Updates from August, 2011 Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 3:21 pm on August 23, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Morton Memos   

    The Obama administration announced last week that it… 

    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.

     
    • Troy Sim 4:40 pm on August 23, 2011 Permalink | Reply

      You’re right on. Until there is guidance from Washington, D.C. things won’t change.

    • Donna 7:48 pm on June 23, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      Before taking up space about things you know nothing about, Immigration Judges do not have the authority to extend prosecutorial discretion and the judge is right, it is NOT the forum for discussing it. Prosecutorial Discretion is just as the name suggests, at the discretion of the prosecutors. They are not obliged to terminate any case brought to them. They extend PD at their own discretion based on criminal history, immigration history and in many instances statements previously made by the respondents.

    • Bruce Coane 8:27 pm on June 23, 2013 Permalink | Reply

      I disagree Donna. A judge can discuss anything they choose to discuss, and can instruct the parties to discuss whatever the judge wants them to discuss. And, when I wrote this almost two years ago, I was a witness to government lawyers denying PD in Houston on many cases. Things may have changed since then, but in 2011, that was certainly the case from my personal observations.

  • Coane and Associates,PLLC 11:13 am on August 10, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , U.S. District Court   

    Our law firm recently settled a sex harassment case 

    Our law firm recently settled a sex harassment case involving male-on-male sex harassment in the work place.

    The case was filed in the U.S. District Court in Victoria, Texas. The lawsuit alleged that the a co-worker grabbed our client’s private parts on various occasions.

    Our client states that he complained to management but they never did anything, saying it was just horseplay. Eventually, our client was fired. He filed a complaint with the EEOC, and then proceeded with a lawsuit. He alleged that he was fired in retaliation for complaining about sex harassment

    The case went to mediation before the lawsuit was filed, but could not be resolved. Following a meeting with the federal judge, the parties negotiated and the sex harassment case was just recently settled, and the lawsuit was dismissed.

    It is important to remember that, in order to preserve a claim for sex harassment, the employee normally must complain to HOUR or to upper level management. The failure to complain could cause the claim to be void. In this case, the employee did complain and, as alleged, the employer failed to take any remedial action.

    ________________________________________________________________________________________________

    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.

     
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: