Raúl and Judy Cárdenas playing with their 8-year-old daughter, Pamela, in their home in Denver.

DENVER — Prosecutors have completed a lightning review ordered by the Obama administration of virtually all 7,900 deportation cases before the immigration court here, identifying more than 1,000 foreigners who pose no security risk and allowing them to remain in the United States.

In a test run of the first comprehensive docket review ever undertaken in the nation’s immigration courts, 16 prosecutors, laboring long days and weekends since Dec. 5, read through looming stacks of paper files to meet a mid-January deadline laid down by Washington.

According to official results obtained by The New York Times, 16 percent of all those facing deportation in Denver — 1,301 immigrants — will receive offers from prosecutors to close their cases after they pass criminal background checks. Department of Homeland Security officials plan to extend the review in coming months to all of about 300,000 cases before the country’s immigration courts.

The administration’s effort to apply prosecutorial discretion to halt tens of thousands of deportations is a major departure for prosecutors and enforcement agents, and was generally welcomed by immigrant organizations. But the administration is not offering any positive legal status to illegal immigrants permitted to stay. Many will be left in an indefinite limbo where they cannot work or obtain driver’s licenses and may struggle to subsist, lawyers said.

“They will be in immigration purgatory,” said Hans Meyer, an immigration lawyer in Denver.

The immigration court review is part of a broad effort by the administration, as President Obama heads into his re-election campaign, to ease the impact of enforcement on immigrant and Latino communities by stopping some deportations while also reducing huge backlogs swamping the courts.

Among other measures, federal officials this month proposed streamlining the procedures by which illegal immigrants with American family members apply for legal residency.

Based on a loose projection of results from pilot projects here and in Baltimore, about 39,000 immigrants nationwide could see their deportations suspended. Although only a fraction of nearly 400,000 deportations in each of the past three years, the numbers would be high enough to be felt across the country, administration officials said, and could show that Mr. Obama had heard increasingly bitter complaints from immigrant groups about families separated by removals since he took office.

Despite the immense workload that immigration prosecutors here suddenly faced, they said they liked their newfound flexibility in pursuing cases — more like the routine practice of their peers in criminal courts. Each minor case they close opens up time on the court’s jammed calendar for an immigration judge to expel a convicted sex offender or gang member, prosecutors said.

“It makes us feel good to know that some of these low-priority cases will be placed at the back burner,” said Corina Almeida, who, as chief counsel for Immigration and Customs Enforcement in Denver, is the senior prosecutor here. “These cases free up others to move to the front of the line: the egregious offenders, those who thumb their noses at the system or commit fraud.”

Administration officials are trying to thread a needle, refocusing immigration enforcement while fending off Republicans, who say Mr. Obama is doing an end run around Congress to give amnesty to illegal immigrants.

“These actions strain the constitutional separation of powers and defy the will of the American people,” Representative Elton Gallegly, the Republican from California who is chairman of the House Judiciary immigration subcommittee, said of the prosecutorial discretion policy.

Under a policy unveiled in June by John Morton, the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, the agency’s officers are asked to be more discriminating with its resources, using prosecutorial discretion to hasten deportations of criminals while avoiding illegal immigrants charged only with civil violations who have strong family bonds in the country.

“If the only thing they did is enter illegally, they have established ties, they have U.S. citizen children, they are productive members of society, they have no criminal records, it makes prosecutors feel good when you know you can do something,” Ms. Almeida said. “They don’t have to worry about someone knocking on their door.”

But as the pilot project unfolded here, lawyers grew frustrated as it became clear that most illegal immigrants would not receive work authorization and that without new status, they would not be able to obtain driver’s licenses or financial aid for college.

Among the first to benefit under the Denver review was a student from Mexico whose parents had brought him to Colorado when he was 9. Jesús Gerardo Noriega, now 21, was put in deportation proceedings after a local traffic officer pulled him over for a burned-out license plate light. A 2006 Colorado law requires state and local police to report any suspected illegal immigrant to ICE.

Mr. Noriega met the standard for prosecutorial discretion in several ways: his parents are legal residents, and his three brothers are American citizens. He applied for residency, but his papers are stalled in the system. He graduated from high school and wants to go to college — to study automotive engineering to design energy-efficient cars, he specified.

Mr. Noriega was arrested 12 days before he would have completed 10 years living in the United States, when he would have become eligible to have his deportation canceled definitively, his lawyer, Mr. Meyer, said.

“My parents didn’t want me sent back, and they wanted to see me again,” Mr. Noriega said, recalling the days when he was detained. “We’ve always been a close family, and having your son put in jail and taken away from you definitely brought sadness and depression to the house.”

He learned just before the holidays that his deportation had been suspended. “I thought it must have been a miracle,” Mr. Noriega said.

But he is worried that without being able to work or drive, he cannot enroll in the courses he needs for the automotive degree.

“It definitely is a step forward,” he said. “But at the same time. I don’t think it’s a solution.”

Administration officials said they were going as far as they could under existing laws and would continue to press Congress for legislation giving legal status to illegal immigrants.

After being chosen for discretion, an immigrant must pass background checks against federal criminal and national security databases. Then ICE prosecutors offer to file a joint motion with the immigrant to close the deportation case. If both sides agree, the approval of an immigration judge is relatively quick.

The deportation then becomes a “sleeping beauty,” one ICE prosecutor said; it is closed and off the docket, but in theory it can be reopened at any time.

Judges and court administrators here were cheered by the prospect of reduced backlogs. With six immigration judges handling on average more than 1,300 cases each, the Denver courts are among the most clogged in the nation, and immigrants wait as long as 18 months for a hearing.

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard oral arguments in three cases on the rights of foreign-born permanent residents of the United States, two of whom face deportation and a third who was denied re-entry after traveling abroad.

The US government has been deporting record numbers of non-citizens — nearly 400,000 a year since 2009, according to the Department of Homeland Security — and legal challenges to these removals have been on the rise.

The Wednesday cases centered around the US Immigration and Nationality Act, which Congress amended in 1996 to make it easier to deport people determined to be “criminal aliens.”

Under US law, legal permanent residents that hold “green cards” can live and work in the United States with few restraints, but can be deported under certain circumstances.

In most cases, to avoid deportation lawbreaking permanent residents must have been legal residents for at least five years, have continuously lived in the United States for seven years, and not been convicted of an aggravated felony.

The court first heard two consolidated cases — Holder v. Gutierrez and Holder v. Sawyers — both of which challenged the Department of Justice?s decision to deport them.

Carlos Martinez Gutierrez moved to the United States with his parents when he was five, and his father became a legal permanent resident when the defendant was seven. In 2003 Martinez Gutierrez, now 19, became a legal permanent resident.

However in December 2005 Martinez Gutierrez was stopped at the US-Mexico border with three young illegal aliens, and the US government began procedures to deport him for “alien smuggling.”

Martinez Gutierrez argued that his father?s immigration status and years of residence could be taken into consideration in meeting eligibility requirements to avoid deportation.

Separately Damien Antonio Sawyers, 15, became a lawful permanent resident in 1995, six years after his mother did so. But the government began deportation proceedings against him in 2002 after Sawyers was convicted of “maintaining a dwelling for keeping controlled substances.”

Sawyers also appealed his removal, arguing that the time he spent as a minor living under his legal resident mother should be considered.

“It is always true… that immigration officials have the discretion not to bring removal proceedings in the first place (or) terminate removal proceedings once they have begun,” Assistant Solicitor General Leondra Kruger told the justices.

“Current immigration and customs enforcement guidance makes clear that a minor receives particular consideration within the totality of the circumstances” in determining whether discretion is applied, she said.

In a separate case, Greek-born Panagis Vartelas came to the United States in 1979, married a US citizen, became a legal permanent resident in 1989 and has has two US citizen children.

Vartelas however was found guilty in 1994 of counterfeiting traveler?s checks, and was sentenced to four months prison.

In 2003 Vartelas traveled to Greece, and upon return was told that he would be deported under the 1996 rules because he had been convicted of a “crime of moral turpitude” — even though he would not have been deported had not traveled abroad.

Vartelas’s lawyers argued that the law should not apply retroactively.

The court this session is handling several immigration cases, most prominently Arizona v. United States on the authority of states to regulate immigration, which under the US constitution is the responsibility of the federal government.

Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5guABrjNfVB01hsaNQiS5WUkR6KdQ?docId=CNG.f02a09f392cafaaab8362a7efd066fb0.3d1

Source: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/Immigration-courtrooms-silent-during-ICE-review-2566401.php#ixzz1jsFj5Krp

Bronx, New York City. On a beautiful summer day in June 2009, an African pastor named Dr. Mensah Otabil delivered a prophetic sermon that would define the destiny of US-based African immigrants forever. “African immigrants in the U.S should not see themselves as immigrants.

Instead, you should see yourselves as pioneers (first settlers) paving the way for the next generations. Whether you like it or not, your children will never go back to Africa. This is the great migration. You have come here not out of your own desire. You have come here because of difficult circumstances in your home countries.

What you see today as a painful legacy will turn out to be a blessing in the future. 100 years from now, your children will be Presidents, Lawyers, Chief Justices, Ambassadors, Teachers, Doctors, Nurses, Judges, Soldiers, CIA Directors and Senators of the United States. Already, one product of this African migration is President Barack Obama”.

Coming from a well respected, international pastor and a great motivational speaker who started his church in a small classroom and built it into a “conglomerate” of churches in over 20 countries around the world, University, Philanthropic projects, businesses and real estate assets, Dr. Otabil’s prophecy must be taken more seriously like a divine instruction.

THE REALITY Fact is, every African wants to go back home, at least in theory. We all thought we would be here in the U.S for a short time, make some good money, turn around quickly and go back to Africa and establish something big. Done. No way. In reality, it’s a different game. Many of us have been here for a long, long time but have gone back to Africa only once or twice. Even when we do go, we are in a hurry to come back to the United States.

Most of us have become U.S citizens, whether by birth or naturalization. Practically, we are Americans! As Dr. Otabil said, “we must see ourselves as pioneers and American citizens, not immigrants”.

I remember watching a U.S TV series in which the lead star suddenly discovers that he is Jewish, after all. He burst into tears of joy and declared, “Oh God, I’m Jewish” and he cried like a baby.

The first time this realization hit me, I felt very emotional. “Oh God, we are Americans!” Guess what, our destiny is now inextricably intertwined with that of the United States. If the U.S economy goes down or God forbid something terrible happens to America, we all go down. On the other hand, if America becomes paradise, all Africans living here will benefit…..our lives depend on America. Period.

The argument is even more compelling when it comes to children of African immigrants. These African-born U.S citizens, who may be referred to as the third generation, hardly know Africa . Many have never set foot there, many speak little or no African language. I have been blessed with three of such kids.

The sad truth is that the next generation of African-born U.S citizens may never go back to Africa. The Irish, the Italian, German, Jewish, Russian, Scandinavian and more recently Korean immigrants never packed bag and baggage and left the U.S for good. So why would Africans, especially when economic and political conditions at home are not relatively good?

That does not mean we would abandon Africa. No way. Of course we are Americans but we will always be African in spirit. As the Irish-Americans still love Ireland and the Jews also love Israel, so would we love Africa. Make no mistake about that.

THE GREAT MIGRATION Today, an estimated 3.5 million strong African and African-born population live in the US. Other

estimates put that number at well over 5 million, including undocumented Africa immigrants.

Several geopolitical and demographic factors are creating an entirely different landscape. In the next few decades, baby boomers will retire. The graying of US population and the hollowing out of the workforce will quicken. There will be a huge aging population expected to live on the average up to nearly 100 years. They must be fed and cared for. Pressure on the work force will mount. To be able to balance its labor force and maintain its strategic competitiveness, the U.S policy makers would need to act, as they have always done. They may well turn to African immigrants, among others, to fill the gap in the labor force.

