IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: EB-5 Regional Center Program

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: EB-5 Regional Center Program: The House of Representative has passed S. 3235, a bill to extend by three years the authorization of the EB-5 Regional Center Program.  Th...

EB-5 Regional Center Program

The House of Representative has passed S. 3235, a bill to extend by three years the authorization of the EB-5 Regional Center Program. 

The Immigration and Nationality Act, section 203(b)(5) established a class of immigrant visas (EB-5) for individuals who invest either $500,000 or $1 million (depending on whether the investment is in a targeted employment area or not) in a new commercial enterprise located within the U.S. and who will create full-time employment for not fewer than 10 qualified employees.  There are two distinct EB-5 pathways for an alien investor to gain lawful permanent residence:

(1)  Basic Program and 

(2) Immigrant Investor Pilot Program.

It is important to note that the EB-5 requirements for an investor under the pilot program are essentially the same as in the basic EB-5 investor program except the Pilot Program provides for investments that are affiliated with an economic unit known as a “regional center.” 

Investments made through regional centers can take advantage of a more expansive concept of job creation, including both “indirect” and “direct” jobs.

The S. 3235 bill is now pending the President's signature. 

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: U.S. v. Santiago's Repacking, Inc.

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: U.S. v. Santiago's Repacking, Inc.:                              U. S. v. Santiago’s Repacking, Inc.   The Office of Chief Administrative Hearing Officer ("OCAHO") granted...

U.S. v. Santiago's Repacking, Inc.

                             U. S. v. Santiago’s Repacking, Inc.  

The Office of Chief Administrative Hearing Officer ("OCAHO") granted Immigration and Customs Enforcement partial summary decision in employer sanctions case and reduced penalties assessed for I-9 violations. 

The OCAHO is  within the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), and it has jurisdiction over, among other things, civil penalty cases arising under the Immigration Nationality Act's employer sanctions provision, section 274A.

In U.S. v. Santiago's Repacking, Inc, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Ellen K. Thomas granted U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE's) motion for summary decision with respect to liability on two counts of its three-count complaint, granted the respondent Santiago's Repacking, Inc. summary judgment on the third count, and imposed reduced penalties.

Count I of ICE's complaint against Santiago's Repacking, Inc. (Santiago's) asserted that Santiago's hired 24 individuals and failed to prepare or present Form I-9 for them upon request. 

Count II alleged that Santiago's hired 30 additional individuals and also failed to prepare or present Forms I-9 for them upon request but sought lesser penalties. 

Count III alleged that the company hired one individual, Santiago Moreno, for whom it failed to ensure that the individual properly completed Section 1 of the form and/or failed itself to properly complete Section 2 or 3. 

Penalties sought were assessed at the rate of $981 for each of the violations in Count I, $935 for each of the violations in Count II, and $935 for the violation in Count III, for a total civil money penalty of $52,529. 

 At the conclusion of the hearing, ALJ Thomas concluded that Santiago's Repacking, Inc. is a small business and it has no history of previous violation. As a result she found that the proposed fines were at the high end of the permissible penalty range and, considering the record as a whole, the statutory factors, and the evidentiary submissions, concluded that they should be adjusted as Santiago's Repacking, Inc.'s is a small company with ordinary business income in 2010 of only $58,457 and its payroll for that entire year was $226,531, so that the proposed penalties are close to the total of the company's business income for 2010. Thus, she adjusted the penalty to $400 for each of the violations in Count I and $350 for each of the violations in Count II, for a total of $20,100.  For more information please see the September 10, 2012, 89 No. 35 Interpreter Releases 1713. 

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DHS OUTLINES TIPS FOR STUDENTS

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DHS OUTLINES TIPS FOR STUDENTS: Posted by Norka M. Schell, Esq.  Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC www.lawschell.com DHS Outlines Tips for Students Seeking Driv...

DHS OUTLINES TIPS FOR STUDENTS

Posted by Norka M. Schell, Esq. 

Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC

www.lawschell.com

DHS Outlines Tips for Students Seeking Driver's License or Social Security Number

     Seeking a driver's license and a social security number can be complicated, especially for a foreigner. Knowing this, the Department of Homeland Security outlines six very useful tips for foreign students on how to seek a driver's license or/or a social security number in the United States.  

      1. Wait ten days after you arrive in the United States. You may want to apply for a driver's license or SSN [social security number] right away, but be patient. This step saves you 20 or more days of waiting! These ten days allow time for all the government databases to update with your arrival information. While you are waiting, talk with your designated school official (DSO) to learn more about your state's driving rules and regulations.

2. Make sure you are in active status in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). SEVIS is the database that manages information for all F and M students and J exchange visitors in the United States. Your DSO activates your record in SEVIS when you register for classes or check in for a program. Talk with your DSO before you apply for a license to make sure you are active in SEVIS.

3. Wait two days after your DSO activates you in SEVIS. After your DSO activates your record in SEVIS, you should wait at least two business days before you apply for a driver's license or SSN. This gives all the databases time to update with your new information. This step can also save you 20 or more days of waiting.

4. Check your forms. You should check all your forms to make sure your information is correct. This is called data integrity. Data integrity is very important because if you have different information on different forms, it will only cause more delays. For guidance, see SEVP's FAQ on Data Integrity. 

5. Bring all your paperwork. When you go to the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) - the common name for a state government office that issues driver's licenses - or to the Social Security office, remember to bring all your paperwork. For most states, the paperwork includes these documents:

• Form I-20, “Certificate of Eligibility for Nonimmigrant Student Status” or DS-2019, “Certificate of Eligibility for Exchange Visitor (J-1) Status”

• Form I-94, “Arrival/Departure Record”

• Passport (with visa if applicable)

• Proof of legal presence or residence (ask your DSO what your state requires)

• For an SSN, you must also bring a letter of employment and an endorsed Form I-20 (for F students). See SEVP's DMV Fact Sheet for more details on the appropriate paperwork you should bring.

    6. Don't wait too long to apply: While you shouldn't rush to get a driver's license or SSN, waiting too long can also be a problem. Verification issues can create significant delays in getting a driver's license or SSN; which, if you are to begin working, could delay or even jeopardize your employment opportunity. To avoid this, do not wait too long to begin the application process, but instead begin as soon you are eligible. http://studyinthestates.dhs.gov/2012/08/timing-is-everything-getting-your-drivers-license-or-social-security-number.

If we can assist you, please feel free to contact our office at (212)564-1589.

LAW OFFICES OF NORKA M. SCHELL, LLC: MANOHOR RAO ARRABALLY UPDATED

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: MANOHOR RAO ARRABALLY UPDATED: Posted by: Norka M. Schell  New York Immigration Attorney Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC www.lawschell.com    Here is the...

MANOHOR RAO ARRABALLY UPDATED

Posted by: Norka M. Schell 

New York Immigration Attorney

Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC

www.lawschell.com 

 Here is the amended on the decision of Matterr of Manohar Rao Arrabally and Yerrabelly which was 

decided on August 16, 2012. 

The Board of Immigration Appeals held that the Respondents, who left the United States temporarily under a grant of advance parole, thereby effected a “departure,” which resulted in their inadmissibility under section

212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). We hold that they did not.

Background

An alien who leaves the United States temporarily pursuant to a grant of advance parole

does not thereby make a “departure . . . from the United States” within the meaning

of section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C.

§ 1182(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) (2006). Matter of Lemus, 24 I&N Dec. 373 (BIA 2007), clarified.

In a decision dated August 20, 2009, an Immigration Judge found the

Respondents inadmissible as charged under section 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) of the

Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) (2006),

as intending immigrants not in possession of valid immigrant visas or other

entry documents. He further found them ineligible for adjustment of status

under section 245(i) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i) (2006), based on their

inadmissibility under section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II), and he ordered them removed

from the United States.

Board of Immigration Appeals

This case presents the question whether the respondents, who left

the United States temporarily under a grant of advance parole, thereby

effected a “departure,” which resulted in their inadmissibility under section

212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II). We hold that they did not. Consequently, the respondents’

Cite as 25 I&N Dec. 771 (BIA 2012).

