Due Process and the Courts

The immigration laws and regulations provide some avenues to apply for lawful status from within the U.S. or to seek relief from deportation.  The eligibility requirements for these benefits and relief can be stringent, and the immigration agencies often adopt overly restrictive interpretations of the requirements.  Learn about advocacy and litigation that has been and can be undertaken to ensure that noncitizens have a fair chance to apply for the benefits and relief for which they are eligible.  

Recent Features

  • FOIA

Investigating the Immigration Court System

We're demanding information to uncover the hiring process for Assistant Chief Immigration Judge and their influence over the immigration courts.

  • Blog

‘Your Client Is Going Bye-Bye.’ Investigation Details Immigration Judges’ Cruel Behavior in El Paso Court

The complaint outlines systemic due process concerns around unprofessional behavior by immigration judges and troubling court practices in El Paso.

Two Systems of Justice: How the Immigration System Falls Short of American Ideals of Justice

This special report lays out the the incongruency between America's criminal justice system and its immigration justice system, and provides recommendations for how these problems could be fixed.

READ MORE

All Due Process and the Courts Content

  • Advocacy

Letter by the Council and AILA urging USCIS to address reports of widespread and recurrent restrictions on access to counsel. (Mar. 24, 2011)

In this March 24, 2011 letter, the Council and AILA urged USCIS to address reports of widespread and recurrent restrictions on access to counsel. These restrictions, documented in a nation-wide survey (http://www.aila.org/infonet/final-results-attorney-representation-before-dhs) of immigration attorneys, included limitations on attorneys’ ability to communicate with their clients, restrictions on attorney seating during USCIS interviews, and limitations on attorneys’ ability to submit documents to the interviewing officer.
  • Advocacy

Council and AILA comments to the DOJ/EOIR regarding the “Retrospective Regulatory Review” (Nov. 27, 2012)

Pertaining to regulations on motions to reopen, stays of removal, bond hearings, telephonic and video hearings, filing and service of documents and decisions, and stipulated removal orders.
  • Advocacy

Comments on the Immigration Adjudication Draft Report by the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) (Feb. 13, 2012)

Addressing representation, stipulated removal orders , prosecutorial discretion, video hearings, and the asylum clock.
  • Advocacy

Testimony submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee for May 18, 2011 hearing, “Improving Efficiency and Ensuring Justice in the Immigration Court System.”

Addressing access to counsel, effective assistance of counsel, protections for noncitizens lacking mental competency, the employment authorization employment clock, and the departure bar to motions to reopen.
  • Advocacy

Letter to DOJ in response to request for comments regarding the Department’s review of its existing regulations (Mar. 31, 2011)

Regarding the departure bar to motions to reopen, ineffective assistance of counsel, fair removal procedures for noncitizens with mental disabilities, and asylum clock problems.
  • Advocacy

Comments on EOIR’s proposed rule on streamlining BIA cases (Aug. 18, 2008)

Addressing the BIA's affirmance without opinion process, three-member panel decisions, and precedent decisions, as well as exhaustion of administrative remedies and the scope of administrative review
  • Advocacy

Providing a Safety Valve: The Need for Greater Discretion in Immigration Decision Making (Jun. 6, 2013)

Discussing efforts in S. 744, “The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act,” to restore a measure of discretion and flexibility to the immigration system.
  • Advocacy

Letter to EOIR recommending possible steps to take to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel (Nov. 12, 2009)

In November 2009, the American Immigration Council sent a letter to the Executive Office for Immigration Review recommending steps the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals can take to protect the right to effective assistance of counsel and help ensure that noncitizens in removal proceedings are afforded a fair hearing.
  • Advocacy

Amicus Letter, urging reconsideration of Compean I (Feb. 6, 2009)

Urging Attorney General Holder to vacate Matter of Compean, 24 I & N Dec. 710 (A.G. 2009), which he later did in Matter of Compean, 25 I&N Dec. 1 (A.G. 2009)
  • Advocacy

Petition for Rulemaking to Amend Regulations Governing Motions to Reopen and Reconsider Removal Proceedings for Noncitizens Who Depart the United States (submitted Aug. 6, 2010)

The Council submitted a Petition for Rulemaking to the Department of Justice and the Executive Office for Immigration Review, urging the Department to rescind the regulation barring post-departure motions to reopen.

Most Read

  • Publications
  • Blog Posts
  • Past:
  • Trending