Provisional Stateside Waiver Approved

Provisional Stateside Waiver approved for a citizen of India. The immigrant visa application is in process, and once issued will allow our client, a spouse of a naturalized United States citizen, to return to this country with a Green Card.

Asylum Approved for Citizen of Yemen

Another asylum application approved, this time on behalf of a citizen of Yemen, overcoming Trump's travel ban. The application was affirmatively filed in August 2018, and was approved by the Trump administration 45 days after the interview was scheduled The next step is to reunite our client with her husband.

Retired Judges Call on ICE to Halt Immigration Arrests at Courthouses

For Immediate Release:
December 12, 2018

Retired Judges Call on ICE to Halt Immigration Arrests at Courthouses

68 Former Judges from 23 States Urge ICE Acting Director to Treat Courthouses Like Schools & Hospitals, Where ICE Limits Arrests

Today, a prominent group of former state and federal judges sent a letter to the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), urging ICE to halt arrests at courthouses. In particular, the judges are calling on ICE to add courthouses to its list of “sensitive locations,” where ICE is prohibited from conducting activities like surveillance, apprehensions, arrests, interviews, or searches. The judges calling for this change include 25 former state supreme court justices and 10 chief justices from across the political and ideological spectrum.

“We know firsthand that for courts to effectively do justice, ensure public safety, and serve their communities, the public must be able to access courthouses safely and without fear of retribution,” the judges wrote to ICE’s acting director Ronald Vitiello.

In the last two years, courthouse immigration arrests have grown in frequency. In 2017, immigration advocates, prosecutors, and sitting state chief justices asked the prior ICE director to stop courthouse arrests. ICE responded by formalizing its courthouse arrests policy for the first time, pledging to limit them in some circumstances, but made clear that such apprehensions would continue. At least 23 states have seen courthouse immigration arrests since 2017.

“Following nearly two years of high-profile ICE courthouse activity, only unequivocal guarantees and protections will restore the public’s confidence that it can safely pursue justice in our nation’s courts,” the judges wrote. “We urge you to restore that confidence by adding courthouses to ICE’s list of ‘sensitive locations,’ thereby assuring officers will refrain from courthouse enforcement activities except in exigent circumstances.”

In today’s letter – coordinated in part by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law – the judges wrote those arrests are having a chilling effect, dissuading victims of violence, criminal defendants, and parents seeking to protect their children from seeking protection and justice. Data from cities in California and Texas also show that Latino residents are seeking fewer orders of protection than they have in the past. The trend suggests that in the face of aggressive immigration enforcement, survivors of domestic violence are balancing the fear of an abuser with the fear of ICE. In Brooklyn and Denver, district attorneys acknowledged dropping cases due to witnesses’ fear that cooperating could lead to immigration trouble for them.

For 25 years, ICE has maintained a “sensitive locations” policy to not conduct enforcement activities in places such as schools, hospitals, religious institutions, and public demonstrations. The outspoken group of judges makes clear that so long as courts remain unsafe places for certain communities, justice cannot be fully applied.

The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law is a nonpartisan law and policy institute that works to reform, revitalize – and when necessary, defend – our country's systems of democracy and justice.

Link to the release: https://www.brennancenter.org/press-release/retired-judges-call-ice-halt-immigration-arrests-courthouses

###

A Review From a Satisfied Client

After receiving the notice for my case, I was wrought with uncertainty and worry. I did not know the next steps I should take. After hearing many accolades of his work, I went to discuss my matter with Matthew Kolken. While I did not know what to do, Kolken laid out the process for me step by step and he did not fail to deliver on any of his assurances. Not only did he keep me informed throughout the entire process, he also fielded my many questions and was quick to have me in his office for an in person meeting whenever I asked.

 

Kolken’s passion and determination was evident both in the courtroom, and in the office. He knew every detail of my case inside and out, and worked tirelessly. Although it was an unnerving process, I felt comfort in knowing the team in charge of my case was one of tenacity and skill. The entire Kolken & Kolken team was invested in the process from start to finish. They all worked so hard on my case. Matthew Kolken is a man of his word, he put me at ease throughout the entire process, and it is with great joy I can say that he was successful in winning my case. I recommend Matthew Kolken’s services wholeheartedly and without reservation, to anyone in need of immigration assistance.

Asylum Victory for Citizen of Pakistan

Another asylum victory before the immigration judge on behalf of an Ahmadi Muslim from Pakistan who fled persecution on account of his religious beliefs. The victory was in the face of the Department's strenuous opposition.

Asylum Decisions and Denials Jump in 2018

Via TRAC:

Fiscal year 2018 broke records for the number of decisions (42,224) by immigration judges granting or denying asylum. Denials grew faster than grants, pushing denial rates up as well. The 42,224 decisions represented a 40 percent jump from decisions during FY 2017, and an 89 percent increase over the number of asylum decisions of two years ago.

This increase largely reflects asylum applicants who had arrived well before President Trump assumed office. Given the backlog in the Immigration Court only one out of five asylum decisions involved cases that took 12 months or less to decide. The one exception was for those who were unable to find an attorney to assist them. For those without representation, over half (55.8%) had cases begun in the same year. For those who were represented, only about one in ten (12.9%) were in cases that had taken 12 months or less to decide.

In 65.0 percent of these decisions this past year asylum was denied[1]. This is the sixth year in a row that denial rates have risen. Six years ago the denial rate was just 42.0 percent. See Figure 1. (For year-by- year figures, see Appendix Table 1 at the end of this report.)

Click here for more.

Biggest Shift Between Obama and Trump is Their Rhetoric

I was quoted in Business Insider:

Matthew Kolken, an immigration attorney based in Buffalo, New York, said the "biggest shift" between Obama and Trump on immigration is in their rhetoric.