And for good reason. African population is the most youthful according to the United Nations. Two-thirds of the population are youthful and are under age 35. About 600 million youth are projected to be in the labor force by 2035.

No other continent or region even comes close, not even India or China. To smoothly absorb these army of youth, African economies must at least triple the 5 or 6 percent current growth rates, qualitatively and quantitatively. In the absence of such growth, even regardless of growth, African youth may be compelled to migrate and flood the U.S and EU labor markets to seek greener pastures whether they exist or not.

Also, African immigration quota is still paltry, possibly under 3 percent compared to India or other countries. There will be the need to increase this quota. The outlook is favorable to Africans. In the U.S, Africans and African-born U.S citizens are largely perceived to be peaceful and hardworking and relatively trustworthy. Such Africans are preferred Managers in stores, pharmacies, gas stations, and even some banks, not to mention hospitals and nursing homes. Even though some explicit and implicit forms of glass ceiling and cultural uneasiness still persist, they will disappear with time, naturally.

It may be hard to tell, but in the coming years, U.S immigration policy may generally favor diversification away from Latin countries and increasing of quotas for non-Latin countries including Africa through such vehicles as the Visa Lottery and other policy instruments.

The result of the above is that the African and African-born population in the U.S will continue to swell exponentially, and along with it the U.S African consumer market.

Another angle is that, US-based African immigrants will significantly benefit from the current significant economic growth in Africa. While some may set up joint venture operations with foreign investors from the U.S, EU, China and also Brazil, many of them will directly benefit from increased Foreign Direct Investment inflows to Africa. As investors flood Africa, more and more African immigrants and African-born U.S citizens may be hired back to work in Africa as “expats” . This

is because they may provide better guidance on a familiar territory; they may be perceived as possess

ing the experience, education and training Westerners especially prefer; also they may culturally connect better with Westerners in particular. This will further increase the clout of U.S based Africans.

OUT OF THE PERIPHERY AND INTO THE MAINSTREAM CONSUMER MARKET.

According to the recent New American Dimension study, the U.S African consumer market is worth over $50 billion and booming. This is bigger than the GDP of dozens African countries. Some experts believe that within 5-10 years, the U.S African market may move from the periphery and well into the heart of the $10 trillion U.S consumer market.

If current estimates hold, the U.S African market may well double in scale to over $100 billion by the year 2020. Already, some Fortune 500 companies including Procter and Gamble, Colgate Palmolive, BMW, and others are showing increasing significant interest in the U.S African Market and are stepping up direct consumer advertising in what they call multicultural marketing. Already, it is believed that about 50% of some remittance companies’ revenue comes from US-based Africans. Remittances from the U.S to Africa are going through the roof. According to the World Bank, in 2010, remittances from the U.S to Nigeria alone was $10 billion.

The result is that the U.S African market will transition into the mainstream consumer market similar to the nearly

$1 trillion African-African market and the nearly $800 billion Asian market, all of which were largely smaller only a few decades ago.

THE GREAT WIND OF CHANGE I have been told by my Indian friends that about 60% of 7 Elevens, Dunkin Donuts, Motels, Pharmacies and so forth are owned by Indians. Impressive. For Africans in the U.S, a great wind of change is blowing. Never before have Africans been so optimistic and ambitious. Across major U.S cities, Africans are getting more “established”. From convenience stores to restaurants, financial services to beauty supply, car workshops to clinics, legal offices to mega churches, real estate to transport services, Africans are opening new businesses in significant numbers. In New York City, African owned businesses are popping up in many locations. Young men from Senegal who hardly speak English are setting up shops. Today, Africans can be proud that they are contributing to the strength and prosperity of the United States, the most exceptional country in the world (please see article on page 27)

THE NEXT LEVEL The truth is, the U.S has always been a land of opportunity and a nation of immigrants. Today, with the election of President Obama, all barriers have come down and everyone can achieve their dreams. For African immigrants, a great door of opportunity has opened. It’s time for mainstream African immigrants to move from the periphery and into mainstream American social, economic and political lives just as the Indian, Chinese and Korean immigrants have done.

