Updates from June, 2010 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 12:23 am on June 29, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , passport seized at airport   

    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.

     
    • rob saijjke 8:34 pm on July 7, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      mr coane, how often does this happen? can DHS take away your passport on suspicion of being a terrorist or illegal alien, without any cause or does that become a criminal matter?

      • Coane & Associates 9:15 pm on July 7, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        DHS can pretty-much do whatever they want at the port of entry (airport), including taking your passport, green card, etc. Of course, you can “challenge” that through the court system.

        • Anonymous 7:12 am on May 9, 2011 Permalink

          hi my passport has been kept by dhs. im anf1 student and i lost my status due to missing a lot of classes, so dhs came to my house took me to detention center. I was off within couple hours on bond of $1200, but the kept my passport. I have a court date at the end of July. So in this case my ID has expired, Is there any system to renew it.

    • Sam 1:05 am on July 8, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      Doesn’t that become a crime, then? And what is the statute of limitation for challenging the system?

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 11:52 am on June 22, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: arizona criminal law, arizona immigration laws, , u.s. constitution   

    Arizona Immigration Law: Violation of the 14th Amendment 

    When Arizona recently passed a law making it a crime to be an illegal immigrant and requiring law enforcement to investigate when they have any probable cause to suspect people are here illegally, the act has highlighted this extraordinary gray area of American law. Immigration has always been a federal issue and a matter of civil rather than criminal law. It is not technically a punishable crime to be here illegally. Whether Arizona has a right to make it a crime will be argued in the American courts.

    As for empowering law enforcement to investigate immigration status, if probable cause means finding a current driver’s license issued by another nation in the wallet of a murder suspect or hearing him blurt out “Please don’t ship me back to Mexico,” that’s reasonable. If probable cause means realizing a person stopped for speeding looks Hispanic or has the last name  ”Martinez”,  that’s unreasonable, and not to mention a violation of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  Additionally, this law pales next to other proposed state and local laws that are in some cases obviously unconstitutional.

    In Arizona, state Senator Russell Pearce, a prime mover behind Arizona’s first foray into immigration law, is proposing a change in law so that babies born in the United States whose parents cannot prove they are here legally are not granted citizenship. Whether or not Senator Russell thinks this is a great idea, this is unconstitutional.

    The 14th Amendment of the U. S. Constitution states: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”   An attempt to pass a state law saying children born in Arizona to illegal immigrants are not citizens is a cynical waste of time, an attempt to pander to the emotions of anti-immigrant voters without doing a thing to deal with any real problems.

    Arizona immigration law has become a tipping point for other states looking to pass laws involving social services, firearms.  And in Nebraska this week, residents in the town of Fremont will vote on a law that would make it illegal to hire illegal aliens and force employers to use the federal E-Verify system to check the status of applicants. It would also become illegal to rent apartments to illegal aliens, which will increase the rate of homelessness.

    The issue in Fremont, Nebraska,  a town heavily dependent on the meatpacking industry is that the Hispanic population has grown from 165 in 1990 to nearly 2,000 now, in a town of about 25,000.  The growth is contributed to manufacturing plants like Fremont Beef and Hormel, unemployment is less than 5 percent; however some residents point to the Hispanic population as a source of growing crime and increased demand for social services.

    Oklahoma is looking at passing tougher penalties for illegal immigrants caught with firearms.  South Carolina is considering passing a law making it illegal to hire workers on the side of the road. In addition, state immigration legislation is also being considered in Idaho, Utah, Missouri, Texas, North Carolina, Maryland, Minnesota, and Colorado.  Who’s next?  Get in line.

    What the other states are witnessing around the country is that the public’s patience is wearing out with the federal government’s failure to enforce immigration laws and protect the interests of American workers and taxpayers.

    The problem with some of these newly proposed laws are that it’s already illegal to hire illegal immigrants, most large businesses already use E-Verify™ and the some of the manufacturing plants are located outside of the city limits and is unincorporated. Some of these newly proposed laws would have no effect on the factories and could discourage landlords from renting to any Hispanics, Asians, and other immigrants, leaving families homeless.

    In my humble opinion, Americans need immigration laws that make sense, and we need them enforced.  However, we don’t need grandstanding politicians pushing for meaningless and unconstitutional laws that violate the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.    It’s a waste of our time, energy, and funds.   Finding real solutions will demand all of those resources, and it’s being wasted on passing unconstitutional laws.