"The Trump administration wants everyone to know that he's harsh on immigrants," Kolken told INSIDER. "Obama was the exact opposite. His rhetoric was very lofty, and favorable to immigration reform."

But children still ended up in detention centers under Obama, Kolken said, and "harsh measures" were used at the Southern border.

"Is the Trump administration in practice worse than Obama? Yes, but we're not talking about night and day, it's shades of grey," Kolken said. "The bottom line is that Trump is bad on immigration and Obama was bad. Neither one of them have done any favors to immigrant communities."

Kolken said Obama's dubious immigration practices were more under the radar because he wasn't using the same "racist and xenophobic rhetoric" as Trump.

Obama "always said the right thing and Trump can't ever say the right thing," Kolken added.

Green Card Holder from Palestine Naturalized After Suing Trump Administration

We just turned a green card holder from Palestine into a U.S. citizen after suing the Trump administration in District Court. Our client filed for naturalization through other counsel in 2015. He was previously charged with marriage fraud. After not being scheduled for examination for more than two years, he contacted us to see what could be done. After several inquiries to USCIS were ignored, we filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus and Declaratory relief in District Court. A few weeks after serving the petition on the U.S. Attorney, our client was scheduled for a naturalization exam. One month later, our client was approved for naturalization and has now been sworn in as a U.S. citizen.

Deportation Prevented Resulting in a Green Card

I just received the green card for a Colombian national overcoming a previously denied petition to remove conditions on lawful permanent residence. His wife is a United States citizen and sponsored him for his green card. The immigration judge granted the petition removing conditions, overcoming the previous USCIS denial, thereby stopping his deportation.

Another Cancellation of Removal Win

Another cancellation of removal grant issued by the Immigration Court in Buffalo, N.Y. on behalf of my client, a citizen of Mexico. My client is the father of two United States citizen children, and is a valued employee of a Colorado based company that depends on his highly specialized services.

The government vigorously opposed our request for cancellation of removal, but thankfully, the Court saw fit to favorably exercise discretion on my client's behalf. His Green Card should arrive in the mail in the coming weeks, and his children no longer have to worry about whether their father will come home to tuck them in at night.

Cancellation of Removal Granted Over Government Opposition

Cancellation of removal granted for a citizen of Mexico who is the husband and father of United States citizens. The weight of deportation has been permanently lifted from his shoulders, and his Green Card should be arriving within the next few weeks.

Appeal Sustained Reversing the Denial of an Application for Permission to Reapply

My client was expeditiously removed at Boston's Logan International Airport for lack of proper documents based on suspicion of previous unauthorized employment. An I-212 was filed in October 2015, and was denied on October 10, 2017. I was retained to appeal the decision. I argued that ARO failed to set forth any basis for the denial of the I-212. The ARO elected to treat my appeal as Motion to Reopen, and rescinded I-212 denial, granting my client permission to reapply based on the strength of my evidentiary submission. My client is now again eligible to apply for admission to the United States.

Matthew Kolken quoted on FOX

“It’s unspeakable,” immigration lawyer Matthew Kolken told Fox News. “In this day and age, we don’t allow our children to walk to school alone… The actors that are smuggling individuals are unscrupulous. They take advantage of them. Women are subjected to sexual assault and rape. Children too.”

Kolken says criminals sometimes embed themselves in migrant caravans and target unsuspecting individuals.

“(Criminals) have infrastructure that is built up already and are put into place inside the caravans,” he said.

A review from a satisfied client

A review from a satisfied client

I was detained at BFDF (Batavia) for over staying after my visa extension application was denied. My employer was not aware that there was a 10 day period before which I had to leave the country. Matthew met with me at the detention facility and walked through what he intended in detail. He got me out the next day without paying the bond by convincing the government to cancel deportation proceedings. Swift and precise is how I would like to describe him. Expert in the field of Immigration Law, highly recommended.

Client Released From Custody after NTA Cancelled

Yesterday, I was able to convince the head of Enforcement and Removal Operations, after first convincing Chief Counsel, to cancel a Notice to Appear prior to it being filed with the immigration court. My client was a detained H-1B overstay whose renewal petition filed by another firm was recently denied. The client was released from custody this morning at 6:30 to allow him to depart the country and avoid an order of removal.

A Toddler's Death Adds To Concerns About Migrant Detention

Matthew Kolken Named Among the Best Lawyers in America in Immigration Law

Matthew Kolken Quoted in Yahoo News

But Matthew Kolken, a Buffalo-based immigration attorney and elected member of AILA National’s board of governors, told Yahoo News that “those of us who have been in the trenches are uniform in our concern about the way he is handling cases.” Kolken said he’s spoken to about a dozen other attorneys with expertise in deportation defense over the last week or so, and “there’s been pretty much a meeting of the minds.”

“For experts in the field, it feels like we’re watching a Holiday Inn Express commercial,” Kolken said, referring to, what he and others worry is Avenatti’s rapid-paced, one-size-fits-all approach to serving potentially vulnerable clients in a highly nuanced and incredibly complex area of immigration law.

“Obviously the reunification of the child is of paramount concern,” Kolken said, emphasizing that he does not know the specific details of Avenatti’s clients’ cases, but has years of experience defending immigrant children from deportation to countries like Guatemala. “But reuniting parent and child in the place that they fled because of unspeakable violence isn’t necessarily the answer either.”

Click here for more.

Asylum Granted for Citizen of Pakistan

Asylum granted by the immigration judge on behalf of a citizen of Pakistan who was employed by an American corporation, and who was brutally attacked and hospitalized as a result of the expression of his pro-American sympathies.

