Tag: BIA

What Will Loretta Lynch’s Nomination Mean for Immigration Reform?

The White House just announced the nomination of Loretta Lynch as the new Attorney General. Ms. Lynch has a long history of civil rights victories. However, what will her nomination mean for immigration purposes?

The Attorney General overseas a great deal of the immigration system. The Immigration Court system and the Board of Immigration Appeals are both supervised by the Justice Department, which is directly overseen by the Attorney General. The Attorney General can also overrule the Board of Immigration Appeal’s decision and may sua sponte take over cases in the system for his review.

Several Republican Senators have asked Lynch to weigh in on the immigration debate. Some are even considering this issue a potential road block to her conformation. The problem here is the administration’s reputation for deporting undocumented aliens, a reputation that Ms. Lynch will inherit as the Attorney General. We will have to wait and see if Ms. Lynch would follow Holder’s steps, or if she would draw her own path.

What do you think?

Guess What? Country Reports are Not Dispositive in Future Fear Determinations (Just Like We Have Been Saying)

Just like every immigration practitioner has been arguing for a long time, the Eleventh Circuit recently ruled that the State Department’s country reports are not dispositive on future fear determinations. The Petitioner in the case was denied his asylum claim before the immigration judge and the Board of Immigration Appeals. Both had ruled that he could not show that he faces any prospects of future persecution. He had argued that he faces such prospects because he had applied for asylum and his application was denied. The immigration judge had denied his claim since the State Department’s 2011 country report was silent regarding the persecution of failed asylum seekers.

The court ruled that the State Department’s report is not exhaustive and can not rebut a specific applicant’s claim without specifically commenting on that case. The court granted the petition for review and remanded the case to the Board.

I  have argued on several occasions that these reports were unreliable. I also argue that the client has a right to confront the report’s author. I applaud the case. If you would like to read it, visit this link.