Immigration QA

Credit Reuters Happy days to the Indian national cricket team, taking its first grand title of a T20 World Cup.  A nearly blemish-free record by most accounts. By the way, this year was also America's first serious ICC Cricket tournament on home turf. The U.S. team actually won enough games to qualify for the 2026  T20 World Cup  in Sri Lanka and India! This rather reminds me of U.S. immigration law.  This is because, in addition to the many requirements for U.S. naturalization, applicants must have what is called Good Moral Character (GMC). This can be a highly discretionary standard used as a catch-all for a derogatory past that may not be technically disqualifying. Some people think it only matters for the previous five years. This is not true. For clients without a blemish on their record, I don’t submit proof of GMC.  For those that do, I work hard to prove this up.  So what is considered a blemish?  This must be examined early in a client screeni...

In 2023 the Minnesota legislature enacted the Clean Slate Act. It involves expanding the types of past criminal convictions that can be sealed from public view, as well as automatically sealing others, primarily low level drug offenses. The reason is that, in many situations, past criminal records harm the ability of an otherwise law abiding individual to gain employment, housing, insurance, loans, or the like.   The question of the Clean Slate Act is not whether expunging criminal records is good. The question is whether a system of automatic expungements has been crafted to prevent unintended harm to those who actually benefit from access to their own criminal records.   Who are some of these people?   Noncitizens.  In every immigration application, noncitizens have an affirmative duty to disclose any arrest and provide certified records of any arrest, charge, conviction, probation, probation completion, and in many instances court transcripts—regardless of final d...

I was recently asked what I'd like non-immigration attorneys to know about the practice of immigration law. The first thing that came to mind is it's complexity.  This is not to say other areas of law are not incredibly complex, but a flavor of what a typical immigration lawyer encounters may be enlightening for lawyers and non-lawyers alike. In a landmark decision expanding rights of noncitizens regarding proper immigration advice before a guilty plea, the U.S. Supreme Court specifically stated, “Immigration law can be complex, and it is a legal specialty of its own.” Padilla v Kentuck y (2010).  The court was right to underscore this, and it’s understandable how many can overlook just how complex immigration law is. For example, different “legal statuses” exist for noncitizens depending on their purpose of entry. There are temporary entries ranging from visitor or student, to refugee and myriad of narrowly defined occupations.  Then there is Legal Permanent Residency, o...

I think most immigration advocates agree it's been a mixed bag.  There were immediate reversals of SOME of President Trump's most anti-immigration executive orders, but not all.  Suprising, given President Biden's pro-immigrant rhetoric. One example is the refugee moratorium, which the administration declined to lift until there was a public outcry.  Another is the many months it took the AG to recind the onerous Castro-Tum decision, which imposed procedural restrictions on immigration judges.   I myself had a client who grew up in the US but was deported under Castro-Tum rule, even though the immigration judge HERSELF ruled he was eligible for a U Visa. Before Castro-Tum, he could have stayed in America waiting for its approval. Under Castro-Tum, he was deported to a life in Mexico he's never known.  How many countless noncitizens were unfairly deported while Merrick Garland delayed this no-brainer move? Castro-Tum should have been rescinded the day he was conf...

Recently I was asked the following question: I'm considering accepting a "Stay of Adjudication" plea, in  a pending criminal sexual conduct case.   I also have a pending asylum application.  I need to know, would accepting this still type of plea make me removable as far as the DHS is concerned? Should I just risk trial then if my worst fear is deportation? SHORT ANSWER:   A "stay of adjudication" represents a full conviction for immigration purposes.  So if you plead guilty, with "stay of adjudication," to a criminal charge, you'll have to see if that criminal charge itself impacts immigration.  In your case, you would still be deportable with a Stay of Adjudication to criminal sexual conduct.  If it was a Stay of Adjud to disorderly conduct, then you would probably be fine.  A noncitizen should ALWAYS have an experienced immigration attorney help or represent them in a criminal charge!  There are just too many ...

A Lawyer Asked Me The Following Question: "My client, who is a permanent legal resident, is charged with a misdemeanor Domestic Abuse No Contact Order - Violate No Contact Order -  Minn Stat  629.75.2(b). The offer is to plea guilty to charge. 90 Days jail stayed for two years.  Would he be deported if he plead guilty?" ANSWER: Yes! FOLLOW UP: "Also, do you know if there is anything I could do like an Alford plea (no admission of facts) or a stay of adjudication on the charge that would keep him from deportation?" ANSWER: None of those resolutions avoid removal proceedings.  And there are additional nuances.  And, during this time, the foreign national defendant may or may not remain in ICE custody during such proceedings.  In Minnesota, this is usually Sherburne or Carver County jail but sometimes Albert Lea.  Ramsey County (St. Paul) recently ended its relationship with I.C.E. to detain foreign nationals in proceedings. Thi...