Former Nazi Labor Camp Guard Jakiw Palij Removed to Germany

Palij is 68th Nazi Removed from the United States

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Jakiw Palij, a former Nazi labor camp guard in German-occupied Poland and a postwar resident of Queens, New York, has been removed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to Germany, Attorney General Jeff Sessions of the U.S. Department of Justice, Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and ICE Deputy Director and Acting Director Ronald D. Vitiello announced today.  ICE removed Palij based on an order of removal obtained by the Department of Justice in 2004.

“The United States will never be a safe haven for those who have participated in atrocities, war crimes, and human rights abuses,” said Attorney General Sessions.  “Jakiw Palij lied about his Nazi past to immigrate to this country and then fraudulently become an American citizen.  He had no right to citizenship or to even be in this country.  Today, the Justice Department—led by Eli Rosenbaum and our fabulous team in the Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section, formerly the Office of Special Investigations—successfully helped remove him from the United States, as we have done with 67 other Nazis in the past.  I want to thank our partners at the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security for all of their hard work in removing this Nazi criminal from our country.”

“Nazi war criminals and human rights violators have no safe haven on our shores,” said Secretary Kirstjen M. Nielsen of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.  “We will relentlessly pursue them, wherever they may be found, and bring them to justice.  The arrest and removal of Jakiw Palij to Germany is a testament to the dedication and commitment of the men and women of ICE, who faithfully enforce our immigration laws to protect the American people.”

Palij, 95, was born in a part of Poland that is situated in present-day Ukraine, immigrated to the United States in 1949 and became a U.S. citizen in 1957. He concealed his Nazi service by telling U.S. immigration officials that he had spent the war years working until 1944 on his father’s farm in his hometown, which was previously a part of Poland and is now in Ukraine, and then in a German factory. 

As Palij admitted to Justice Department officials in 2001, he was trained at the SS Training Camp in Trawniki, in Nazi-occupied Poland, in the spring of 1943. Documents subsequently filed in court by the Justice Department showed that men who trained at Trawniki participated in implementing the Third Reich’s plan to murder Jews in Poland, code-named “Operation Reinhard.” On Nov. 3, 1943, some 6,000 Jewish men, women and children incarcerated at Trawniki were shot to death in one of the largest single massacres of the Holocaust. By helping to prevent the escape of these prisoners during his service at Trawniki, Palij played an indispensable role in ensuring that they later met their tragic fate at the hands of the Nazis.

On May 9, 2002, the Criminal Division’s then-Office of Special Investigations (OSI) and the U.S. Attorney’s Office of the Eastern District of New York filed a four-count complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, to revoke Palij’s citizenship.  The complaint was based primarily upon his wartime activities as an armed guard of Jewish prisoners at Trawniki, who were confined there under inhumane conditions.   Palij’s U.S. citizenship was revoked in August 2003 by a federal judge in the Eastern District of New York based on his wartime activities and postwar immigration fraud.  In November 2003, the government placed Palij in immigration removal proceedings.

In decisions issued on June 10 and Aug. 23, 2004, U.S. Immigration Judge Robert Owens ordered Palij’s deportation to Ukraine, Poland or Germany, or any other country that would admit him, on the basis of his participation in Nazi-sponsored acts of persecution while serving during World War II as an armed guard at the Trawniki forced-labor camp in Nazi-occupied Poland under the direction of the government of Germany and his subsequent concealment of that service when he immigrated to the United States. As Judge Owens wrote in his decision ordering Palij’s deportation, the Jews massacred at Trawniki “had spent at least half a year in camps guarded by Trawniki-trained men, including Jakiw Palij.”  In December 2005, the Board of Immigration Appeals denied Palij’s appeal.

The removal of Palij to Germany was effectuated through close cooperation between the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and State. For nearly four decades, the Justice Department has vigorously pursued its mission to expel Nazi persecutors from the United States.  The Palij case was the product of the Department’s longtime efforts to identify, investigate and take legal action against participants in Nazi crimes of persecution who reside in the United States. Since OSI began operations in 1979, that office and its successor, the Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section (HRSP) of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, have won cases against 108 individuals who participated in Nazi crimes of persecution. In addition, attempts to enter the United States by more than 180 individuals implicated in wartime Axis crimes have been prevented as a result of the “Watch List” program initiated by OSI and enforced in cooperation with the Departments of State and Homeland Security. 

This removal was supported by ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations and Office of the Principal Legal Advisor as well as the Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Center (HRVWCC).  The HRVWCC is comprised of ICE HSI’s Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit, ICE’s Human Rights Law Section, FBI’s International Human Rights Unit and HRSP.  Established in 2009, the HRVWCC furthers the government’s efforts to identify, locate and prosecute human rights abusers in the United States, including those who are known or suspected to have participated in persecution, war crimes, genocide, torture, extrajudicial killings, female genital mutilation and the use or recruitment of child soldiers. The HRVWCC leverages the expertise of a select group of agents, lawyers, intelligence and research specialists, historians and analysts who direct the government’s broader enforcement efforts against these offenders.

The case was investigated, litigated and supervised over the years by a host of attorneys and historians in OSI, the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of New York, and HRSP, including Director Eli M. Rosenbaum, Senior Trial Attorney Susan L. Siegal and Chief Historian Dr. Jeffrey Richter, all of whom have served with HRSP since its 2010 creation.  

Asylum Granted for Citizen of India

Asylum granted by Immigration Judge for our client, a citizen of India, who was severely beaten by the government for his lawful activities on behalf of a political party.

Matthew Kolken named as one of the Best Lawyers in America for Immigration Law

I am pleased to announce that I have been selected by my peers for inclusion in the 25th Anniversary Edition of The Best Lawyers in America© for my work in Immigration Law.

