authorization and permanent residency. The administration estimates about 500,000 people could be eligible, plus about 50,000 of their children.

The program is meant to eliminate the need for such individuals to go through the cumbersome extreme hardship “waiver” process, which requires undocumented spouses of U.S. Citizens to receive an approved waiver from USCIS, before applying for an immigrant visa at a U.S. Consulate abroad.

Unfortunately, the Republican-led coalition is seeking to put an end to the program claiming that the Biden administration has abused their power in creating it. These states argue that only Congress has the authority to enact legislation that would authorize a program like parole in place.

Court filings also accuse the Biden administration of unlawfully creating a pathway to permanent residency for these individuals solely for political purposes, due to the fast-approaching presidential election.

Continue reading

by

florida-890553_1280A new week brings new immigration news. Recently, a federal judge issued a temporary injunction blocking part of a Florida law that imposes criminal penalties on those who transport undocumented immigrants into the state of Florida, classifying such actions as felonies.

The order was made in response to a lawsuit filed by the Farmworker Association of Florida and seven individuals who feared traveling in and out of the state of Florida with undocumented friends and family members due to Florida’s controversial law.

In his ruling, Judge Roy Altman indicated that the Florida law is likely unconstitutional because the supremacy clause places the regulation of immigrants under the purview of the federal government.

In his preliminary order, the judge stated that Florida’s law is preempted by the federal government, “By making it a felony to transport into Florida someone who ‘has not been inspected by the federal government since his or her unlawful entry,’ [the law] extends beyond the state’s authority to make arrests for violations of federal immigration law and, in so doing, intrudes into territory that’s preempted.”

The judge further stated that any harm created by the injunction is outweighed by the harm suffered by the plaintiffs and the federal government. As a result, the Florida law will be halted until the judge rules on the merits of the case.

Continue reading

by

usa-3808026_1280

In this blog post, we share with you the latest regarding the controversial immigration law from the state of Texas known as SB-4.

In a stunning turn of events, on Tuesday March 19th the Supreme Court of the United States cleared the way for the state of Texas to enforce its controversial immigration law SB4, which would allow state officials to arrest and detain those suspected of entering the country illegally.

The Supreme Court rejected the Biden administration’s request to intervene and keep Texas’s strict immigration enforcement law on hold pending litigation.

The legal challenges however did not stop there. Later that day, a federal appeals court put the controversial law back on hold, just hours after the Supreme Court would have allowed Texas to begin enforcing the new law.

The order came down from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in which a three-judge panel voted 2-1 to vacate a previous ruling that had put the law into effect.

The future of the law still hangs in the balance as the 5th Circuit prepares to hear arguments over the controversial law to decide once and for all whether the law is unconstitutional.

Continue reading

by

The Supus-supreme-court-building-2225766_1280reme Court of the United States has issued an important but temporary victory to the Biden administration. On Monday, the court temporarily halted the enforcement of a controversial immigration law from the state of Texas known as SB4, which would authorize state law enforcement officials to arrest and detain those suspected of entering the country illegally, while imposing harsh criminal penalties.

The administrative hold issued by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito blocks the law from taking effect in the state of Texas until March 13. This temporary pause will give the court enough time to review and respond to court proceedings initiated by the Biden administration. Alito has ordered Texas to respond to the government’s lawsuit by March 11.

U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar has argued that SB4 violates the law by placing the authority to admit and remove noncitizens on state law enforcement when these matters fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government, and not individual states.

Continue reading

by

eric-gonzalez-Z3CHkelnvHA-unsplash-scaled

In the latest legal saga concerning the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, a federal appeals court has declared the DACA program illegal, causing uncertainty for the future of the program.

Yesterday, the three-judge panel for the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a ruling in which it found that the Obama administration did not have the legal authority to create the DACA program in 2012. The Circuit Court ruling affirms a previous ruling handed down by U.S. District Court Judge Andrew Hanen of the Southern District of Texas which halted the Biden administration’s plans to revive the program last year.