The respondents seek adjustment of status under section 245(i) of the Act (rather than

section 245(a)) because they “failed . . . to maintain continuously a lawful status since entry into the United States” within the meaning of section 245(c) of the Act. Section 245(i) adjustment is available for a fee to certain aliens who are “physically present in the United States” but covered by section 245(c). Section 245(i)(1)(A)(ii) of the Act. The appeal will be sustained in part and the record will be remanded to the

Immigration Judge for further proceedings.

LAW OFFICES OF NORKA M. SCHELL, LLC: MATTER OF Mahvah AKRAM, Respondent

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: MATTER OF Mahvah AKRAM, Respondent: Posted by Norka M. Schell, Immigration Attorney Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC www.lawschell.com Decided on August 1, 2012 This c...

MATTER OF Mahvah AKRAM, Respondent

Posted by Norka M. Schell, Immigration Attorney
Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC
www.lawschell.com

Decided on August 1, 2012

This case addresses the question whether an alien who was admitted to the United States as a K-4 non immigrant pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act,

8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(K)(iii) (2006), can adjust status without demonstrating immigrant visa eligibility and availability as the beneficiary of an approved immigrant visa petition filed by his or her stepparent, the United States citizen K visa petitioner. 

(1) An alien who was admitted to the United States as a K-4 nonimmigrant may not

adjust status without demonstrating immigrant visa eligibility and availability as the

beneficiary of a Petition for Alien Relative (Form I-130) filed by his or her stepparent,

the United States citizen K visa petitioner.

(2) A K-4 derivative child of a K-3 nonimmigrant who married the United States citizen

K visa petitioner after the K-4 reached the age of 18 is ineligible for adjustment of status

because he or she cannot qualify as the petitioner’s “stepchild.”

In a decision dated May 21, 2010, an Immigration Judge denied Mahvash Akram's application for adjustment of status and granted her request for voluntary departure. Mahvash Akram appealed from that decision and submitted two motions to remand. 

The case addressed the question whether an alien who was admitted to the United States as a K-4 nonimmigrant pursuant to section 101(a)(15)(K)(iii) of the Immigration and Nationality Act,

8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(15)(K)(iii) (2006), can adjust status without demonstrating

immigrant visa eligibility and availability as the beneficiary of an approved

immigrant visa petition filed by his or her stepparent, the United States citizen

K visa petitioner. 

The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) concluded that the Respondent, a K-4 nonimmigrant who was over 18 years of age when her K-3 mother married the K visa petitioner, was ineligible to adjust her status under section 245(a) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a) (2006), because she can not qualify as the petitioner’s “stepchild.” The BIA denied the two motions and dismissed the appeal.  

For assistance with your legal matter, please contact our office at (212)564-1589. 

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: ICE AGENTS SUES DHS AND ICE OVER DACA

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: ICE AGENTS SUES DHS AND ICE OVER DACA: Posted by Norka M. Schell, Esq. www.lawschell.com The Consideration for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA") is under attack....

ICE AGENTS SUES DHS AND ICE OVER DACA

Posted by Norka M. Schell, Esq.

www.lawschell.com

The Consideration for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA") is under attack. Ten officers and agents of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") have filed a lawsuit in the District Court for the Northern District of Texas against the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano and ICE Director John Morton challenging the Obama administration's deferred action for childhood arrivals (DACA) directive and associated prosecutorial discretion memorandum "that prevent ICE officers, employees, and agents from fulfilling their sworn oath to uphold the law and defend defended the United States Constitution."  The Plaintiffs allege that the directive "commands ICE officers to violates federal law... commands ICE officers to violate their oaths to uphold and support federal law, violates the Administrative Procedure Act, unconstitutionally usurps and encroaches upon the legislative powers of Congress, as defined in Article I of the United States Constitution, and violates the obligation of the executive branch to faithfully execute the law, as required by Article II, Section 3, of the United States Constitution. 

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS PROCESS

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS PROCESS: By Norka M. Schell, Esq. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival Questions and Answers In the light of the estimate 12 plus million undocu...

DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS PROCESS

By Norka M. Schell, Esq.
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival Questions and Answers

In the light of the estimate 12 plus million undocumented immigrants in the United States, mounting visa application backlogs, minimal workplace enforcement, it is clear that our current immigration laws do not meet the needs of our economy or hundreds of thousands of undocumented high school students and graduates. Despite of our broken immigration system, Congress still has not passed a comprehensive immigration reform.

On the other hand, the Obama's Administration  in an attempt to fulfill the President's promises to undocumented immigrant communities, announced on June 15, 2012 that it will grant Deferred Action status to young child undocumented high school students and graduates. Beginning tomorrow, August 16, 2012, the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service will accept applications for request consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

Where did the Obama's Administration get  the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals idea?

The idea to grant and extend Deferred Action to young people -- Childhood Arrival -- originated from Temporary Protected Status program, also known as "TPS."

Generally, a Temporary Protected Status program establishes a temporary safe haven in the United States for nationals or a foreign status (or if stateless if person habitually resided in the foreign state) if the Attorney General, after consultation with appropriate government agencies, determines with respect to that foreign state that:

1. There is an ongoing armed conflict within the state (or a part of the state) posing a serious threat to the personal safety of the county's nationals if returned there. INA Section 244(b)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C 124a(b)(1)(A); or

2. There has been an earthquake, flood, drought, epidemic or other environmental disaster resulting in a substantial but temporary disruption of living conditions in the area affected; the foreign state is unable temporarily to handle the return of its nationals and the foreign state has affirmatively requested designation, INA Section 244(b)(1)(8),  8 U.S.C. Section 1245a(b)(1)(B); or

3. There exist extraordinary and temporary conditions in the foreign state preventing its nationals from returning safely, unless Attorney General determines that it is contrary to national interest to allow those aliens to remain temporarily. INA Section 244(b)(1)(C),  8 U.S.C Section 125a(b)(1)(C).

A Temporary Protected Status Program can be withdrawn or terminated if:

1. The Attorney General finds person was not eligible
2. The person fails maintain continuous physical presence
3. The person fails without good cause, to re-register with Department of Homeland Security
4. The Attorney General terminate the program.

"Bravo" to the Obama's Administration for its cleverness and courage to find a way for temporary relief to the undocumented high school students and graduates. I hope that the U.S. Congress re-examine immigration reform and find the way to grant to the "undocumented" high school students and graduates permanent safe haven in the United States. 

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDH...

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDH...: IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS : By Attorney Norka M. Schell On August 3, 2012, the Department of Homeland...

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS: By Attorney Norka M. Schell On August 3, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that USCIS will begin accepting request...

DEFERRED ACTION FOR CHILDHOOD ARRIVALS

By Attorney Norka M. Schell

On August 3, 2012, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that USCIS will begin accepting request for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival on August 15, 2012, when USCIS expects to post the application form and instructions on its website. Requests for relief are to be decided on a case-by-case basis, and applicants must pass a background check before they can receive deferred action.

I advise the Childhood Arrivals to proceed with caution because the deferred action is a discretionary decision where DHS will determine on a case-by-case of not to pursue enforcement against a person for a specific period. A grant of a deferred action status will not confer lawful immigration status, alter an individual's existing immigration status, or provide a path to citizenship. It only means that time in deferred action status will be considered a period of stay authorized the Secretary of DHS. DHS can renew or terminate a grant of deferred action at any time.

If you need assistance regarding Deferred Action, you should contact my office at (212)564-1589.

LAW OFFICES OF NORKA M SCHELL, LLC: PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION NOTICE

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION NOTICE: Posted by Attorney Norka M. Schell EOIR HAS POSTED THE FOLLOWING NOTICE ON ITS WEBSITE In 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DH...

PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION NOTICE

Posted by Attorney Norka M. Schell

EOIR HAS POSTED THE FOLLOWING NOTICE ON ITS WEBSITE

In 2011, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced a new process to ensure that its resources are focused on its highest enforcement priorities. This process is referred to as "prosecutorial discretion," or "PD." Under the PD, DHS reviews pending cases to see whether they meet certain criteria for cases that are considered a low enforcement priority. If a case meets the criteria, DHS  may request "administrative closure" of the case.

