The International Business Law Firm PC

Category: Uncategorized

  • 4th Circuit Denies Asylum Claim On Family Relation

    One of the most difficult areas of asylum law is to determine what social group you are in if you are claiming asylum, and if that is the reason that you are in danger of persecution. While membership in a family is now established as a possible social group, it is important to tie the danger of persecution to the membership in that family and not related dangers that may arise related to membership. At least in the US 4th Circuit.

    On June 26, 2020, the US Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued its published opinion in the case of Jexte Cedillos-Cedillos v. William Barr (https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/182233.P.pdf) denying asylum because his claim was based on his personal danger due to having reported the crimes of those that would persecute him, and since it was based on his personal conduct, he was not eligible for asylum. This is a tricky issue that most may not understand. Reading this case, especially since it is a “published” opinion, and therefore has precedent value, explains the difficult analysis that must be made for a claim to be successful.

  • US Supreme Court Preserves DACA

    The Supreme Court ruled Thursday, June 18th, that the Trump administration cannot carry out its plan to shut down the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, which has allowed nearly 800,000 young people, known as Dreamers, to avoid deportation and remain in the U.S.

    https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rules-trump-cannot-end-daca-big-win-dreamer-n1115116?fbclid=IwAR20dr4j1fgFCSuByRppJTDQF5TFFfrhNSVSbI7ArlarWXBbBjZwFW7EatI

  • 7th Circuit Blocks Public Charge Burden

    This decision releases the Supreme Court stay which permitted the Trump administration’s policy against immigrants to become effective. Not the end of the battle, but a victory.

    https://www.courthousenews.com/7th-circuit-blocks-feds-from-enforcing-public-charge-immigration-rule-in-illinois/

    An excellent article discussing the merits of this issue was posted in the Washington Post on Friday:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-is-so-set-on-harassing-immigrants-that-his-immigration-agency-needs-a-bailout/2020/06/11/52c2ae06-ac1b-11ea-9063-e69bd6520940_story.html

  • Immig Judges’ Authority to Administratively Close Restored

    The US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has restored Administrative Closure as an inherent power of Immigration Court judges, effectively overruling the current administration’s attempt to preclude this standard procedure.  This tool permits adjudication of pending applications by temporarilly suspending immigration court proceedings.

    This is a very good decision for persons in immigration court proceedings because when there is potential relief from removal, say when the foreign national has a US wife, or and approved PERM application, the attorney may ask for administrative closure to permit a decision on the green card application and possibly a hardship waiver, so that the foreign national can be granted residency status, or be able to expeditiously return to the United States upon the approval.

    This decision overturns the US Attorney General’s recent order trying to stop Immigration Court judges from this procedure, presumably under this Administration’s current policy, which appears to many to be to create dysfunction in the immigration system, delaying applications or procedures that might help legal immigration, assist the undocumented to become documented, or ultimately create new voters out of those who gain legal permanent residence and then citizenship after prolonged court proceedings.

    Although the Attorney General normally can set policy guidance for judges, the 4th Circuit determined that the reasoning of the AG was “. . . a stark departure, without notice, from long-used practice and thereby cannot be deemed consistent with earlier and later pronouncements” and inconsistent with its stated goals of expedition and efficiency. The court also found that the tool of administrative closure was inherent in the power establishing the immigration courts, granted to them by the US code — the power to efficiently administer and adjudicate their proceedings.

    The case Romero v. Barr, and is located at: http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/181850.P.pdf

  • EB-5 Q&A: What qualifies as an EB-5 troubled business?

    Answer:

    A troubled business is defined as a business that has been in existence for at least two years, has incurred a net loss for accounting purposes during the twelve-or twenty-four month period prior to the priority date on the foreign investor’s I-526, and the loss for such period is at least equal to twenty percent of the troubled business’s net worth prior to such loss. You may present your business tax returns, accounting records to show the qualification. In the case of a troubled business, 10 jobs must be preserved, created, or some combination of the two. This means if you currently have 8 full time employee, the new investment need to create additional 2.