Immigration Matters

Yesterday, the House of Representatives voted on two immigration bills: "No Sanctuary for Criminals Act" and "Kate's Law."  Both bills passed.  The votes followed party lines. Kate's Law Kate's Law is an effort to toughen the laws against those who re-enter the U.S. illegally after a removal order.  It is named in honor of a young woman who was murdered by someone who had re-entered the country illegally after being ordered removed.  The bill was passed with a vote of 257 in favor and 167 opposed.  Only 1 Republican opposed the bill.  24 Democrats voted in favor. The bill proposes an increase to the prison sentences that can imposed when a person is caught illegally re-entering the U.S. after being ordered removed.   The minimum sentence was increased from 2 years to 5 years. The law is intended to be a deterrent to individuals considering re-entering the U.S. illegally after being removed (deported).   How effective it would be remains to be s

The Trump travel ban goes into effect today (June 29, 2017).   There are two parts to the ban: the ban of the issue of certain non-immigrant visas to citizens of six designated countries and the admission of refugees. During the ban, the US Department of State will be reviewing the vetting procedures for the issue of both non-immigrant visa and immigrant visas as well as admission of refugees.  The review will determine whether existing procedures are sufficiently thorough for national security purposes.  What happens after that review is completed will depend on what the findings are.  The Travel Ban Does Not Affect Everybody. It does not affect people applying for nonimmigrant visas or immigrant visas if they are not citizens of the six designated countries.  It does not affect citizens of the six designated countries who already have green cards or already have non-immigrant visas (e.g. B-1/2, F, J, K, L, M, O, P, Q, R visas). It does not affect citizens of the six designa

While much attention has focused on the Supreme Court's decision regarding the travel ban, the Court also issued a decision on another immigration matter just days earlier on June 23, 2017:  Jae Lee vs. United States.   This decision has implications that are far more significant and wide-reaching than the travel ban because it affects individuals who are already in the U.S. and who may been long-term residents, even if undocumented. Jae Lee vs. United States is about whether a person's guilty plea is valid when the criminal defense attorney wrongly advises a client that a guilty plea will not result in deportation.  The issue is critical to people who are not U.S. citizens (i.e. undocumented, lawfully present on a non-immigrant visa, or a lawful permanent resident) because a removal order can make it extremely difficult and sometimes impossible to ever live again in the United States.   Even those who can overcome the deportation order, the expense is significant and takes

In January 2017 and again in March 2017, President Trump issued executive orders imposing a 90-day travel ban on the citizens of six countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Syria) plus a 120 day suspension on the admission of refugees.  In short order, complaints were filed in federal court.  The lower courts responded by putting in place nationwide injunctions while the cases were pending decisions on the merits of the complaints.  The injunction meant the government could not suspend processing of visas for refugees and the citizens of the six countries included in the travel ban.  The government appealed those injunctions to Circuit Courts, but the injunctions were upheld.  The government made a final appeal to the Supreme Court. On June 26, 2017, the US Supreme Court issued a two-part decision on the travel ban.  See U.S. Supreme Court decision on Trump vs International Refugee Assistance Project. The first decision was to agree to hear the case in the Fall 2017 Term.  Thi