Matthew Kolken Referenced in Reason Magazine

Matt Kolken, an immigration attorney and national immigration reform advocate, thinks there's a viable solution. "The law specifically provides that if you are an immediate relative of a United States citizen, [you're] eligible to apply for adjustment of status, which is to become a green-card holder from inside of the country," says Kolken.

Click here for more.

Matthew Kolken Quoted in Salon

Matthew Kolken, a partner at a New York immigration law firm, said there are only two substantive ways Trump’s in-laws could gain green cards: through sponsorship by their daughter or an employer. The latter is unlikely, he said, as it would require evidence that there were no Americans who could do the job for which they were hired.

Click here for more.

Immigration Arrests Drop at Mexican Border for Second Straight Month

Via the New York Times:

American immigration officials arrested 2,885 fewer people at the Southwest border last month than in June, the second month in a row that the number of migrants trying to enter the United States has dropped.

Data released on Wednesday by the Department of Homeland Security show that authorities apprehended 39,953 people at the American border with Mexico in July. The number of arrests in June totaled 42,838.

Matthew Kolken Recognized as One of Western New York's Top Attorneys

I am pleased to announce that I have been named by Business First and the Buffalo Law Journal as a "Legal Elite" honoree for 2018 as one of Western New York’s top attorneys.

Stepped Up Illegal-Entry Prosecutions Reduce Those for Other Crimes

Via TRAC:

The latest available case-by-case records for June 2018 reveal a total of 11,086 new federal prosecutions were brought as a result of referrals from CBP in the five federal judicial districts along the southwest border. June numbers were up 20.3 percent from the 9,216 such prosecutions recorded during May, and up 74.1 percent over March figures[1]. Despite this increase, only 46 percent of all Border Patrol arrests of adults in June were criminally prosecuted.

The number of families arrested by the Border Patrol showed little indication of materially dropping. Numbers have remained quite similar during April, May and June. This meant that Border Patrol officials still had to pick and choose which adults to refer to federal prosecutors, and which adults not to criminally prosecute.

Percent of Criminal Prosecutions for
Non-Immigration Offenses, Southwest Border

Matthew Kolken Recognized as a Five-Year Selectee as a "Super Lawyer" by Super Lawyers Magazine

I am pleased to announce that I have been recognized as a five-year selectee as a "Super Lawyer" for having attained a high-degree of peer recognition and professional achievement.

BIA PRECEDENT CHART

Note: This document compiles headnotes from BIA precedent cases published in volumes 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 of the Administrative Decisions under the Immigration and Nationality Laws of the United States, organized by topic.  It currently includes headnotes from all BIA cases published from Matter of Esposito (March 30, 1995) through Matter of L-E-A- (May 24, 2017).

Disclaimer: This document is provided for informational purposes only as a convenience to the public.  It is not intended as a comprehensive source for preparing an appeal, or for citation in legal briefs, and does not represent an official publication of EOIR.

It is always nice to be recognized for pro bono representation, but that isn't why you should do it

Ivanka Trump: Family separation policy was "a low point for me"

If only Michelle Obama had the strength of character to speak out against her husband's policies of jailing refugee children in deportation internment camps.

"That was a low point for me as well. I feel very strongly about that.  I am very vehemently against family separation and the separation of parents and children…immigration is incredibly complex as a topic." ~Ivanka Trump

.@IvankaTrump: "That was a low point for me as well. I feel very strongly about that. I am very vehemently against family separation and the separation of parents and children…immigration is incredibly complex as a topic." #axios360 pic.twitter.com/shU32wprwu

— CSPAN (@cspan) August 2, 2018

A Refugee Child Has Died After Being Released From Family Detention

Update: The child died following her stay at an ICE Detention Center, as a result of possible negligent care and a respiratory illness she contracted from one of the other children. 
The events took place in Dilley Family Detention Center in south Texas.

— Mana Yegani (@Law_Mana) August 1, 2018

Deportation Terminated on behalf of an Unaccompanied Minor from Central America

My motion to terminate deportation has been granted on behalf of my client, an unaccompanied refugee child from Central America. The termination order permanently eliminates the threat of removal to a country where he faces unspeakable violence. A Green Card will be forthcoming putting an end to this ordeal.

I am proud to say that in the four years since the onset of the surge of unaccompanied children and women from the Northern Triangle of Central America I have not had a single client ordered removed.

I strongly urge my colleagues in the immigration law community to consider taking an unaccompanied minor case on a pro bono basis. Competent representation is a difference-maker that changes lives.

Findings of Credible Fear Plummet Amid Widely Disparate Outcomes by Location and Judge

Via Syracuse University's TRAC:

Immigration Court outcomes in credible fear reviews (CFR) have recently undergone a dramatic change. Starting in January 2018, court findings of credible fear began to plummet. By June 2018, only 14.7 percent of the CFR Immigration Court decisions found the asylum seeker had a "credible fear." This was just half the level that had prevailed during the last six months of 2017. See Figure 1. Supporting details are found in Table 1[1].

Figure 1. Percent of Immigration Court Decisions Finding Credible Fear by Month, June 2013 - June 2018 

Motion to Reopen Granted, Green Card to Follow

After first obtaining a recision of my client's administrative removal order, USCIS erroneously denied her I-485 claiming they lack jurisdiction, and incorrectly instructed that we needed to file a Motion to Reopen with Immigration Court. I then filed a Motion to Reopen the erroneously denied I-485, which was granted, and we are now waiting for a decision that if favorable will result in the granting of my client's Green Card.

