DHS to Expand Provisional Waiver Program Eligibility

Tomorrow, July 29, 2016, DHS will publish in the Federal Register a final rule that will expand eligibility for the provisional unlawful presence waiver to individuals who can establish extreme hardship to a lawful permanent resident (LPR) spouse or parent. Previously, the program was only available to individuals who could establish hardship to U.S. citizen spouse or parent.

This is great news for families of lawful permanent residents. In essence, any individual who is eligible for an I-601unlawful presence waiver (requiring hardship to a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouse or parent) can now take advantage of the Provisional Waiver Program.

The Provisional Waiver Program has the benefit of shortening the time period the Applicant will spent outside of the United States, thereby reuniting families sooner. Before the program, applying for the I-601 unlawful presence waiver at the consulate in the Applicant’s home country was the only option. This process was lengthy, often resulting in families being separated for an entire year. With the Provisional Waiver Program, the Applicant submits the Form I-601A waiver inside of the United States and waits for an approval before departing the U.S.

For more information on the Provisional Waiver Program, or to see if you qualify, please schedule a consultation at Brewer &Lormand, PLLC.

Lauren Wallis is an immigration attorney at Brewer & Lormand, PLLC. She works out of the firm's Dallas office and has practiced family immigration law for three years. She has extensive experience handling Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers and head-started the Provisional Waiver Team at her previous firm when the Program was launched by Immigration in 2013.She also handles SIJS, VAWA, U Visas, Military PIP, Applications for Residency, Citizenship, Adjustments of Status, DACA, TPS, Asylum, and Deportation Defense.

Requesting an Immigration Bond

There has been a recent shift in the decision making process to grant bond to undocumented individuals who are detained by Immigration. Whereas before ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) would exercise its discretion to grant bond based on the circumstances in each case, I have seen ICE declining to issue bond across the board. This means individuals must request a hearing to seek bond before the Immigration Judge.

Individuals without legal representation will find this process difficult to maneuver. For example, detained individuals are scheduled for master hearings, which are separate and apart from bond proceedings. In order to be scheduled for a bond hearing, an individual must request a bond hearing and complete a Bond Worksheet, which typically looks like this. Notice the worksheet asks for the relief the individual will be seeking; a determination that is difficult for a lay person to make.

Another important consideration is that the immigration judge will generally not grant a bond unless the individual is eligible for relief. 

For more information about whether an individual is eligible for relief, or how to request a bond, please contact an immigration attorney at Brewer & Lormand, PLLC.

Lauren Wallis is an immigration attorney at Brewer & Lormand, PLLC. She works out of the firm's Dallas office and has practiced family immigration law for three years. She handles SIJS, VAWA, U Visas, Military PIP, Applications for Residency, Citizenship, Provisional Waivers, Waivers, Adjustments of Status, DACA, TPS, Asylum, and Deportation Defense.

This article is intended for educational purposes only and should not be relied on or construed as legal advice.

Domestic Violence Asylum Claims

In an unpublished decision, D-M-R- (BIA June 9, 2015), the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has held that "El Salvadoran women in domestic relationships who are unable to leave" is a cognizable particular social group (per its decision in Matter of A-R-C-G-, 26 I&N Dec. 388 (BIA 2014)) that "does not necessarily require that an applicant seeking asylum or withholding of removal based on domestic violence have been married to his or her abuser."

Instead, the Court states "we look to the characteristics of the relationship to determine its nature." Of importance is establishing the bona fide nature of the relationship as well as the inability of the Applicant to leave the relationship.

Greater Dallas Hispanic Chamber of Commerce Kicks off Installation Reception

Last night, February 3, 2016, the Greater Dallas Hispanic Chamber of Commerce (GDHCC) kicked off its 2016 Board of Directors Installation Reception at the beautiful Morton H. Meyerson Symphony Center in the Dallas Arts District.

Former CBS reporter Susy Solis introduced the Chamber's influential members, including former Chair Wanda Granier, Mayor Pro Tem Monica R. Alonzo, and Chamber President Rick Ortiz.

District 4 Commissioner Dr. Elba Garcia swore in the new board of directors, along with new Chairman, Mr. Don Perez.

The GDHCC highlighted its commitment to continue bolstering economic growth and empowering business owners. If you are a small business interested in what the GDHCC can do for you, check out their Scale Up Program.

Lauren Wallis is an immigration attorney in Dallas, Texas at the law office of Brewer & Lormand, PLLC. Email her at lwallis@brewerlormand.com.

U.S. Supreme Court to rule on Obama's Executive Action

The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Texas et al. v. U.S. et al. to review whether President Obama can proceed with his executive action to defer deportation and grant work authorization to the nearly 11 million individuals living in the United States without lawful status.

At the heart of the issue is the constitutionality of the programs released by the Obama administration in November of 2014, called DAPA and expanded DACA, that would bring millions of unlawful immigrants out of the shadows.

DAPA is intended to cover the parents of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents. DACA 2.0, as it has been called, applies to certain individuals who came to the U.S. under the age of sixteen and are seeking or have obtained an education.

The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments this April and a decision is likely to be made by June. Twenty six states filed suit to stop DAPA and the expanded DACA from being implemented in December of 2014. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas issued a preliminary injunction in February 2015, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the injunction on November 9. 2015. The Obama administration petitioned the Supreme Court for immediate review of the Fifth Circuit's decision on November 20. 2015.

Read more about what the Fifth Circuit has done to halt the executive action here.

Photo attributable to: jurispage.com

                                         




Lauren Wallis is an immigration attorney at Brewer & Lormand, PLLC. Email her your immigration questions here.