On February 1, 2017, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced that on January 17, 2017, it automatically extended certain expiring Employment Authorization Documents (EADs) for up to 180 days for certain renewal applicants. Starting on February 16, 2017, the USCIS began reissuing receipt notices to many of these renewal applicants.
On February 21, 2017, the Attorney General of the United States, Jeff Sessions, issued a Memorandum titled “Recission of Memorandum on Use of Private Prisons.” The Sessions Memorandum rescinds an August 18, 2016, Memorandum authored by the then-Deputy Attorney General of the United States, Sally Q. Yates titled “Reducing our Use of Private Prisons”.
On February 22, 2017, just two days after Secretary Kelly issued the two DHS memorandums providing for the expansion of the use of section 287(g) agreements, Aaron Barker of Clich2Houston reported that Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez opted his department out of the section 287(g) program. Although the timing seems related, the article quotes Sheriff Gonzalez as attributing his decision to cost concerns.
On February 8, 2017, the Department of State (DOS) released the Visa Bulletin for March 2017. The March 2017 Visa Bulletin contains application final action dates and dates for filing for immigrant visas in both the family-sponsored and employment-based preference categories. The dates in the bulletin will be effective for March of 2017.
On January 31, 2017, President Donald Trump nominated Judge Neil M. Gorsuch of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to the United States Supreme Court. In this article, I will offer an overview of Judge Gorsuch’s career and known positions, with an emphasis on issues that relate to the administration of the immigration laws. In conclusion, I will explain why Judge Gorsuch is an exceptional pick for the vacant Supreme Court seat and why the Senate should move expeditiously to confirm him.
In a recent post, I criticized the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s decision to uphold a temporary restraining order (TRO) (as a preliminary injunction) against aspects of President Donald Trump’s Executive Order suspending entry for aliens from seven countries, and I also criticized the President for his reckless off-the-cuff statements during the litigation. However, on February 8, 2017, President Trump engaged with the issue more productively, by taking a moment to discuss the statute under which he issued the Executive Order instead of criticizing individual judges and making statements about the proceedings without consulting the lawyers tasked with defending him. In this post, I examine President Trump's remarks and explain why they provide a good template for him going forward.
On February 9, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rendered a decision in State of Washington v. Trump, No. 17-35105. The case regarded the U.S. government’s appeal of the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington against portions of President Donald Trump’s Executive Order titled “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.”. The Ninth Circuit denied the Government’s emergency motion for a stay of the TRO pending appeal. In this post, I will offer my analysis and opinion of the decision, as well as how I believe that the Trump Administration should proceed.