To do this, we will all need some tough love. I believe African immigrants must de-emphasize cultural activities. There is too much drumming and dancing. Instead, we must focus on how to get in the big game. Firstly, we must figure out how the U.S capitalist system works. Secondly, at least for the purpose of marketing or administration, there is the need for U.S based Africans to define and differentiate themselves from other groups. This need has become more urgent than ever, now that marketers are beginning to significantly chase the African immigrant’s hard-earned dollar. What do we call ourselves? African Americans? American-Africans? US-African citizens? African immigrants? African-born US citizens? I personally do not like the term “African immigrants” because we are not. We are U.S citizens like everyone else. Thirdly, African community leaders must come together and set achievable, ambitious goals. Lastly, African-born U.S citizens (I like this one better) must begin to make waves. Instead of African leaders coming all the way from Africa to meet the President and Congressional leaders, why shouldn’t African community leaders in the U.S do the same and lobby Washington and Wall Street? Better yet, we must begin to gather courage and set our sights on building great businesses, running for Presidents, Governors, Senators, Mayors, District Councils, Borough Presidents and more. Our market is booming. Our clout is growing. And after all, “we are Americans!”

Source: http://www.modernghana.com/news/371865/1/the-50-billion-us-african-market-and-the-great-win.html

In a move similar to ones chided by federal courts in Alabama and Arizona, one Kansas City area lawmaker has proposed a bill that would require Missouri schools to check the immigration status of its students.

Republican state Sen. Will Kraus’ bill would also allow police to question a person’s citizenship at traffic stops and makes it a state misdemeanor not to carry proper citizenship documentation.

The U.S. Department of Justice last October blocked portions of an immigration law in Alabama that drove Hispanics away from the state and their children out of schools. While federal judges let stand part of the law that allows police to check a person’s immigration status during a traffic stop, the courtbarred a provision mandating schools to check students’ citizenship status and overrode the allowance of misdemeanor filings for those who don’t carry federal registration papers. The federal decision sparked a heated spat between the Justice Department and the Alabama Attorney General.

Kraus’ copycat bill aims to “track noncitizens in public schools in order to get an accurate set of data,” the Kansas City Star reports. Schools would be required to ask new students for a birth certificate or proof of legal immigration, but would still be able to attend school if they or their parents are undocumented. All information collected will be kept confidential. From the Star:

Kraus’ bill would require that schools turn data collected over to the state Board of Education, which would compile and submit an annual report to the General Assembly. The report would contain information regarding immigration classifications of enrolled students and numbers of participants in English as a second language programs, as well as the cost to the state of their education.The report also would attempt to analyze the impact of educating noncitizens on the quality of education provided to students who are citizens.

Kraus says that the bill is part of an effort to pressure Democratic Attorney General Chris Koster to sue the federal government to recoup costs of enforcing federal immigration laws.

“I asked my office to reach out to state agencies to find out who actually tracked the cost of illegal immigration on Missouri taxpayers. The results were underwhelming as we found most agencies have no idea of the true cost to taxpayers,” Kraus said in a statement Tuesday. “Immigration is ultimately a federal issue and the solution will be a federal solution. But until a solution is reached, the impact of the federal government’s lack of enforcement is being felt at the state level. As fiscal stewards of our residents’ tax dollars, we have a responsibility to determine that impact.”

Still, St. Louis Attorney Ken Schmitt told KMOX that the bill would spook families, inciting many to pull their children out of school or flee the state.

“The intent of the statutes is to have happen exactly what has happened in Alabama,” Schmitt, chair of the American Immigration Lawyers Association Missouri/Kansas Chapter, told KMOX.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/12/missouri-immigration-bill_n_1202363.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003

Question:

Mr Uhuru, This prosecutorial discretion issue, can your case be dismissed before it is placed on an immigration court docket and be granted a green card even if it had been denied?

Answer:

Prosecutorial discretion is very broad.  This discretion includes whether to charge a person, what types of charges to bring, whether to drop charges, among others.  The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has no authority to review prosecutorial discretion, Matter of Bahta, 22 I&N Dec. 1381 (BIA 2000).  In general, the government (through Department of Homeland Security –DHS- decides if and when to charge a person.  Yes a case may be dismissed by the government and the government may even grant a green card even if it had been denied before.  If a Notice to Appear (NTA) has already been issued and filed, then ICE prosecutor can move to dismiss the proceedings without prejudice and USCIS has the authority to grant a green card.

Question.

I was denied a Marriage Based Green Card due to insufficient evidence. Now what?

Here it depends on what DHS decide to do.  If DHS deny the petition and makes what is called a 204( C) finding, (marriage fraud finding),the alien will be put in removal proceeding.  Marriage fraud is a serious crime and penalties include up to five years in jail and a fine of $250,000.  Additionally such an alien is precluded from any other immigration benefit.  There are very few ways of overcoming this finding, please consult your attorney on this.   If no finding of marriage fraud, DHS may still put the alien in removal proceedings but the alien is not precluded from other immigration benefits.

Did you know?

Ten day notice  INA §239 (b) –Respondent must be granted at least 10 days after service of NTA before hearing can commence to provide opportunity to secure counsel, unless respondent requests in writing an earlier date.

Information posted or made available on or through this site, including without limitation any responses to legal questions posted on this site, and any other comments, opinions, recommendations, answers, analysis, references, referrals or legally related content or information (collectively “Legal Information”) is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Such Legal Information is intended for general informational purposes.  Consult an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction about your specific legal issue. Questions and answers or other postings to this site are not confidential and are not subject to attorney-client privilege.  This Legal Information does not constitute advertising or a solicitation.

Obama administration officials announced on Friday that they will propose a fix to a notorious snag in immigration law that will spare hundreds of thousands of American citizens from prolonged separations from immigrant spouses and children.

The change that immigration officials are offering would benefit United States citizens who are married to or have children who are illegal immigrants. It would correct a bureaucratic Catch-22 that those Americans now confront when their spouses or children apply to become legal permanent residents.

Although the tweak that officials of the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services are proposing appears small, immigration lawyers and advocates for immigrants say it will make a great difference for countless Americans. Thousands will no longer be separated from loved ones, they said, and the change could encourage Americans to come forward to apply to bring illegal immigrant family members into the legal system.

Illegal immigrants who are married to or are children of American citizens are generally allowed under the law to become legal residents with a visa known as a green card. But the law requires most immigrants who are here illegally to return to their home countries in order to receive their legal visas.

The catch is that once the immigrants leave the United States, they are automatically barred from returning to this country for at least three years, and often for a decade, even if they are fully eligible to become legal residents.

The immigration agency can provide a waiver from those tough measures, if the immigrants can show that their absence would cause “extreme hardship” to a United States citizen. But until now, obtaining the waiver was almost as hard and time-consuming as obtaining a green card.

Immigrants had to leave the United States and return to their countries of birth to wait for at least three months and sometimes much longer while the waiver was approved. And sometimes the waivers were not approved, and the immigrants were permanently stranded, separated from their American families.

The journey toward the green card to which they were entitled was so fraught with risks for the illegal immigrants that many families simply decided to live in hiding and not apply.

Now, Citizenship and Immigration Services proposes to allow the immigrants to obtain a provisional waiver in the United States, before they leave for their countries to pick up their visas. Having the waiver in hand will allow them to depart knowing that they will almost certainly be able to return, officials said. The agency is also seeking to sharply streamline the process to cut down the wait times for visas to a few weeks at most.

“The goal is to substantially reduce the time that the U.S. citizen is separated from the spouse or child when that separation would yield an extreme hardship,” said Alejandro Mayorkas, the director of the immigration agency.

On Friday, the agency will publish a formal notice in the Federal Register that it is preparing a new regulation governing the waivers. But agency officials, speaking on condition of anonymity on Thursday before the proposal was formally announced, stressed that this was only the beginning of a long regulatory process that they hoped to complete by issuing a new rule before the end of this year.

The change on how and where these waivers are issued is one example of a number of measures the Obama administration has taken in recent months that do not require the approval of Congress. The steps are designed to ease the burdens on American and immigrant families stemming from dysfunctional or outmoded immigration statutes.

White House officials are resigned to the fact that there will most likely be no progress before the November elections on immigration legislation that President Obama supports that would give legal status to millions of illegal immigrants. They have been looking for ways to help immigrant communities without going through the partisan dissension in Congress.

“This will open up a huge door to bring a large number of people into the light,” said Charles Kuck, an immigration lawyer in Atlanta who is a former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. “There are hundreds of thousands of people who came to the United States illegally who are married to U.S. citizens who have not taken advantage of the waiver that is currently available. This changes their lives.”

“Yay!” said Nancy Kuznetsov, an American citizen and immigration advocate who was separated for more than four years from her husband, Vitali, from Belarus. Ms. Kuznetsov has battled for years for the waiver fix.

“This is a wonderful humane change that recognizes the importance of American citizens,” said Ms. Kuznetsov, vice president of American Families United, an organization of Americans facing struggles with the immigration system.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/us/path-to-green-card-for-illegal-immigrant-family-members-of-americans.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

DALLAS – “It’s very frustrating,” Lorene Turner said. She has spent hours on Facebook trying to find her granddaughter, Jakadrien. “Once I get home I am up until 3 or 4 in the morning searching and looking,” Turner said. “It’s all I can think about. Finding my baby.”

Turner has been searching for Jakadrien since the fall of 2010, when she ran away from home. She was 14 years old and distraught over the loss of her grandfather and her parents’ divorce.

Turner searched for months for a clue. “God just kept leading me,” she said. “I wake up in the middle of the night and do whatever God told me to do, and I found her.” Turner said with the help of Dallas Police, she found her granddaughter in the most unexpected place – Colombia.
where she had mistakenly been deported by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in April of 2011.

“They didn’t do their work,” Turner said. “How do you deport a teenager and send her to Colombia without a passport, without anything?” News 8 learned that Jakadrien somehow ended up in Houston, where she was arrested by Houston police for theft. She gave Houston police a fake name.

When police in Houston ran that name, it belonged to a 22-year-old illegal immigrant from Columbia, who had warrants for her arrest.
So ICE officials stepped in.

News 8 has learned ICE took the girl’s fingerprints, but somehow didn’t confirm her identity and deported her to Colombia, where the Colombian government gave her a work card and released her. “She talked about how they had her working in this big house cleaning all day, and how tired she was,” Turner said. Through her granddaughter’s Facebook messages, Turner says she tracked Jakadrian down.
U.S. Federal authorities got an address. U.S. Embassy officials in Colombia asked police to pick her up.

But that was a month ago, and the Colombian government now has her in a detention facility and won’t release her, despite her family’s request. “I feel like she will come home,” the grandmother said with tears in her eyes. “I just need help and prayer.” There are still many unanswered questions about how an African-American girl who speaks no Spanish is mistaken for a foreign national. Immigration officials are investigating and released a statement late Tuesday.

“ICE takes these allegations very seriously,” said ICE Director of Public Affairs Brian Hale. ” At the direction of [the Department of Homeland Security], ICE is fully and immediately investigating this matter in order to expeditiously determine the facts of this case.”

ICE officials also noted there have been instances where ICE has seen cases of individuals providing inaccurate information regarding who they are and their immigration status for ulterior motives.

Source: http://www.wfaa.com/news/texas-news/Dallas-Teen-Is–Mistakenly-Deported–136626533.html

Question: “I have a pending case with the immigration court. I have been here for ten years and I have a family. My I-751 was denied for lack of sufficient evidence and a contradictory answer to a question I did not understand during the interview. Can a judge grant me my green card in court and what determines this?

Thank you. George M

Answer: A person seeking relief in removal proceeding may be eligible for several forms of relief.  These include adjustment of status, voluntary departure, cancellation of removal, withholding of removal, asylum, among others.

If seeking relief through cancellation of removal for non Lawful Permanent Residents, then one has to show a ten year continuous residence, good moral character for 10 years, no certain convictions, that removal would result in exceptional hardship to his or her U.S. citizen or LPR immediate relative, and that the case warrants a favorable exercise of discretion.

If seeking relief through adjustment of status in immigration court, the immigration judge must adjudicate the adjustment and the case cannot be remanded to USCIS unless ICE counsel consents.  It’s a matter of prosecutorial discretion whether ICE counsel consents to the case been remanded to USCIS.  This means that an immigration judge has the authority to grant you a green card.

In removal proceedings, the Government has the burden of proving removability. (8 U.S.C. § 1229a(c)).  Once the government has met this burden (through proving up the Notice to Appear) then the applicant has the burden to show eligible for the relief sought — i.e. adjustment of status. ( Aslam v. Mukasey, 537 F.3d 110, 115-17(2d Cir 2008).  It is therefore the applicant’s burden to show that the marriage was a bona fide marriage and not entered into for purpose of immigration benefits.

George, immigration courts, like other courts require legal knowledge.  The government, in this ICE counsel, is not allowed to give you legal advice.  The immigration judge is not allowed to give you legal advice because the judge is supposed to be neutral. If you choose to represent yourself in court, you are expected to know the legal procedures. My advice to those in legal proceedings, whether immigration or any other legal proceedings, is to seek legal advice.

Please remember that this legal Information is intended for general informational purpose only. This legal information is not intended as a substitute to retaining an attorney.  Please consult an attorney licensed to practice law in your jurisdiction for answers to your specific legal questions.

Did you know?

Good moral character.  Under INA §101(f) (1) a person whose is a habitual drunkard is not considered to be a person of good moral character. (Habitual drunkard during the requisite period of the relevant form of relief being sought)

(Reuters) – Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney said on Saturday he would veto a proposal granting U.S. citizenship to undocumented immigrants who were brought to the country as children, a pledge that won hearty applause from Iowa conservatives he hopes to win over.

A young woman asked Romney about the bipartisan proposal known as the Dream Act, during an appearance at a crowded restaurant in Le Mars, a conservative Republican stronghold in western Iowa.

“The question is if I were elected and Congress were to pass the Dream Act, would I veto it and the answer is yes,” Romney said.

“For those that come here illegally, the idea of giving them in-state tuition credits or other special benefits, I find to be contrary to the idea of a nation of laws,” Romney said.

“If I’m the president of the United States I want to end illegal immigration so that we can protect legal immigration. I like legal immigration.”

Under the Dream Act, which was brought up in the Senate in May, young undocumented immigrants who have lived most of their lives in the United States and graduate from U.S. high schools would be eligible for a conditional six-year “path to citizenship” if they earn a college degree or serve two years in the military.

Romney also said he would secure the U.S.-Mexico border with a fence and enough Border Patrol agents to guard it.

The remarks drew vigorous applause in Le Mars and at a later appearance in Sioux City. Romney said he would eliminate the “magnet” that draws illegal immigrants by cracking down on employers who hire them.

“We need to give those employers the tools they need to determine who’s legal and illegal,” he said. “But if they have those tools and don’t use them, we’re going to go after them just like we go after employers who don’t pay their taxes,” Romney said.

He said he would continue a provision that grants a fast track to citizenship for foreigners who serve in the military.

Romney has led in the opinion polls ahead of Tuesday’s Iowa caucus, which kicks off the state-by-state contests to choose the Republican presidential candidate who will challenge President Barack Obama, a Democrat, in the November 2012 general election.

But he has not sealed the deal with some Iowa Republicans who doubt his conservative credentials because of his history as governor of left-leaning Massachusetts.

“We need a staunch conservative to the max and I just don’t see it in anybody other than (Rick) Santorum,” said Pat Renken, a Le Mars resident who manages a grain elevator. He turned out at a Romney rally despite planning to vote for Santorum, a conservative former senator from Pennsylvania.

“There’s nothing that turns me off about him (Romney),” Renken said. “I just like Senator Santorum more.”

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/01/us-usa-campaign-romney-immigration-idUSTRE80001O20120101?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=71