While the panel declared the DACA program illegal, it stopped short of ordering the Biden administration to completely invalidate the program for those with existing DACA benefits, or those seeking to renew those benefits. For the time being, DACA policy remains intact for current beneficiaries, allowing U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to continue to accept and adjudicate renewal requests. However, USCIS is prohibited from approving initial applications for DACA, and accompanying requests for employment authorization.

What happens next?

The appeals court has sent the lawsuit back to U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen, the same judge that previously ordered a nationwide injunction preventing the approval of new DACA applications. Judge Hanen will review the legality of the program under the Biden administration’s policy memorandum which includes revisions to the program.

Sadly, it is unlikely that Judge Hanen will rule in favor of the Biden administration which will likely result in a formal appeal sent to the United States Supreme Court, where chances of its survival hinge on a conservative leaning court. Judge Hanen previously found the program illegal because the government failed to follow the notice and comment periods required by the federal Administrative Procedures Act. In 2016, the Supreme Court deadlocked in a 4-4 decision over expanding DACA to parents of DACA recipients, keeping in place a lower court decision preventing its expansion.

The appellate court’s decision will have long-lasting repercussions, as it forces members of Congress to safeguard the future of the program by passing legislation to settle the matter once and for all. While the topic has been argued for the past decade on Capitol Hill, no meaningful steps have been taken to preserve the program and create a path to residency for Dreamers.

Continue reading

by

tingey-injury-law-firm-L4YGuSg0fxs-unsplash-1-scaled

Welcome back to Visalawyerblog! In this blog post we share with you some recent news regarding a new class action lawsuit that has been filed by 49 plaintiffs against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), seeking relief from the extreme processing delays currently taking place for I-765 applications for employment authorization (EADs) filed by individuals seeking adjustment of status (AOS) in the United States, and for I-765 applications filed by E-2 dependent spouses with USCIS.

Currently, USCIS reports that I-765 work permit applications based on a pending I-485 adjustment of status application are taking between 20 to 21.5 months to process at the California Service Center; while it is taking 9 to 9.5 months to process work permit applications at the National Benefits Center; and 9.5 to 10.5 months to process such applications at the Nebraska Service Center.

The new legal challenge against the government has been mounted by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP, Joseph and Hall PC, Kuck Baxter Immigration LLC, and Siskind Susser PC.

The lawsuit seeks to hold the government accountable once and for all for the exorbitant processing times taking place for work permit applications to be adjudicated, especially those at the California Service Center. Under the law, applicants for adjustment of status are afforded the option of applying for temporary employment authorization while their green card applications are pending with USCIS, through what is supposed to be an easy procedure that involves filing a simple I-765 application for employment authorization. In normal circumstances, such employment authorization applications took on average 7 to 9 months to be adjudicated. Since the onset of the pandemic however USCIS has not been able to adjudicate these applications within reasonable timeframes.

Processing times have gotten worse and worse to the point that applicants are receiving their green card interview appointments before even coming close to receiving an approved employment authorization document. This has resulted in applicants being unable to seek employment while waiting for their green card applications to process. This has caused great cause for concern for individuals who have a job offer lined up or who need to work to maintain their households. Further, the American economy is experiencing more and more labor shortages as they struggle to get individuals back to work. The situation at the USCIS level is making it even more difficult for American businesses to find qualified workers.

Continue reading

by

tom-barrett-M0AWNxnLaMw-unsplash-scaled

We have very interesting and exciting news to report to our readers. We are happy to report that on Tuesday, October 5, 2021, a federal judge from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, declared that the State Department cannot use the various geographic COVID-19 related Presidential Proclamations to cease the processing of visas at Embassies and Consulates worldwide.

