Over 250,000 Young People Are at Risk of Deportation When They Turn 21

 

By: Katy Murdza www.immigrationimpact.com/

A lesser-known group of young people who grew up in the United States with immigration status—typically the children of noncitizens who entered the U.S. on temporary work visas—is increasingly at risk of deportation.

They are known as Documented Dreamers, and when these young adults turn 21, they “age out” of their previous lawful status, which was tied to their parents’ visas. They are then required to seek and obtain immigration status on their own or to depart the country. If they fail to depart, they run the risk of being subjected to immigration enforcement and potential deportation.

If a parent can adjust to Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) status, also known as a green card, before their children turn 21, the children are eligible to obtain permanent residency through the same process. But many temporary workers are not eligible to adjust their status. And others are trapped in years-long green card backlogs, like many immigrant workers from India and China, more information  https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5314-young-people-are-at-risk-of-deportation.html

Which Countries Could Get Temporary Protected Status (TPS) Next?

 

By: Melissa Cruz - www.immigrationimpact.com

By the end of the Trump presidency, Temporary Protected Status (TPS) was all but destroyed. The former administration had attempted to end crucial protections for the hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people who benefited from the status.

Now, just a short time into the Biden administration, those protections are being restored or extended.

Foreign nationals already living in the United States whose countries have been designated for TPS will once again be able to live and work without fear of losing their status. Without these protections, people could be forced to return to a country experiencing war, famine, or environmental disaster.

More information https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a5097-Countries-Could-Get-Temporary-Protected-Status.html

Immigrant Children With Cancer, HIV, Cerebral Palsy Threatened With Deportation

By Walter Ewing www.immigrationimpact.com 

Without so much as a formal announcement, the Trump administration sent letters to families of sick children containing a dire warning: leave the country in 33 days or face deportation and a years-long ban on returning. Many of those who received a letter last week are Boston-based immigrants whose children suffer from cancer, cystic fibrosis, and HIV, among other illnesses.

Up until now, the children and their families had benefited from a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) program known as “medical deferred action.” This program allows immigrant families to remain in the United States for two-year periods if they can prove that a family member needs life-saving treatment for “serious medical conditions.” Many of the families in the program entered the United States through a visa or another legal channel. Deferred action enabled them to stay so the family member could receive medical treatment. 

USCIS says medical deferred action has been revised and is now limited to the foreign-born relatives of U.S. military service members. 

This abrupt change in policy—reportedly implemented with no formal notice on August 7—leaves the future of many children in doubt. Children who are now receiving treatment for illnesses such as epilepsy, cerebral palsy, and muscular dystrophy will be forced to return to countries where the medical treatment they need to survive may not exist. 

Some parents of the children, as well as several U.S. public officials, regard the new policy as a de facto death sentence. 

For instance, 16-year-old Jonathan Sanchez has been receiving treatment for cystic fibrosis for three years at Boston Children’s Hospital. With continued treatment, he has a life expectancy of 37 years. But if he is forced back home to Honduras? His mother puts it simply: “He would die.” In fact, his sister died of cystic fibrosis 18 years ago in Honduras. 

Not surprisingly, USCIS’s decision to deport seriously ill children has been met with fierce criticism. 

Boston Mayor Marty Walsh called the new policy “absurd and inhumane.” And Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey wrote, “the Trump administration is now literally deporting kids with cancer.” 

A USCIS spokesman told one media outlet that the new policy does not definitively take deferred action off the table, but that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will now consider requests for temporary relief from deportation. The letters sent by USCIS, however, don’t mention the transition to ICE. The letters simply state that “when you submitted your request [for deferred action] you were present in the United States contrary to law” and have 33 days to leave, or else the federal government will begin removal proceedings. Many families reportedly did not even receive the letters in their mailboxes until halfway through the 33-day period. 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Massachusetts is exploring possible legal action against the federal government over this new policy. 

It is not yet known how many people are affected by the change or if letters have been sent to anyone outside of the Boston area. Yet for the families who received notice of the shift, the fear is immediate. 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

https://www.inmigracionyvisas.com/a4426-Sick-immigrants-Threatened-with-deportation.html

USCIS Changes to Asylum Interview Scheduling Allows Long-Pending Cases to Languish

 

Written by Royce Murray 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) made abrupt and sweeping changes to how the agency will schedule interviews for affirmative asylum applications. Rather than interviewing those who have been waiting months or years for their interview, asylum offices will now prioritize brand new filings ahead of all others waiting in the queue. 

While scheduling asylum interviews in a timely manner is important to applicants, as well as the government, this decision will create additional obstacles for many worthy applicants looking to successfully claim asylum. Over the years while applicants wait for an interview, detailed memories fade, supporting documents get lost, corroborating witnesses become harder to find, and evidence grows stale. Long delays also prevent family members from reuniting in safety together, as spouses or children may be left in tenuous situations outside of the United States. 

Announced in late January and effective immediately, USCIS will schedule interviews following three priorities: 

1. Applications previously scheduled but the interview had to be rescheduled at the request of the applicant or USCIS; 
2. Applications pending 21 days or less since filing; 
3. All other pending asylum applications, starting with newer filings and working back toward older filings. 

The trigger of this scheduling shift is the lack of adequate resources for the asylum program. 

USCIS currently reports a backlog of 311,000 pending asylum cases, which has steadily grown in the past five years as violent conditions in the Northern Triangle of Central America sent many asylum seekers to the U.S. southern border. Subjected to a fast-track deportation process called “expedited removal,” asylum seekers are given a preliminary screening by an asylum officer to protect against wrongfully deporting people back to grave harm. Many asylum officers were tasked with handling these screening interviews rather than previously filed, affirmative asylum cases, and there were not enough new officers brought on board to meet operational needs. 

The workload challenges the asylum program is facing right now are not new. In the mid-1990s, when the asylum program was unable to handle the volume of applications, the asylum system saw numerous reforms, including staffing up the program and delaying issuance of a work permit only to those whose applications were pending for six months. 

Those changes had an impact but as caseloads ebb and flow, USCIS must continue to adapt. When the need for asylum grows, so too must our commitment to protecting those at risk. Rather than pitting old cases against new cases, the agency must set the asylum program up for success by staffing the program with a sufficient number of asylum officers to meet demand.

 

Source: www.immigrationimpact.com 

http://inmigracionyvisas.com/a3768-Changes-to-Asylum-Interview-Scheduling.html