Deportation and the 2012 Election

President Barack Obama hasn’t quite received the satisfactory rating he had with the Hispanic voters in 2010, but a recent survey from the Pew Hispanic Center shows that many Hispanic voters still favor him in the 2012 elections.

This survey was done with 1,220 Latino adults from all 50 states and the District of Colombia. The results that this survey got may not be conclusive, even though a lot of Hispanics are most likely to vote for him again, the percentage of the poll are divided into the way the Obama administration is handling the country’s general problems and the immigration and deportation problems specifically.

Obama’s current approval rating among the general population is 46% which is 3% lower than what he received from the Pew survey’s 49%, but in 2010, he received a rating from the Latinos 9% higher at 58%. So what does this say?

The respondents are aware that the Obama administration deports illegal immigrants faster than the previous administration did, and 77% of those who are aware of this object to the current deportation policies.

However, high and low the ratings for Obama go, 91% of the respondents are in full support of broad immigration reform, including the naturalization of undocumented residents brought to the US as children, and the DREAM Act.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

USA Immigration from Pakistan

I just spoke with a potential client in Pakistan. He is a 25 year old man who just moved there from the USA, after spending 11 years in New Jersey.

He returned to Pakistan via “voluntary departure” in order to avoid deportation. Unfortunately, and unbeknownst to him, once he left, another law kicked-in, preventing him from returning to the USA for 10 years. That law is known as the ten year bar.

He was telling me how his city of Karachi seems totally lawless and that there are savage killings and mutilations almost every day. He expressed real fear as a minority Shia muslim that he could be a victim.

My experience representing clients in court is that the immigration judges don’t give much credence to the fears expressed by Pakistani asylum seekers here. But, listening to the fear in this young man’s New Jersey-accented-voice, made the situation in Karachi seem very real. Unfortunately for him, though, there is no quick-fix that will allow him to return to the USA anytime soon.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

Share this:

The Obama administration announced last week that it was going to review all 300,000+ deportation court cases and consider dismissing some of them. The stated criteria for dismissal/closure was whether the personal has not been convicted of a serious crime and has not been a habitual immigration violator. This latest statement from the administration follows earlier pronouncements (known as the Morton memos) from ICE and DHS that they would be exercising prosecutorial discretion and terminating many deportation cases.

Since the Morton memos have NOT been followed, at least from my observations in immigration court, I was very skeptical of the latest announcements last week, which led many to suggest it was a new amnesty. While there was no statement about amnesty, the administration did say that work permits would be issued to people whose cases were closed in this process.

I suspected that it would be “business as usual”, based on my observations following the Morton memos. Following those memos, the local prosecutors in Houston exhibited no intention of dismissing any cases (except for some during the first few weeks). The problem is that the administration in Washington makes these bold pronouncements, yet nothing trickles down to their people in the field. So, the prosecutors and the judge act as though the memos and pronouncements have no effect on them.

Today, I had a deportation case in immigration court and figured I’d test the waters. My client is a young woman from China, and had no problems with the law and is a full-time college student. I asked the prosecutor , Dean Emmons, and the Judge Lisa Luis if they would agree to close the case pursuant to the directives from Washington, DC. The judge said,”I’m not bound by the Morton memos,” and that this was “not the right forum. The prosecutor said that he was not willing to close the case.

So, notwithstanding directives from Washington about the new amnesty, nothing has trickled down to the field. What the government should have done was to order an immediate halt to all deportation cases until they can review the files as was promised. Going forward with such cases, in light of directives from Washington saying to the contrary, is just plain wrong.

In conclusion, there is no new amnesty and there is no stoppage of deportation cases, at least in Houston and Miami where I handle most of my cases.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

Coane & Associates immigration case in San Francisco

Tomorrow, I will be arguing an immigration case at the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

This case involves an individual from Nigeria who married a US citizen. He was given a green card based on his marriage, but about 2 years later, the immigration service canceled his status, claiming they approved it by mistake. In particular, they said that since they never approved his wife’s visa petition, they couldn’t lawfully approve his adjustment of status to green card.

As it turns out, the law says that if a green card is approved by mistake, it’s as if the person never had a green card. The government then prosecuted my client and he was ordered deported, even though he has been in the United States for 19 years and has 2 US citizen children.

At tomorrow’s appellate argument, the 9th Circuit will decide whether to overturn the deportation order and allow my client to apply for certain waivers, to allow him to stay here.

The lesson to be learned from this case is that there is no statute of limitations prohibiting the government from taking away a person’s green card for reasons of mistake, or fraud, or anything else that they can articulate.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bruce Coane is a leading lawyer with 30 years of experience in the field of immigration law and employment law. He may be reached via email at houstonlaw@aol.com or his website at Coane and Associates.

Immigration court proceedings are being terminated, pursuant to new policy

Pursuant to an August 20, 2010 directive from the Department of Homeland Security, immigration court proceedings are being terminated in many cases.

The directive condones the dismissal of these deportation proceedings where there is specific “relief” available for the foreign national. Such relief involves things like marriage to a USA citizen, or other pending or approved visa petition.

While the directive was issued only 7 days ago, I have already seen several of my clients’ deportation cases dismissed. This is a huge benefit for clients as it saves them the time and expense and fear of deportation proceedings.

Can you avoid deportation by marrying a U.S. Citizen?

The answer is yes . . . and no.  Let me explain.

First, if you get married after the government has initiated deportation proceedings, you will have to overcome the presumption that your marriage is sham and that the only reason you got married was to avoid being deported.  Before you can even apply for your green card, you’ll have to prove by “clear and convincing” evidence that your relationship was entered into in good faith, and not under marriage fraud.

Many people get green cards through marriage.  However, the process for getting a green card through marriage while facing deportation is totally different.  You’ll have to file a stand-only I-130 visa petition and specifically request, IN WRITING, an exemption based on a good-faith marriage.  And you can file your I-485 visa petition, if, and only if, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approve your I-130 visa petition.

Finally, even if USCIS grants and approves your I-130 petition, you are still under scrutiny.   You’ll have to have an adjustment of status interview before an Immigration Judge who will independently review whether your relationship is a fraud.    This hearing is generally adversarial.  The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is represented by experienced trial attorneys skilled at the art of cross-examination and  will convince the presiding Judge that your marriage is a fraud.   USCIS doesn’t take marriage fraud lightly.   If you are caught, the penalties are severe; you’ll be barred from future visa petitions and face criminal fines of up to $250,000 and five years imprisonment.

Here’s the bottom-line:  if you are required to appear in Immigration Court and considering marriage as a way to avoid deportation, you should consult with an effective immigration lawyer with considerable experience in courtroom advocacy.  Call me at 713.850.0066 to discuss your immigration case.

Green Card Seized at Airport

Our client’s green card was seized by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) after she tried to re-enter the USA after a short trip abroad.

The DHS now has most USA criminal records in the database at the airports. They even have criminal records from certain foreign countries, like Canada, etc.

If the DHS believes the crime could make the person subject to deportation, they often seize the green card at the airport. Such a person, like our client, is then left with no proof of legal status.

In our client’s case, we tried unsuccessfully to get the green card returned, and finally, today, the DHS office in New Orleans, stamped her passport with proof of legal status.

Obtaining that stamp was no simple task because it requires the filing of form I-90, which is normally used to replace a lost or stolen passport. In this case it was neither lost nor stolen, and it took great effort to get DHS to accept the form. And, without proof that the form was filed, DHS was refusing to stamp the passport with proof of green card status. Now that she has proof again, our client can travel abroad, renew her driver’s license, and work legally.