Thursday, April 11, 2019
A review from a satisfied client.
Mr. Kolken has proven to be the best attorney in Buffalo and throughout the nation. It is hard to put into words the excellent job him and his team provide us. Also a special thanks to Marijo. Our application was extremely well-put together. I would highly recommend Mr. Kolken for any immigration needs.
Thursday, March 14, 2019
Removal Proceedings Cancelled Prior to First Hearing
I was able to arrange to have immigration court proceedings cancelled by Immigration and Customs Enforcement after they filed the charging document with the court, but prior to the scheduling of the first master calendar hearing. My client, the spouse of a United States citizen who is expecting the couple's first child, is absolutely ecstatic. Needless to say, so am I.
Wednesday, March 6, 2019
A review from a satisfied client.
Mr. Kolken is very dedicated and very intelligent in his field. Despite all the difficulties and challenges in my case Mr. Kolken was able to save my Green Card. Not Only the green card but he saved my family from separation by saving my Green card. I highly recommend Mr. Kolken. Keep fighting hard and keep saving the familes. You are a real hero. Thank you once again.
Monday, February 25, 2019
Another Victory to Report
Motion to terminate removal granted by the Immigration Court in Orlando, Florida sparing the spouse of a United States citizen the harsh consequences of deportation.
Wednesday, February 20, 2019
80,051 Deportation Hearings were Canceled Due to the Government Shutdown and New Filings Plummet
Via Syracuse University's TRAC:
Canceled Hearings. The tally for hearings canceled during the shutdown and its aftermath has also been affected by delays in getting their status updated in the court records. As of February 1, a total of 80,051 hearings that had been scheduled during the shutdown were either marked in the court's database as canceled due to the "Court Closure" or their entry was simply left untouched with their status remaining blank although the scheduled hearing date was now long past. If other reasons for cancellations during the shutdown such as 'Docket Management (postpone hearing)', 'IJ leave' / 'IJ reassignment', or canceled 'to allow for scheduling of priority case' are included then canceled hearing numbers rise to 94,115.
Also note:
New Filings. Unless there was a dramatic drop in arrests and removal actions initiated by immigration authorities during the shutdown period, there appear to be a sizable number of new filings yet to be recorded and reflected in the court's workload. As shown in Figure 1, while new Immigration Court cases fluctuated between roughly 20,000 - 25,000 a month before the shutdown, filings seeking deportation orders recorded for January plummeted to just under 5,600.
Canceled Hearings. The tally for hearings canceled during the shutdown and its aftermath has also been affected by delays in getting their status updated in the court records. As of February 1, a total of 80,051 hearings that had been scheduled during the shutdown were either marked in the court's database as canceled due to the "Court Closure" or their entry was simply left untouched with their status remaining blank although the scheduled hearing date was now long past. If other reasons for cancellations during the shutdown such as 'Docket Management (postpone hearing)', 'IJ leave' / 'IJ reassignment', or canceled 'to allow for scheduling of priority case' are included then canceled hearing numbers rise to 94,115.
Also note:
New Filings. Unless there was a dramatic drop in arrests and removal actions initiated by immigration authorities during the shutdown period, there appear to be a sizable number of new filings yet to be recorded and reflected in the court's workload. As shown in Figure 1, while new Immigration Court cases fluctuated between roughly 20,000 - 25,000 a month before the shutdown, filings seeking deportation orders recorded for January plummeted to just under 5,600.
Tuesday, February 12, 2019
Withholding of Removal Granted for Citizen of Mexico Fearing Cartel Violence
I just got out of court: Withholding of removal granted for a citizen of Mexico who fears persecution by the drug cartels on account of his family membership.
When I got this case my client was in custody after having a previous removal order reinstated, and was facing imminent deportation to Mexico. I was retained by his wife after telling her that it was going to be a long shot to win at best.
My first step was to prevent the Government from putting him on a plane back to Mexico. I then assisted in obtaining a favorable reasonable fear determination where my client was deemed credible. After that, I was able to secure his release from custody. After release, I prepared our defenses and legal argument for submission to the Court, and prepared our witnesses for trial.
Today at trial, the immigration judge granted withholding of removal, and the Department graciously accepted the Court's order as final. As a result, my client's citizen wife and children will no longer have to fear that he will be deported to a country where he will be likely murdered.
When I got this case my client was in custody after having a previous removal order reinstated, and was facing imminent deportation to Mexico. I was retained by his wife after telling her that it was going to be a long shot to win at best.
My first step was to prevent the Government from putting him on a plane back to Mexico. I then assisted in obtaining a favorable reasonable fear determination where my client was deemed credible. After that, I was able to secure his release from custody. After release, I prepared our defenses and legal argument for submission to the Court, and prepared our witnesses for trial.
Today at trial, the immigration judge granted withholding of removal, and the Department graciously accepted the Court's order as final. As a result, my client's citizen wife and children will no longer have to fear that he will be deported to a country where he will be likely murdered.
Wednesday, February 6, 2019
Matthew Kolken's Response to the Immigration Portion of the State of the Union address
Statistics show that unlawful entries to the United States have hit a 46-year low since Trump took office, and there has been a significant increase in arrests in the interior of the country. In fact, there are far more people overstaying their visas than coming to the United States illegally. Statistics also show that undocumented immigrants commit far fewer crimes than native born citizens.
I do not oppose physical barriers in areas that have been deemed to be high traffic zones if experts in Customs and Border Protections believe they will assist them in enforcing the law. We are a sovereign country and have both a duty and an obligation to control our borders. Moreover, many Democrats voted in favor of physical barriers prior to Trump making it a signature campaign item. Democrats now oppose a wall simply because they oppose Trump.
That said, the most effective wall is an immigration law that serves both the needs of economic refugees and United States employers in industries with recognized labor shortages. A guest worker program is essential to ensure that there is a lawful way for people to easily come to this country to do the jobs Americans are either unwilling or unable to perform. This will positively impact law enforcement's ability to enforce the immigration and criminal laws because unlawful traffic to the United States will be limited to the real "bad hombres." A guest worker program will also alleviate the number of asylum seekers at the southern border as many will simply be able to apply for a visa to come to the country rather than making the perilous journey where they may fall victim to criminals who control illegal passage.
As for the Democratic response, Stacey Abrams engaged in revisionist history, attempting to whitewash Obama's abysmal human rights record on immigration. Plain and simply, Obama, like Trump, is a human rights violator. He should be remembered as such.
I do not oppose physical barriers in areas that have been deemed to be high traffic zones if experts in Customs and Border Protections believe they will assist them in enforcing the law. We are a sovereign country and have both a duty and an obligation to control our borders. Moreover, many Democrats voted in favor of physical barriers prior to Trump making it a signature campaign item. Democrats now oppose a wall simply because they oppose Trump.
That said, the most effective wall is an immigration law that serves both the needs of economic refugees and United States employers in industries with recognized labor shortages. A guest worker program is essential to ensure that there is a lawful way for people to easily come to this country to do the jobs Americans are either unwilling or unable to perform. This will positively impact law enforcement's ability to enforce the immigration and criminal laws because unlawful traffic to the United States will be limited to the real "bad hombres." A guest worker program will also alleviate the number of asylum seekers at the southern border as many will simply be able to apply for a visa to come to the country rather than making the perilous journey where they may fall victim to criminals who control illegal passage.
As for the Democratic response, Stacey Abrams engaged in revisionist history, attempting to whitewash Obama's abysmal human rights record on immigration. Plain and simply, Obama, like Trump, is a human rights violator. He should be remembered as such.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)