Articles

Immigration Enforcement Deportation Pause and Limitations

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/21_0120_enforcement-memo_signed.pdf

A Protester's Guide from the ACLU:

As you come out to protest, here's what our video notes to keep in mind:

  • The right to protest is a fundamental human right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the First Amendment.
  • If you get stopped, ask if you are free to go. If the police say yes, calmly walk away.
  • You have the right to record. The right to protest includes the right to record, including recording police doing their jobs.
  • The police can order people to stop interfering with legitimate police operations, but video recording from a safe distance is not interfering.
  • If you get stopped, police cannot take or confiscate any videos or photos without a warrant.
  • If you are videotaping, keep in mind in some states, the audio is treated differently than the images. But images and video images are always fully protected by the First Amendment.
  • The police's main job in a protest is to protect your right to protest and to de-escalate any threat of violence.
  • If you get arrested, don't say anything. Ask for a lawyer immediately. Do not sign anything and do not agree to anything without an attorney present.
  • If you get arrested, demand your right to a local phone call. If you call a lawyer for legal advice, law enforcement is not allowed to listen.
  • Police cannot delete data from your device under any circumstances.

Recent Case Updates

Cortes-Maldanado v. Barr

Ninth circuit decision holding a conviction based on ORS 475.860 (2011), Oregon's former marijuana delivery statute is not an "illicit trafficking offense" and thus not an aggravated felony under the Immigration and Nationality Act. It has a great discussion of the categorical approach to ascertaining whether a conviction is deportable and/or an aggravated felony written by Judge Paez. I am counsel for Mr. Cortes-Maldanado.

Article from "Top of the Ninth" blog

Casa de Maryland, et al. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security - Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Case

District Court for the District of Maryland ordered that the actions taken by Defendants to rescind the DACA policy are arbitrary and capricious, in violation of 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A); The rescission of the DACA policy was vacated, and the policy is restored to its pre-September 5, 2017 status; any other action to rescind DACA that is not in compliance with applicable law. Plaintiff’s estoppel claim and request for an injunction as it pertains to DACA's information-sharing policies are denied.

Convention Against Torture - CAT Claim Grants

Lucero Xochihua-Jaimes v. William Barr (18-71460) Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

LGBQT woman was granted a petition for review of her Convention Against Torture Claim before the Immigration Board of Appeals. The panel found that petitioner would be more likely than not be tortured if returned to Mexico. The panel agreed there was no affirmative evidence there is a general area where petitioner would be safe from Los Zetas and that the Mexican government is acquiescent.

Mauricio Gonzalez Ruano v. William P. Barr, 18-2337 (7th Cir. 2019) Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit granted petitioner Asylum and protection under the Convention Against Torture act because of his membership to a "particular social group". The Court found that the torture that petitioner and his family had suffered in the past and fears in the future were compelling, and remanded the decision from the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Ammar Hachicho v. William Barr, 18-71724 (9th Cir. 2020) Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Petitioner was denied in part and granted in part his Petition for Review before the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The court found that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) did not err in finding that petitioner was not eligible to adjust his status through Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C. 1255 (d) nor that his prior conviction constituted a "particular serious crime". However, the court did find that the Immigration Judge erred in denying petitioner's application for deferral of removal under the Convention Against Torture. The BIA failed to consider all relevant evidence, including ISIS, Abused Human Rights by the Assad Goverment, and petitioners membership as a Christian in Syria, as all possible sources of torture, the Nith Circuit court grants his deferral for removal and CAT claim.

Supreme Court Cases

Oregon's 10-2 verdict system is unconstitutional under the Sixth and 14th amendment of the US constitution.

Ramos v. Louisiana, 140 S. Ct. 1390, 590 U.S. (Supreme Court 2020)

President Trump's administration followed inappropriate procedures when eliminating DACA...remand to the administration to take another look...

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA): Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of Univ. of Cal. (Supreme Court 2020)

Oregon Supreme Court Cases

Police Traffic Stop Case - State of Oregon v. Mario Arreola-Botello: During traffic stops, an officer may only ask investigatory inquiries that are directly related to the traffic violation. The officer may ask for drivers license, registration, proof of insurance, and questions directly related to the traffic stop.

February 2020 Voice of San Diego - Hundreds of Illegal Entry Convictions Will Be Overturned
18-50206 USA v. Oracio Corrales-Vazquez (This is the 9th circuit publication related to the article above)
February 2020 Public Broadcasting Service PBS - At least 138 deported to El Salvador were later killed, human rights group says

9th Circuit Court Links

Relief from Removal
Criminal Issues In Immigration Law

Mexico and Central America Country Conditions

An expert, Dr. Thomas Boerman, discusses the danger for returnees from the U.S. in Mexico and country conditions in Central America in his articles below. His CV is also attached.

July 2014
The New York Times: Remains Thought to be Those of American Missing in Mexico

June 2014
The New York Times: Mexico Soldiers Wage Bloody Battle With Gang

Post-Conviction Relief

"Post-Conviction Relief in the Defense of Immigrants" article by Brian Conry in which he anticipates the holding in Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S. Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010) (Criminal defense counsel's failure to advise a client pre-plea of the clear immigration consequences of a criminal conviction is ineffectiveness as a matter of law) published in the Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association magazine January 2001.

Post-Conviction Relief advisory re: Vega-Gonzalez v. State (2004), written by Brian Conry in 2004.

DV Assault Convictions and Immigration Consequences: November 2013

Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions

Potential Defenses to Deportation and Post Conviction Relief Caselaw (Caveat: an individualized assessment is necessary to advise any "alien" if "relief" from deportation might be available. This caselaw is not intended to be exhaustive or for any individual to rely on pro se if assessing potential defenses to deportability or the likelihood of prevailing on a post conviction matter).

Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions and Some Available Immigration Waivers: English language

Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions and Some Available Immigration Waivers: Spanish language

DV Assault Convictions and Immigration Consequences: November 2013