"Administrative closure" is an order by the court that removes the case from the court's calendar of hearings. Administrative closure does not mean that your case is completed or that the court has granted any application for relief that you may have filed with the court. If the court orders your case administratively closed, it simply means you will have no further hearings unless you or DHS specifically ask the court to schedule a hearing.

DHS is currently reviewing cases already filed with and pending before the Immigration Court to see whether any cases should be administratively closed. If DHS agrees that your case meets the PD criteria, then DHS may file a motion asking the court to administratively close your case. Immigration judges are prepared to adjudicate these motion on a case-by-case basis as they are filed.

If you need further guidance regarding PD, you should contact my office at (212)564-1589 or website www.lawschell.com. If you have questions, you may also contact the Office of Chief Counsel. Contact information is also available at http://www.ice.gov/contact/opla/.

HOUSE PASSES STUDENT VISA REFORM ACT

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: HOUSE PASSES STUDENT VISA REFORM ACT: Posted by: ATTORNEY NORKA M. SCHELL Tel. (212)564-1589 On August1, 2012, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3120, the Student Vis...

HOUSE PASSES STUDENT VISA REFORM ACT

Posted by: ATTORNEY NORKA M. SCHELL

Tel. (212)564-1589

On August1, 2012, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3120, the Student Visa Reform Act.

The bill amends INA Section 214(m) so that only schools accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of Education would be eligible to sponsor students for non immigrant visas.docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/.../BILLS-112hr3120-SUS.pdf

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DHS Outlines Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival...

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: DHS Outlines Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival...: Posted by Norka M. Schell, Esq.  Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC The Department of Homeland Security t oday  provided additional info...

DHS Outlines Deferred Action for Childhood Arrival Process

Posted by Norka M. Schell, Esq. 
Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC


The Department of Homeland Security today  provided additional information on the deferred action for childhood arrivals process in preparation for the August 15 implementation date. 


On June Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano announced that certain young people who came to the United States as children and meet other key guidelines may be eligible, on a case-by-case basis, to receive deferred action. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is finalizing a process by which potentially eligible individuals may request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals. 


USCIS expected to make all forms, instructions, and additional information relevant to the deferred action for childhood arrivals process available on August 15 2012. USCIS will then immediately begin accepting requests for consideration of deferred action  for childhood arrivals. 


The information shared during today's call includes the following highlights:

1. Requestors - those in removal proceedings, those with final orders, and those who have never been in removal proceedings - will be able to affirmatively request consideration of deferred action for childhood arrivals with USCIS.

2. Requestors will use a form developed for this purpose

3. Requestors will mail their deferred action request together with an application for an employment authorization document and all applicable fees to the USCIS lockbox. 

4. All requestors must provide biometrics and undergo background checks. 

5. All four USCIS Service Center will review requests. 

It is important to note that this process is not yet in effect and individuals who believes they meet the guidelines of this new process should not request consideration of deferred action before August 15, 2012. 


Be aware of scam and unauthorized practitioners of immigration law. 


For more information, contact (212)564-1589.

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE & TERMINATION OF PROCEEDING...

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE & TERMINATION OF PROCEEDING...: Author: Norka M. Schell, Esq.  Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC                                             THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN  ...

ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE & TERMINATION OF PROCEEDINGS

Author: Norka M. Schell, Esq. 
Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC


                                           THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 
ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSURE AND TERMINATION OF PROCEEDINGS

If you are in immigration proceedings or know someone who is in proceedings, you may have heard the terms "administrative closure" and "termination of proceedings." What are these terms and what are the differences between them?

 Administrative closure is a procedural mechanism used to temporarily remove a case from the immigration court's calender. The Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) "urged" Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to administratively close cases where there is a pending visa petition that is prima facie approvable. In evaluating a request for administrative closure, Immigration Judges have the authority to administratively close a case which is before him or her over a party's objection where it is "otherwise appropriate under the circumstance."  A person whose case has been administratively closed remains in removal proceedings, and either party ( the respondent or the DHS ) can request that the case be placed back on the court's calender at any time. A party, whose case has been administratively close, does not waive any rights obtained when the case was closed.

By contrast, termination of proceedings means that the case has ended and the respondent is no longer in removal proceedings. A party in proceedings may request the court for dismissal of his case and only the court, upon motion, may then terminate the proceedings. The reason for termination include that the Notice to Appear was "improvidently issued." Upon termination, the individual will revert to the same status he or she was in prior commencement of proceedings. If the government wants to place the individual back into proceedings after a case is terminated, it must file a new Notice to Appear with the court.

Whether a request for an administrative closure or a motion to terminate proceedings might be filed in a particular case, it is a legal question.

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: EXERCISING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION FOR DREAMers

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: EXERCISING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION FOR DREAMers

DHS CONFERENCE INVITATION

Posted by Norka M. Schell 
www.lawschell.com


IMMEDIATE RELEASE

DHS Conference Call Invitation: Secretary Napolitano’s June 15 Memorandum Deferred Action For Childhood Arrivals U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services sent this bulletin at 07/25/2012 04:05 PM EDT Dear Stakeholder, On June 15, 2012, Secretary Janet Napolitano issued a memorandum to DHS components on the exercise of prosecutorial discretion with respect to certain childhood arrivals on a case-by-case basis.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement invite interested individuals to participate in a joint national teleconference to provide further details and collect additional input regarding the implementation of Secretary Napolitano’s memorandum on Thursday, July 26 from 4pm – 5pm (Eastern).

 To Participate in the July 26 Conference Call Please use the information below to join the session. We recommend calling in at least 20 minutes prior to the start of the teleconference. Call-in Number: 1-800-779-9654 Passcode: DHS

 This call is intended for stakeholders only. Members of the media should call (202)282-8010 with inquiries.

Kind regards, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

The mayor's got moves like Obama

The mayor's got moves like Obama

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: EXERCISING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION FOR DREAMers

IMMIGRATION AND POLICY: EXERCISING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION FOR DREAMers: Posted by: Norka M. Schell, Esq.  Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC Tel. (212)564-1589 www.lawschell.com On July 19, 2012, Secretary...

EXERCISING PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION FOR DREAMers

Posted by: Norka M. Schell, Esq. 
Law Offices of Norka M. Schell, LLC
Tel. (212)564-1589
www.lawschell.com

On July 19, 2012, Secretary Napolitano testified before the House of Judiciary Committee and clarified that "deferred action for DREAMers is not "amnesty" and does not provide green cards or any other legal status that would put DREAMers on the path to citizenship".

Here is some history on Prosecutorial Discretion. Since the 1996 amendments to the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) which limited the authority of immigration judges to provide relief from removal in many cases, there has been increased attention to the scope and discretion of former Immigration and Nationality Services' (INS) prosecutorial discretion.

"Prosecutorial discretion" is the authority of an agency charged with enforcing a law to decide whether to enforce, or not to enforce, the law against someone. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), like other law enforcement agencies, has prosecutorial discretion and exercises it every day. In the immigration context, the term applies not only to the decision to place someone in proceedings, but also to a broad range of other discretionary enforcement decisions.

The favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion to grant deferred action to DREAMer only means --a discretionary decision not to assert the full scope of the DHS's enforcement authority as permitted under the law. DHS can not admit an inadmissible alien to the United States unless a waiver is available or unless Congress pass a DREAM Act legislation and President Obama signs it.

When President Obama announced on June 16 that DHS will grant deferred action to DREAMers, he only confirmed that we already know -- DHS has finite resources and it is not possible for DHS to investigate and prosecute all immigration violations. Therefore, it will focuses its finite resources in furtherance of its enforcement priority -- serious criminals, threats to national security, recent border crossers and repeat immigration violators.

The guideline on deferred action program would be available on August 1, and applications would be available on August 15. There will be an application fee but the amount is yet unknown.