Green Card Holder Readmitted Despite 9 Year Absence

I just obtained the readmission of a Greek national as a lawful permanent resident despite a 9 year continuous absence abroad overcoming an abandonment finding. My client is back inside the United States, and we are in the process of renewing his Green Card.

2nd Circuit Rules Criminal Sale of Marijuana 3rd is not an Aggravated Felony

Hot off the presses:

Hylton v. Sessions, 17‐1567‐ag (JULY 20, 2018)

Antoine Hylton, a Jamaican national, petitions for review of the order of the Board of Immigration Appeals, which found him ineligible for cancellation of removal because his prior state conviction for sale of marijuana in the third degree constituted an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act. The single issue on appeal is whether the minimum offense conduct under Hylton’s statute of conviction, New York Penal Law (“NYPL”) § 221.45, is necessarily punishable as a federal felony by the Controlled Substances Act. Because NYPL § 221.45 explicitly extends to the distribution of less than an ounce of marijuana without remuneration, it is punishable as a federal misdemeanor. 2 Hylton’s crime of conviction is therefore not categorically an aggravated felony. We GRANT the petition, VACATE the opinion of the BIA, and REMAND for further consideration consistent with this opinion.

Click here to read the opinion.

A review from a satisfied client

"Mr. Matthew saved our lives. He is THE Best attorney in New York and his team is also very great. I don't have words to explain how much we appreciate what he has done for us. We were in a bad situation because my case was so difficult, but we won the case. I am so thankful of Mr. Matthew and his team."

Acting Director Vitiello’s Statement on House Resolution Expressing Support for ICE Workforce

For Immediate Release

For media inquiries about ICE activities, operations, or policies, contact the ICE Office of Public Affairs at (202) 732-4242.

Acting Director Vitiello’s Statement on House Resolution Expressing Support for ICE Workforce

Washington DC -- Acting Director Ron Vitiello made the following statement after the House of Representatives passed H.Res. 990, which expresses support of the ICE workforce:

\"ICE plays a critical role in protecting public safety and our national security, from combating the illegal drug trade to removing public safety threats from our communities. Our workforce continues to carry out their important mission and we will not be deterred by threats against our agency. I am grateful to the members of Congress who today publicly declared their support for the brave, dedicated men and women of ICE. We will continue to fulfill our sworn oaths to enforce federal immigration and customs laws."

###

It is always nice to be recognized

A Look At Immigration From A Virginia Town With A Fast-Growing Hispanic Population

Via NPR:

Immigration is near the top of the list of issues Americans find the most worrying. That's according to a recent poll conducted for NPR by Ipsos. Views on immigration diverge sharply depending on people's party affiliation, where in the country they live and whether they know people born outside the United States. Over the past few days, we've explored some of what we learned from that poll. And today we go to rural southwestern Virginia. NPR's Melissa Block talked with people in the small town of Galax, which has one of the fastest-growing Hispanic populations in the state.

Threefold Difference in Immigration Bond Amounts by Court Location

Via Syracuse University's TRAC:

In recent years somewhat over one in four detained individuals were ultimately successful in obtaining an Immigration Court custody decision that allowed them to be released by posting a bond[1]. So far this year, this success rate has been 30.5 percent, up from 18.4 percent during FY 2014. See Figure 1. Percent of Detained Individuals Granted Bond in Immigration Court, FY 2014 - FY 2018. 

This increase occurred primarily because more and more of those detained are receiving custody hearings. Judges have been actually no more willing to grant bond at these hearings. During FY 2014 in slightly less than half the cases (48.8%) were bond motions granted. A slightly lower proportion (47.1%) have been granted during FY 2018.
Nationally, for bond hearings thus far during FY 2018, the median bond amount set was $7,500. This amount is up by 50 percent from the median of $5,000 five years ago.

A median bond amount of $7,500 means half of all individuals who were successful in having their motions granted had to post a bond of $7,500 or more. Nearly 40 percent had to post a bond of $10,000 or more. Five percent had their bond amount set at $25,000 or more. Only 1 percent were released without having to post a dollar bond. And only one in twenty had a bond amount that was less than $2,500. See Table 1 for details on bond amounts at the end of this report.

Click here for more.

Where You Watch TV News Predicts Your Feelings On Immigration

Via NPR:

More than 1,000 people were asked about Trump's immigration policies and proposals and about which immigrants should get priority in the U.S. system. The poll was conducted in English and Spanish from June 19 to 20. Most respondents said they got their news mainly from TV.

On some questions, people who get their TV news primarily from Fox News or CNN are even further apart than Republicans and Democrats, with viewers of the other big TV networks somewhere in between.

ICE Arrests 37 People in New Jersey Immigration Enforcement Surge

NEWARK, N.J. — U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Enforcement and Removal Operations (ERO) Newark Field Office arrested 37 individuals during a five-day operation that concluded Friday, as part of the agency’s ongoing public safety efforts. The operation targeted criminal aliens who were previously incarcerated at the Middlesex County Jail (MCJ), and who were subsequently released to the community by MCJ, without honoring the ICE detainer or advising ICE of their release. The operation also targeted other criminal aliens residing in Middlesex County.

Of those arrested, 16 subjects had been previously released by MCJ without honoring the ICE detainer and 78% had prior criminal convictions or pending criminal charges.
“ERO New Jersey will continue to enforce ICE’s commitment to public safety,” said Ruben Perez, acting Field Office Director of ERO in Newark. “Middlesex county, which aspires to be a ‘sanctuary county’ by protecting criminal aliens, in the process assists criminals in undermining federal law, and creates a dangerous environment in the community. It also overburdens local law enforcement. ICE will continue to execute its mission in such communities.”
The individuals arrested as part of the operation were nationals of Brazil, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, India, Ivory Coast, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, and Turkey.