    

     
    • Tara Dyson 6:48 pm on June 22, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      AZ attorney general and Senator Pearce should both be fired for deregulation of duty.

    • Alex Flanders 6:54 pm on June 22, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      With the heated debate surrounding Arizona’s immigration law there are two arguments that seem to pop up stubbornly. Either its you’re a racist for wanting closed borders, or your making a big deal about nothing because really, the illegals pay taxes and help the economy.

      The first charge is a waste of time even to try and refute because no matter what you do or say, to disagree with a liberal makes you a racist.

      With the second charge however, common sense proves it false. But, if like so many liberals, common sense is lacking then the facts surely fill the void. There are so many excuses that amount to no better than grasping at straws. As I saw one person complain, “Most “illegals” pay taxes and still don’t qualify for welfare” true to an extent as legally, illegal aliens do not qualify for welfare. The nanny state wonder of welfare is reserved for citizens. At least they’re not supposed to qualify for it. But it is incredibly naive to think illegals aren’t getting hand outs and entitlements all over the place.
      Senator Pearce is a complete idiot.

      • phillip s. 3:40 am on June 23, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        It is amazing that so many can rant about the constitution but when Russel Pearce contemplating a new law that is in violation of Section 1 of the 14th amendment, it is okay! Still trying to figure out this conondrum!!!

    • Bobby 6:59 pm on June 22, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      But that would fall under the jurisdiction of common sense. Good luck arguing that. So lets move on to some figures. There are two income tax forms, the 1040 and the 1040NR for working nonresidents. The GAO report shows that 634,000 1040NRs were filed in 2007. That’s 634,000 out of an estimated 9 to 11 million illegals? So unless millions of illegals suddenly had the urge to pay their taxes, then I’m pretty sure that’s not much different from 2010. This is also similarly reported in CIS and OIS reports. The idea that illegals put anything back into the economy is ludicrous. Any taxes they may or may not pay is immediately dwarfed by the social and economic cost.

    • irsattorney 3:36 am on June 23, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      Providing FULL Citizenship ‘rights to those born on American Soil regardless, if the parents entered the country illegally defies gravity. >> If a Foreign National commits a capital crime and, flees to their home country,… does that make him/her “safe”? >> This isn’t Baseball.

    • nili adler 12:24 pm on June 23, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      I don’t like it.We need some kind of a law that the government can follow through,not some barbaric rituals.If it did not work before,what makes you think it will work now? And what makes you think this is better?Something should have been done before this law came into exsistance anyway.”

    • That Other Mike 11:11 am on June 25, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      What the other states are witnessing around the country is that the public’s patience is wearing out with the federal government’s failure to enforce immigration laws and protect the interests of American workers and taxpayers.

      Perceived,/em> failure is what you mean – deportations of illegal entrants have risen dramatically during the Obama administration.

    • phill 4:55 pm on April 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply

      id undrstan it how is it a violasion

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 6:08 pm on June 21, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , EEOC investigation, ,   

    Gay Man Pursues Sexual Discrimination Claim 

    Today, my client will be participating in an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) investigation concerning his charge of discrimination. We filed his charge with the EEOC claiming discrimination based on sex.  While normally there are no laws preventing employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, in this case, his supervisor suspected that the client was gay, kept asking questions about his family, etc, and fired him after 6 weeks on the job because he “was not the right fit,” and things were “not working well.”   The client is claiming sex discrimination, as the basis to enable the EEOC to investigate. Following today’s investigatory process, there will be the opportunity for mediation to see if there is a way to amicably resolve this case.

     
    • Allison Welsch 7:41 pm on June 21, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      How often does that occur in the work place?

      • Coane & Associates 12:52 pm on June 28, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        I have had this type of issue many times, so, unfortunately, it is probably a common occurance.

    • Raj Makajanani 1:40 pm on June 22, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      Did you case get resolved, and what was the outcome?

