Medellin v. Texas, ___ U.S. ___, 128 S.Ct. 1346 (Mar. 25, 2008) (neither an International Court of Justice case, Case Concerning Avena and Other Mexican Nationals (Mex. v. U. S.), 2004 I. C. J. 12, nor a memorandum issued by the President of the United States constitutes directly enforceable federal law that pre-empts state limitations on the filing of successive habeas petitions, affirming dismissal of a habeas petition in a death penalty case raising a claim that petitioner was not informed of his Vienna Convention right to notify the Mexican consulate of his detention).
Augustin v. Attorney General, 520 F.3d 264 (3d Cir. Mar. 20, 2008) (BIA did not err in refusing to impute to a noncitizen who entered the United States as a minor the parent's years of continuous residence in order to meet the seven-year requirement for cancellation of removal), declining to follow Cuevas-Gaspar v. Gonzales, 430 F.3d 1013 (9th Cir. 2005) (parent's preceding years of residence in the United States are imputed to a minor child in application for cancellation of removal) , and distinguishing Morel v. INS, 90 F.3d 833 (3d Cir.
Ahmed v. Mukasey, 519 F.3d 579 (6th Cir. Mar. 20, 2008) (BIA abused discretion in denying a motion to remand to an IJ for further consideration of eligibility for adjustment of status as a "child" and immediate relative of an American citizen under the Child Status Protection Act and 8 U.S.C. 1255).
Graham v. Mukasey, ___ F.3d ___ (6th Cir. Mar. 20, 2008) (expedited removal procedure, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 1228(b), violated neither due process not equal protection rights).
AILF Practice Advisory sets out arguments to challenge Matter of Acosta Hidalgo, a recent BIA decision holding that IJs and the BIA lack jurisdiction to determine prima facie eligibility for naturalization in order to terminate removal proceedings.
http://www.ailf.org/lac/pa/Acosta_Hidalgo_lac_pa_031808.pdf
Yusupov v. Attorney General, 518 F.3d 185 (3rd Cir. Mar 14, 2008, as amended Mar 27, 2008) (interpreting national security exception to withholding of removal claims, prohibiting withholding of removal if "there are serious reasons to believe that the alien committed a serious nonpolitical crime outside the United States," under INA 241(b)(3)(B)(iii)).
Ni v. BIA, 520 F.3d 125 (2d Cir. Mar. 14, 2008) (petition for review granted where BIA failed to support its decision with a rational explanation).
A K-1 Fiance visa shall not be issued unless the applicant provides "information on any criminal convictions of the petitioner for any" crime specified in the regulations. INA 214(d)(1), 8 U.S.C. 1184(d)(1). The consular officer shall not approve a petition unless the officer has verified that the petitioner has not previously petitioned for two persons, and that at least two years have elapsed since any previously approved petition. INA 214(d)(1)(A), 8 U.S.C. 1184(d)(1)(A). Waiver.
The TPS statute, INA 244(c)(2)(A)(iii)(I), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(2)(A)(iii)(I), states the Attorney General cannot waive INA 212(a)(2)(A) grounds of inadmissibility (controlled substance and CMT), for TPS applicants. The very next paragraph, however, provides the Attorney General cannot waive inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(2)(C)(i), 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2)(C)(i) (reason to believe illicit drug trafficking), "except for ... a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana." INA 244(c)(2)(A)(iii)(II), 8 U.S.C. 1254a(c)(2)(A)(iii)(I).
"Step-by-step information about what communities and families can do when a loved one is detained, especially within the first 24 hours. Also included is how you can protect yourself from future raids, facts about the ICE detention and deportation system as well as flyers and other resources." Detention Watch Network and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild. Jan. 2008. http://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/commresourcekit.html