These individuals range from 21 to 68 years old and all were previously arrested or convicted of a variety of offenses. Some of the arrests and convictions included: aggravated criminal sexual contact, aggravated assault, DUI, hindering apprehension, endangering the welfare of a child, battery, theft, burglary, possession of a weapon, forgery, domestic violence assault, disorderly conduct, and illegal entry.

The 16 subjects that were released by MCJ and arrested during this operation include:

A 68-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the Perth Amboy Police Department on January 23, 2009, in Middlesex County for the crimes of murder–purposely and hinder prosecution-false info and was booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On June 14, 2011, he was convicted of aggravated manslaughter and hinder own prosecution-false info and was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment in state prison. On May 5, 2015, the subject was transferred from state prison back to the custody of the Middlesex County Jail as he appealed his convictions. On May 5, 2015, ICE issued a detainer to Middlesex County Jail. On May 22, 2018, the original charge was overturned and he was found guilty of a single felony charge of hindering-oneself-give false information and sentenced to time served. Even though an ICE detainer was previously issued he was released.

A 21-year-old citizen of Turkey was arrested by the South Brunswick Police Department on May 10, 2017, in Middlesex County for burglary entering structure and theft by unlawful taking, and was booked into Middlesex County Jail. On May 10, 2017, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released. On July 15, 2017, he was arrested for resisting arrest, obstructing the administration of law, and possession of marijuana. On October 12, 2017, he was arrested by ICE officers in Monmouth Junction, New Jersey and was subsequently released on bond by the Immigration Judge. On April 12, 2018, he was arrested for a third time for simple assault, harassment, and possession of a weapon for unlawful purpose, and was booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On April 13, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored again and he was released.

A 32-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the New Brunswick Police Department on August 12, 2016, in Middlesex County for Aggravated Sexual Assault- Helpless Victim, Aggravated Criminal Sexual Contact, Sexual Assault-Force/Coercion, and Criminal Sexual Contact and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On August 16, 2016, ICE issued a detainer. On May 18, 2018, he was convicted of Aggravated Criminal Sexual Contact and sentenced to 644 days’ time served, parole supervision for life and registration under Megan’s Law. On May 21, 2018, Middlesex County Jail refused to honor the detainer and he was released.

A 26-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the North Brunswick Police Department on February 17, 2017, in Middlesex County for driving while his license was suspended and on his court date of May 23, 2017, he was found guilty and sentenced to ten (10) days of incarceration at the Middlesex County Jail. On May 31, 2017, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released. He also had a prior conviction for DUI.

A 46-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the Carteret Police Department on December 15, 2017, in Middlesex County for domestic violence/simple assault and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On December 25, 2017, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored by Middlesex County Jail and he was released. On June 28, 2018, he was convicted of Domestic Violence Assault.

A 34-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the Edison Police Department on May 29, 2018, in Middlesex County for aggravated assault and possession of a weapon and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On May 30, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released.

A 42-year-old citizen of Honduras was convicted of illegal entry on November 10, 2009, and removed. On June 12, 2017, she was arrested by the Woodbridge Police Department, in Middlesex County for shoplifting, and released. On March 11, 2018, she was again arrested for shoplifting, and released. On April 21, 2018, she was arrested for a third time for shoplifting, and booked into Middlesex County Jail. On April 21, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and she was released.

A 21-year-old citizen of Guatemala was arrested by the Green Brook Police Department on June 20, 2018, in Somerset County for driving under the influence of alcohol and by the Middlesex Police Department (later that same day) in Middlesex County, for burglary-entering structure, theft by unlawful taking, receiving stolen property and hindering oneself/ false information and was booked into Middlesex County Jail. On June 21, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored by Middlesex County Jail and he was released.

A 21-year-old citizen of Honduras was arrested by the New Brunswick Police Department on May 29, 2018, in Middlesex County for aggravated assault, possession of a weapon for unlawful purpose, unlawful possession of a weapon, and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On May 29, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but he was released.

A 37-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the New Brunswick Police Department on November 25, 2017, in Middlesex County for driving without a license, and booked into the Middlesex County Correctional Facility in North Brunswick, NJ. On November 25, 2017, an ICE detainer was issued but he was released.

A 25-year-old citizen of the Dominican Republic was arrested by the Perth Amboy Police Department on May 25, 2018, in Middlesex County for harassment, hindering, and obstruction, and was booked into Middlesex County Jail. On May 29, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released. He also has prior arrests for domestic violence and forgery.

A 27-year-old citizen of the Dominican Republic was arrested by the Perth Amboy Police Department on January 25, 2018, in Middlesex County for aggravated assault - significant bodily injury to a victim of domestic violence, criminal restraint – hold victim, possession of a weapon for unlawful purpose, unlawful possession of a weapon and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On January 30, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released.

A 41-year-old citizen of Honduras was arrested by the New Brunswick Police Department on September 18, 2017, in Middlesex County for driving with a suspended license and was booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On September 18, 2017, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released. Subject has prior arrests for forgery.

A 29-year-old citizen of Mexico was arrested by the Perth Amboy Police Department on March 12, 2018, in Middlesex County for aggravated assault on law enforcement and possession of CDS/analog and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On March 13, 2018, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and she was released. She has prior arrests for assault by auto and DUI.

A 28-year-old citizen of Peru was arrested by the Union City Police Department in Union City, New Jersey on May 08, 2018, for simple assault and booked into the Hudson County Jail (HCJ). At the time of his release from HCJ, it was discovered that he had an outstanding warrant for contempt from the Perth Amboy Police Department, in Middlesex County. He was transferred to the Middlesex County Jail on the warrant. On May 15, 2018, ICE issued a detainer to Middlesex County Jail but the detainer was not honored and he was released.

