On March 15, 2017, Judge Derrick K. Watson of the United States District Court for the District of Hawaii issued a temporary restraining order against sections 2 and 6 of President Donald Trump’s Executive Order titled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” (“Travel Order”). The decision is titled Hawaii v. Trump, CV No. 17-0050.
On November 20, 2014, the Secretary of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson, released a Memorandum detailing three distinct levels of civil immigration enforcement priorities for the immigration components of the DHS. The priorities set forth in the Memorandum are guidance for the officers of the Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). The November 2014 civil enforcement priorities have since been replaced by a new set of enforcement priorities on February 20, 2017. This article is archived for informational purposes only.
Each year, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) disposes of E-Verify records that are over 10 years old. In accordance with records retention and disposal policies, the USCIS will delete E-Verify records over 10 years old on April 1, 2017. This article cotains information regarding downloading E-Verify Historic Records Reports prior to the deletion of old E-Verify records.
I receive various communications from the American Association of Immigration Lawyers (AILA) due to my being a member and having attended many AILA conferences. Followers of my blog will likely notice that the opinions I express on immigration are well right of those expressed by most immigration attorneys and advocates seen in the media. In this post, I will examine areas where I agree with AILA and disagree with AILA in a post about its new “Justice Campaign.”
On March 6, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision titled Beckles v. United States, No. 15-8544 (2017). Beckles is not an immigration case and is unlikely to have a direct effect on immigration law. However, it is tangentially related to the Supreme Court decision in Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. __ (2015), which does have an effect on certain immigration statutes. As a matter of interest, we will review the Beckles decision in brief and explain how it is related to Johnson.
On March 6, 2017, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and Secretary of Homeland Security John Kelly released statements about President Donald Trump’s new travel Executive Order issued on the same day. The three department heads each defended the travel Executive Order and explained how their respective Departments would implement its provisions. The video of their statements is available in this post.
Riz Ahmed, a Pakistani-British actor and rapper, delivered a speech delivered to the House of Parliament in London on the subject of diversity in film and television. Ahmed spoke broadly of encouraging diversity in film and television, and he was critical of the United Kingdom for being, in his opinion, behind the United States in this area. However, Ahmed made an interesting argument regarding what he perceived as the power of diversity in film and television to prevent young people from joining ISIS. While this portion of his speech has received much attention and acclaim, I will explain why I find it quite troubling, given my strong interest in immigration issues.