Case Note: Jennings v. Rodriguez

Yesterday, the legal community, and immigration advocates especially, were shocked by the Supreme Court’s decision in Jennings v. Rodriguez. The Supreme Court ruled that arriving aliens do not have the right to periodic bond hearings to assess the conditions of their detainment. I will sum up the plurality’s opinion in this post. The decision is…

Read More

Board of Immigration Appeals Issues Decision on Particular Social Groups

The Board issued a new decision regarding “particular social group”. The Board ruled that an asylum applicant must delineate a “particular social group” before the immigration judge to be eligible for asylum. The decision is Matter of W-Y-C & H-O-B, 27 I&N Dec. 189 (BIA 2018). The Facts The Respondents, in this case, are a…

Read More

I Told You So!! Judge Limits Trump’s Travel Ban, Again!

I wrote a post when the Supreme Court ruled on Trump’s travel ban arguing that the decision was more expansive than the Administration’s interpretation. I also said that there will be more litigation to clarify who is encompassed within the “bona fide relationship” language the Supreme Court used. Yesterday, a federal judge in Hawaii agreed with…

Read More

Analysis of the Ninth Circuit’s Decision on Travel Ban

Well, to start with, judges are people. If you attack them, they subconsciously, will hold it against you. So please have some respect for other branches of government Mr. President. What Happens Now? So the three judges panel upheld the lower court’s ruling banning the ban. The court ruled that the Plaintiffs have an interest…

Read More

Asylum Applicants can Prove Nationality by Testimony

In a decision that should help stateless asylum applicants, the Second Circuit ruled that asylum applicants can prove their citizenship through testimonial evidence. The applicant in that case was a stateless Tibetan who was born in Nepal. He was severely beaten by Nepalese Maoists for refusing to join them. He was also beaten by the…

Read More