A 29-year-old citizen of El Salvador was arrested by the Carteret Police Department on September 1, 2017, in Middlesex County for Endangering-Abuse/Neglect of a Child and booked into the Middlesex County Jail. On September 5, 2017, ICE issued a detainer, but the detainer was not honored and he was released. After his release, he was arrested for DUI and subsequently convicted on March 15, 2018 for the same offense.

Those arrested will remain in ICE custody pending removal or immigration proceedings.

ICE is focused on removing public safety threats, such as convicted criminal aliens and gang members, as well as individuals who have violated our nation’s immigration laws, including those who illegally re-entered the country after being removed, and immigration fugitives ordered removed by federal immigration judges.

For the first two quarters of Fiscal Year 2018, ICE arrests comprise over 66 percent convicted criminals. Of the remaining individuals not convicted of a crime, approximately 23 percent have either been charged with a crime, are immigration fugitives, or have been removed from the United States and illegally re-entered, reflecting the agency’s continued prioritization of its limited enforcement resources on aliens who pose threats to national security, public safety and border security.

Last Reviewed/Updated: 07/16/2018

DHS Northern Border Strategy

Via the Department of Homeland Security:

The Northern Border Strategy establishes a clear vision and discrete actions that will collectively improve DHS’s efforts to safeguard the Northern Border against terrorist and criminal threats, facilitate the flow of lawful cross-border trade and travel, and strengthen cross-border community resilience. It aligns with the requirements of the Northern Border Security Review Act. The Strategy and its companion Implementation Plan will improve the Department’s ability to identify capability gaps and evaluate measures to address them, allowing DHS to improve management oversight and optimize taxpayer resources.

Northern Border Strategy - June 2018

369.13 KB

Matthew Kolken Quoted in Bloomberg Law

“The adjudicators of the applications are now the enforcers of the law,” Matthew Kolken of Kolken & Kolken in Buffalo, N.Y., said July 9. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, not the USCIS, has traditionally handled enforcement, he told Bloomberg Law.

With the likelihood of removal increasing “exponentially” if a visa petition isn’t properly “squared away,” employers that spend a great deal of time and money sponsoring a worker for a visa could see that worker removed from the U.S. with few options, if any, for coming back, he said.

Click here for the full article.

A review from a satisfied client

Before I hired Mr. Kolken I was working with another Immigration Law Firm that claims to have been around for decades with the best Immigration attorneys in the country. It was a major disappointment at all levels from incompetence to ignorance of some Immigration Laws to messing up my application (missing and erroneous information) to showing up 20 minutes late to the USCIS interview appointment.

As a consequence of their missteps, incompetence and disorganization I received a several pages long RFE from USCIS. After they reviewed the RFE the told me that my case is desperate now. That was when I decided to fire them.

After firing the first law firm, I did interview eleven Immigration attorneys from across the country including Mr. Kolken at the cost of hundreds of Dollars. Of all of them Mr. Kolken stood out as the honest straightforward attorney who explained to me the path forward to resolving my issues and the risks involved. I decided to hire Mr. Kolken.

My experience with Mr. Kolken and his Law Firm was exceptional. My file was handled by Attorney Mietlicki and Attorney Kolken. Mr. Mietlicki was accessible and responsive to all my inquiries and was there when I needed some reassurance. Mr. Kolken responded to the RFE by the due date.

Thanks to Mr. Kolken and his Law Firm my case has been resolved.

I want to say thank you to Mr. Kolken, Mr. Mietlicki and their staff for the professionalism and caring when I needed someone to talk to.

USCIS Updates Notice to Appear Policy Guidance to Support DHS Enforcement Priorities

Versión en español

WASHINGTON — U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issued updated guidance (PDF, 139 KB) today that aligns its policy for issuing Form I-862, Notice to Appear, with the immigration enforcement priorities of the Department of Homeland Security.

A Notice to Appear (NTA) is a document given to an alien that instructs them to appear before an immigration judge on a certain date. The issuance of an NTA commences removal proceedings against the alien. Under the new guidance, USCIS officers will now issue an NTA for a wider range of cases where the individual is removable and there is evidence of fraud, criminal activity, or where an applicant is denied an immigration benefit and is unlawfully present in the United States.

“For too long, USCIS officers uncovering instances of fraudulent or criminal activity have been limited in their ability to help ensure U.S. immigration laws are faithfully executed. This updated policy equips USCIS officers with clear guidance they need and deserve to support the enforcement priorities established by the president, keep our communities safe, and protect the integrity of our immigration system from those seeking to exploit it,” said USCIS Director L. Francis Cissna.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients and requestors are exempted from this updated guidance when: (1) processing an initial or renewal DACA request or DACA-related benefit request; or (2) processing a DACA recipient for possible termination of DACA. As explained in the concurrently issued DACA-specific guidance, USCIS will continue to apply the 2011 NTA guidance (PDF, 77 KB) to these cases. USCIS will also continue to follow the existing DACA information-sharing policy regarding any information provided by a DACA requestor in a DACA request or DACA-related benefit request.