As our readers will know, beginning in January of 2020, to protect against the rise of COVID-19 infections in the United States, the President issued a series of Presidential Proclamations that suspended and restricted entry into the United States, of immigrants and nonimmigrants, who were physically present within the Schengen Area, Brazil, China, the United Kingdom, Ireland, and Iran, during the 14-day period preceding their entry or attempted entry into the United States.

These Presidential Proclamations did not have a termination date and have continued to be in force to the present day. The most widely discussed ban (the Schengen visa ban “Proclamation 9993,”) applied to immigrants and nonimmigrants from 26 European countries including: Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland. However separate visa bans have also impacted the entry of Brazilian nationals, Chinese nationals, Iranian nationals, and Indian nationals (see the list of COVID-19 travel bans listed below.)

Since the issuance of these travel bans, U.S. Consulates and Embassies worldwide have refused to issue any visas to those who do not otherwise qualify for an exemption and have been physically present in any of the affected regions during the 14-day period preceding their entry into the United States. The only way applicants have succeeded in pushing their cases forward has been by requesting a National Interest Exception from their respective Embassy.

The COVID-19 related travel bans are as follows:

  • China Visa Ban – Proclamation 9984 issued January 21, 2020 – No termination date
  • Iran Visa Ban –Proclamation 9992 issued February 29, 2020 –No termination date
  • European Schengen Area Visa Ban—Proclamation 9993 issued March 11, 2020—No termination date
  • Ireland and UK Visa Ban –Proclamation 9996 issued March 14, 2020 –No termination date
  • India Visa Ban –Proclamation 10199 issued April 30, 2021—No termination date
  • Brazil Visa Ban—Proclamation 10041 issued May 25, 2020 –No termination date

For a complete list of COVID-19 country-specific proclamations click here.

Continue reading

by

yemen-653086_1920

Welcome back to Visalawyerblog! We are happy to bring you the latest immigration updates recently announced by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

USCIS Guidance Following DACA Permanent Injunction in State of Texas, et al., v. United States of America, et al., 1:18-CV-00068, (S.D. Texas July 16, 2021)

USCIS has announced on its official webpage that consistent with the permanent injunction granted by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas on July 16, 2021, declaring DACA policy illegal, USCIS is prohibited from granting initial requests for first time DACA applicants, and accompanying requests for employment authorization.

However, USCIS will continue to accept both initial and renewal DACA requests but will not be able to adjudicate requests for first time DACA applicant’s pursuant to the court order.

Renewal filings for those who have received DACA benefits in the past, will continue unaffected by the court order, and USCIS will continue to adjudicate renewal requests, and accompanying renewal requests for employment authorization as before.

What’s next? The Department of Justice will be appealing the District Court’s decision and the Biden administration is urging Congress to pass the American Dream and Promise Act of 2021.

Read Biden’s Statement responding to the Court’s injunction here.

Applicants Filing Change of Status Applications to F-1 No Longer Need to Submit Subsequent Applications to ‘Bridge the Gap’

We are happy to report that USCIS recently ended the “Bridge the Gap” policy. Previously, prospective students with a current nonimmigrant status in the United States, that was set to expire more than 30 days before their F-1 program start date, were required to “Bridge the Gap,” by filing Form I-539 with USCIS to request an extension of their current status, or a change to another status ensuring that they would not have a “gap” in status.

Effective July 20, 2021, USCIS announced that individuals who have applied for a change of status to F-1 student, will no longer need to “Bridge the Gap,” while their initial F-1 change of status application is pending with USCIS.

To prevent a “gap” in status, USCIS has said that it will now grant the change of status to F-1 effective the day the applicant’s Form I-539, Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status is approved. If USCIS approves an application more than 30 days before the student’s program start date, the student must ensure they do not violate their F-1 status during that time (such as engaging in unauthorized employment, more than 30 days before the program start date as listed on the Form I-20.)

These changes have been introduced to decrease current backlogs and USCIS workloads. A revision of the Form I-539 instructions will soon be published to reflect these new policy changes.

Continue reading