Entries by David Isaacson

OPPOSITION TO CORRUPTION AS A POLITICAL OPINION SUPPORTING A GRANT OF ASYLUM: RUQIANG YU V. HOLDER AND ITS PREDECESSORS

By David A. Isaacson On September 7, 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Ruqiang Yu v. Holder, No. 11-2546-ag, reaffirming that opposition to corruption may under some circumstances qualify as a political opinion upon which a grant of asylum can be based under U.S. immigration law.  According […]

WHAT THE THIRD CIRCUIT MISSED IN VERA, PART TWO: A PRACTICAL EXAMPLE OF WHY ACCEPTING UNREFUTED BUT UNSUPPORTED GOVERNMENT ASSERTIONS IS PROBLEMATIC

In a previous post on this blog, “The Prejudice Caused By Summary Removal After Visa Waiver Admission: What the Third Circuit Missed in Vera and Bradley”, I discussed the case of Vera v. Attorney General of the U.S., in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that a woman who had […]

SOME PRELIMINARY REACTIONS TO THE DISTRICT COURT DECISION REFUSING TO ENJOIN PORTIONS OF ALABAMA’S IMMIGRATION LAW

By David A. Isaacson Chief U.S. District Judge Sharon Blackburn of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama recently issued a memorandum opinion preliminarily enjoining the enforcement of certain portions of Alabama’s new immigration law but upholding other portions. This decision has already attracted substantial criticism, with the New York Times describing […]

THE POTENTIAL REACH OF KHALID V. HOLDER: HOW THE 5TH CIRCUIT INTERPRETED THE CSPA AND HOW SOME OUTSIDE ITS TERRITORY MAY BE ABLE TO BENEFIT

By David A. Isaacson In its recent decision in the case of Khalid v. Holder, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected the 2009 decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) in Matter of Wang. The Fifth Circuit in Khalid held that a derivative beneficiary of an immigrant petition, whose adjusted […]

LEAVING TOO MUCH FOR ANOTHER DAY: WHAT THE SECOND CIRCUIT’S RECENT CSPA DECISION MISSED IN AGREEING WITH THE RESULT OF MATTER OF WANG

By David A. Isaacson In its recent decision in Li v. Renaud, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit found that a derivative beneficiary of a family-based petition, whose adjusted age even under the Child Status Protection Act (“CSPA”) is above 21, cannot use section 203(h)(3) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”) […]

IF EVEN THE CHIEF JUSTICE CAN MISUNDERSTAND IMMIGRATION LAW, HOW CAN WE EXPECT STATES TO ENFORCE IT PROPERLY? REMOVAL ORDERS AND WORK AUTHORIZATION

By David A. Isaacson In part of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting upholding an Arizona law that imposed sanctions on employers (formally implemented as suspension or revocation of business licenses) for hiring “unauthorized alien” workers, the Court found that the Arizona law was not impliedly pre-empted because it tracks […]

POTENTIAL IMMIGRATION IMPLICATIONS FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES OF JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S ANNOUNCEMENT REGARDING DOMA SECTION 3

By David A. Isaacson The Justice Department announced Wednesday, that, based in part on the recommendation of Attorney General Eric Holder, President Obama has determined that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, and will no longer defend it in court. This is because, facing litigation within the jurisdiction of a […]

CONSEQUENCES OF VISA BULLETIN CUTOFF DATE RETROGRESSION UNDER THE CHILD STATUS PROTECTION ACT

By David A. IsaacsonIn recent months, the Visa Bulletin issued by the Department of State has shown a “retrogression” of priority dates in a number of Family-based categories. This means that the cutoff date determining which priority dates are early enough to make a visa number available to particular immigrants so that they can move […]

THE SPIRIT IS AT THE AIRPORT, BUT THE FLESH IS IN THE UNITED STATES: UNDERSTANDING PAROLE

By David A. Isaacson One immigration concept which sometimes gives rise to confusion is that of “parole”. The most common use of parole at present is to allow in, pursuant to an “advance parole” authorization, aliens who have a pending application for adjustment of status under INA § 245 or certain other relief. Perhaps because […]