USCIS, along with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), has legal authority under current immigration laws to issue NTAs. This Policy Memorandum updates the guidelines USCIS officers use to determine when to refer a case to ICE or to issue an NTA. The revised policy generally requires USCIS to issue an NTA in the following categories of cases in which the individual is removable:

• Cases where fraud or misrepresentation is substantiated, and/or where an applicant abused any program related to the receipt of public benefits. USCIS will issue an NTA even if the case is denied for reasons other than fraud.
• Criminal cases where an applicant is convicted of or charged with a criminal offense, or has committed acts that are chargeable as a criminal offense, even if the criminal conduct was not the basis for the denial or the ground of removability. USCIS may refer cases involving serious criminal activity to ICE before adjudication of an immigration benefit request pending before USCIS without issuing an NTA.
• Cases in which USCIS denies a Form N-400, Application for Naturalization, on good moral character grounds because of a criminal offense.
• Cases in which, upon the denial of an application or petition, an applicant is unlawfully present in the United States.

The revised policy does not change the USCIS policy for issuing an NTA in the following categories:

• Cases involving national security concerns;
• Cases where issuing an NTA is required by statute or regulation;
• Temporary Protected Status (TPS) cases, except where, after applying TPS regulatory provisions, a TPS denial or withdrawal results in an individual having no other lawful immigration status;
• DACA recipients and requestors when: (1) processing an initial or renewal DACA request or DACA-related benefit request; or (2) processing a DACA recipient for possible termination of DACA.

Under separate policy guidance (PDF, 77 KB) issued concurrently, USCIS officers will continue to apply PM 602-0050, Revised Guidance for the Referral of Cases and Issuance of Notices to Appear (PDF, 77 KB) (NTAs) in Cases Involving Inadmissible and Removable Aliens, dated November 7, 2011, to the issuance of NTAs and Referrals to ICE for DACA recipients and requestors.

Interim and final policy memos are official USCIS policy documents and are effective the date the memos are issued.

For more information on USCIS and our programs, please visit uscis.gov or follow us on Twitter (@uscis), YouTube (/uscis), Facebook (/uscis), and Instagram (@USCIS).

Last Reviewed/Updated: 07/05/2018

Many unaware that most immigrants in the U.S. are here legally

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Media contact: Olivia O'Hea, 202-419-4372, oohea@pewresearch.org


Shifting Public Views on Legal Immigration into the U.S.
Many unaware that most immigrants in the U.S. are here legally

WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 28, 2018) – While there has been considerable attention on illegal immigration into the U.S. recently, opinions about legal immigration have undergone a long-term change. Support for increasing the level of legal immigration has risen, while the share saying legal immigration should decrease has fallen, according to a new national survey by Pew Research Center. 

The survey finds that 38% say legal immigration into the United States should be kept at its present level, while 32% say it should be increased and 24% say it should be decreased. 

Since 2001, the share of Americans who favor increased legal immigration into the U.S. has risen 22 percentage points (from 10% to 32%), while the share who support a decrease has declined 29 points (from 53% to 24%). 

The shift is mostly driven by changing views among Democrats. The share of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents who say legal immigration into the U.S. should be increased has doubled since 2006, from 20% to 40%. 

Republicans’ views also have changed, though more modestly. The share of Republicans and Republican leaners who say legal immigration should be decreased has fallen 10 percentage points since 2006, from 43% to 33%. 

Still, about twice as many Republicans (33%) as Democrats (16%) support cutting legal immigration into the U.S. 

The new survey, which was largely conducted before the crisis at the U.S.-Mexico border involving immigrant children being separated from their parents, finds deep and persistent partisan divisions in a number of attitudes toward immigrants, as well as widespread misperceptions among the public overall about the share of the immigrant population in the U.S. that is in this country illegally: 

Fewer than half of Americans know that most immigrants in the U.S. are here legally. Just 45% of Americans say that most immigrants living in the U.S. are here legally; 35% say most immigrants are in the country illegally, while 6% volunteer that about half are here legally and half illegally and 13% say they don’t know. In 2015, the most recent year for which data is available, lawful immigrants accounted for about three-quarters of the foreign-born population in the United States. 

Most feel sympathy toward unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. Nearly-seven-in-ten (69%) are very or somewhat sympathetic toward immigrants who are in the United States illegally. That view has changed little since 2014, when a surge of unaccompanied children from Central America attempted to enter the U.S. at the border. An overwhelming share of Democrats (86%) say they are sympathetic toward immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally, compared with about half of Republicans (48%). 

Fewer say granting legal status to unauthorized immigrants is a “reward.” Just 27% of Americans say that giving people who are in the U.S. illegally a way to gain legal status is like rewarding them for doing something wrong. More than twice as many (67%) say they don’t think of it this way. Since 2015, the share saying that providing legal status for those in the U.S. illegally is akin to a “reward” for doing something wrong has declined 9 percentage points. 

Most Americans do not think undocumented immigrants are more likely to commit serious crimes.Large majorities of Americans say that undocumented immigrants living in the U.S. are not more likely than U.S. citizens to commit serious crimes (65% say this) and that undocumented immigrants mostly fill jobs citizens don’t want (71% say this). These opinions, which also are divided along partisan lines, are virtually unchanged since 2016. 

Most people who encounter immigrants who do not speak English well aren’t bothered by this. Most Americans say they often (47%) or sometimes (27%) come into contact with immigrants who speak little or no English. Among those who say this, just 26% say it bothers them, while 73% say it does not. The share saying they are bothered by immigrants speaking little or no English has declined by 12 percentage points since 2006 (from 38% to 26%) and 19 points since 1993 (from 45%). 

The survey was conducted June 5-12 among 2,002 adults. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 2.6 percentage points for results based on the full sample.

Read the report:http://www.people-press.org/2018/06/28/shifting-public-views-on-legal-immigration-into-the-u-s


For more information or to arrange an interview, please contact Olivia O'Hea at oohea@pewresearch.org or 202-419-4372.

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It does not take policy positions. The Center is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts, its primary funder. Subscribe to our daily and weekly email newsletters or follow us on our Fact Tank blog.