      • Coane & Associates 12:50 pm on June 28, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        The investigation at EEOC continues, and when they are done, we can take the case to court, unless the case settles, of course.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 9:14 pm on June 16, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: aggravated felony, Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, , drug offense,   

    Supreme Court Ruling Saved Immigrant from Deportation 

    The Supreme Court has issued a decision this week that will help many non-citizens avoid being deported. A state drug offense is not considered an “aggravated felony” unless it is punishable as a felony under federal law. A second or subsequent simple possession drug offense is not punishable as a felony under federal law unless the prosecutor charges the defendant as a recidivist before trial or before a guilty plea. On June 14, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled that when a defendant has been convicted of a second or subsequent simple possession drug offense that has not been enhanced as a result of a prior conviction, the defendant has not been convicted of an offense that is punishable as a felony under federal law and has therefore not been convicted of an “aggravated felony.” Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder, 2010 WL 2346552, at *11 (U.S. June 14, 2010).

    The Supreme Court’s decision will help one of my clients who is currently in deportation proceedings. His case was put on hold by the immigration judge, pending the outcome of this Supreme Court case. My client obtained his permanent residence (“green card”) in 1981, is married to a U.S. citizen, and has two simple possession drug convictions. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, my client was ineligible for cancellation of removal because he was considered to have been convicted of an “aggravated felony.” However, my client was not charged as a recidivist when he was prosecuted for his second simple possession drug offense. Therefore, as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision, my client is no longer considered to have been convicted of an “aggravated felony” and my client is now eligible to apply for cancellation of removal. If his application for cancellation of removal is granted, he will be able to remain in the United States. The Supreme Court’s decision has saved him from deportation.

     
    • Bill Hurst 11:04 pm on June 17, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      Civil sanctions imposed on United States citizens convicted of a felony in many states include the loss of competence to serve on a grand or petit jury or to vote in elections even after release from prison. While controversial, these disabilities are explicitly sanctioned by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, a Reconstruction-era amendment that deals with permissible state regulation of voting rights.

    • natalie byers 3:56 pm on June 23, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      I am desperately seeking advice (and searching for legal counsel) for the following case. I’m trying to help someone that I’ve known dearly for 11 years who was deported in 2004 to Mexico for a 2000 cocaine conviction/aggravated felony. He did 3 years probation, rehab and had completely turned his life back around to how it was before he made a few bad choices/friends when out of the blue he was deported.

      At the time of his deportation, the attorney did not give him his full options and said there was nothing that he could do. So, there was no fight to prevent the deportation. Obviously, had he known his rights/choices, the energy would have been placed into remaining into the country, getting the charges expunged/reduced or getting permission to be allowed back in the country after a few years.

      This gentleman was a permanent resident in San Diego, California for more than 30 years at the time of his deportation. His parents are both permanent US residents and his two younger brothers are natural US citizens. Obviously, everyone involved would love to see him get back into the States to be with family and also to start a new life (get married and live a law-abiding life).

      I know this is a severe and challenging case, but I’m determined to try every avenue to help fight for someone that was not given that opportunity and who deserves a second chance.

      • Coane & Associates 12:46 pm on June 28, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        We handle cases like this. Call our office. At 713 850 0066 to arrange a telephone appointment with Ajay Chaudhary, who specializes in criminal immigrant cases.

      • Coane & Associates 9:17 pm on July 7, 2010 Permalink | Reply

        I thought I replied to this, but don’t see it. Did you get my reply. We handle these types of cases regularly. You may call us at 713-850-0066 if you would like to arrange for a telephone appointment.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 2:29 pm on June 14, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Immigrant Investor Pilot Program, , services fees   

    USCIS Proposes Change in Fees 

    U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is seeking public comment on a proposed federal rule that would adjust fees for immigration benefit applications and petitions.   The proposal, posted to the Federal Register today for public viewing, would increase overall fees by a weighted average of about 10 percent but would not increase the fee for the naturalization application.

    The proposed fee structure would establish three new fees, including a fee for regional center designations under the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program, a fee for individuals seeking civil surgeon designation and a fee to recover USCIS’s cost of processing immigrant visas granted by the Department of State.  The proposed fee structure also reduces fees for certain individual applications and petitions as a result of lower processing costs.

    Our office believes that fee increases should be followed by improvements in service.  As this has not occurred in the past following fee increases, we doubt it will happen now.  If anything, increasing fees in a slow economy will just result in few applications and revenues for the USCIS.

    To view the proposed new filing fees, please click HERE.

     
    • Jonas 2:29 pm on May 24, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      That sounds ridiculous!

    • Pheap 8:42 pm on July 7, 2010 Permalink | Reply

      I would like to bring my nephew to the USA from Cambodia. What’s the process for getting him a resident alien card?

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel
%d bloggers like this: