IMMIGRATION COURT POSTPONES ALL NON-CUSTODY HEARINGS UNTIL JUNE 26, 2020.

IMMIGRATION COURT POSTPONES ALL NON-CUSTODY HEARINGS UNTIL JUNE 26, 2020.  

it was just announced that Hearings in non-detained cases at other immigration courts are postponed through, and including, Friday, June 26, 2020.

Individuals with hearing dates before that date will receive notice of rescheduling of their hearings.

ONE IMMIGRANT AMONG MANY SERVING OUR SICK IN THE AGE OF COVID-19

ONE IMMIGRANT AMONG MANY SERVING OUR SICK

IN THE AGE OF COVID-19

By Christopher Kerosky

Immigrants are among the many now fighting on the front lines of the corona virus epidemic: in hospital emergency rooms and ICUs, nursing homes and acute-care facilities, and emergency medical teams across the country. More than 3 million immigrants work in the U.S. health care system, accounting for about 1 in 4 workers in that field, according to research by Harvard Medical School.  Approximately 29% of all doctors are foreign-born and 23% of all nurses and nurse’s assistants, according to the American Medical Association.

One of these immigrants is Leonor Carreno—a certified nurse’s assistant (CNA) in Sonoma County.  Leonor has had a particularly difficult immigrant path – including being jailed and almost deported -- simply for getting a CNA license without having a green card.  After years of fighting deportation, she gained her legal status.  And now like many other immigrants across our country, Leonor is caring for elderly and sick Americans-- those most at risk from the deadly corona virus.

Here’s her story.

Leonor’s immigrant journey

Leonor is a native of Oaxaca, a beautiful but impoverished part of southern Mexico with a large indigenous population.  She made the long perilous journey to the United States with her three-year-old son in 1998. They crossed the border near Calexico without papers, at a time when our borders were easier to pass through.  The two joined her husband in Petaluma, where she still lives today.

Leonor went to work on a farm at first, working long hours at low wages to help her family survive.  At nights she learned English and studied for the CNA exam, which she took and passed in 2002.  Leonor began to work at a post-acute care facility and worked a second job on nights and weekends as a caregiver in private homes. 

A second son was born two years later.  Her life was demanding, with two children and two jobs, but the future looked bright.

Arrest and Deportation Court.

Then, in 2011, her happy life fell apart suddenly and unexpectedly.  A disgruntled employee reported her and six other undocumented nurses working at the facility.  All seven women were arrested and held without bail.  Leonor was incarcerated for 21 days.  When she was finally released by law enforcement authorities, ICE agents took her into custody and began deportation proceedings. 

Leonor’s only crime: obtaining a certified nursing assistant’s license as an undocumented immigrant.

The deportation case against her lasted 8 years, languishing in the immigration court in San Francisco while she and her family awaited her fate. Finally, last year, an immigration judge approved her application for cancellation of deportation, finding that she had “good moral character” and that her U.S.-born son would suffer exceptional hardship if she would be deported to Mexico.

Faith, Family and Work.

Like so many immigrants, Leonor’s life has been centered on her family, her faith and her work.  Throughout her ordeal, Leonor’s faith in God has sustained her.  She is very active in her church, the Iglesia Pentecostal Unida, a Spanish-language Christian church in Petaluma.  Leonor assists the pastor with services and volunteers her time to the religious community. “I feel so blessed by God for granting me the right to stay in this country.”

Her family is another pillar of her life.  Leonor is very close to her two sons, David, 24, and Ovid Josue, 18. Both sons appreciate the sacrifices their mother has made to provide them a life in this country.  David and Ovid have both followed in their mother’s footsteps, pursuing their own careers in the medical field.

Leonor continues to work two jobs, caring for sick and the elderly.  When she regained her right-to-work, Leonor went back to work full-time at her post-acute care facility.  And she still works a second job as a private care-giver. 

Immigrants on the front lines.

Her story is not completely unique.  Our nation’s hospitals and other health care facilities have long relied on immigrants to fill the role of doctors, nurses, EMT workers, and medical technicians.  Now they are serving their adopted country when it is a particularly dangerous time to be caring for our sick.  As of April 2nd, the CDC has reported that 9,282 health care workers have contracted COVID-19, 723 have been hospitalized and 27 have died.  Surely those numbers will continue to climb. Still they serve.

“It has always been such a special blessing for me to work caring for the sick and elderly,” says Leonor.  “and now I feel particularly fortunate to be able to contribute to this country in this difficult moment for all of us.” 

In fact, Leonor, the good fortune is ours.

************************************************************************

CHRISTOPHER A. KEROSKY of the law firm of KEROSKY PURVES & BOGUE has practiced law more than 25 years and has been recognized as one of the top immigration lawyers in Northern California for 10 years by“Super Lawyers” www.SuperLawyers.com .   He graduated from University of California, Berkeley Law School and was a former counsel for the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington D.C.  His firm has offices in San Francisco, Los Angeles and six other locations in California. 

WARNING: The foregoing is an article discussing legal issues. It is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice. We recommend that you get competent legal advice specific to your case.

COVID-19 UPDATE: Immigration Courts Will Stay Closed Through May 1, 2020.

COVID-19 UPDATE: Immigration Courts Will Stay Closed Through May 1, 2020.

The immigration courts in San Francisco and Sacramento have announced that all hearings where the immigrant is not detained --both masters and merits-- are canceled through May 1, 2020.

EOIR staff will work to reset the cases and send new notices over the next week or two.  Immigration Courts at 100 Montgomery and 630 Sansome Street remain open for filings and inquiries.  Persons can call 800-898-7180 or use the online case portal to check case information/next hearing dates to obtain useful information which parties routinely call EOIR SF about. 

The Immigration Courts issued this new update:  https://www.justice.gov/eoir/eoir-operational-status-during-coronavirus-pandemic concerning the COVID-19 outbreak.

UPDATE ON COVID-19 AND IMMIGRATION POLICY.

UPDATE ON COVID-19 AND IMMIGRATION POLICY.  

In an attempt to update our clients and colleagues on evolving changes in immigration policy, law and procedure in response to COVID-19, we’ll be providing updates on our Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/Kerosky.Purves.Bogue/).  These will cover interim policies by the Department of Homeland Security (ICE, CIS, CBP), the Immigration Courts (EOIR) and other departments of the Trump Administration.

In each case, more details on each subject can be found on our blog (English) https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2703305973287682389#allposts

And (Spanish): https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=6259469893665134068#allposts/src=sidebar

HOW TO FIGHT YOUR DEPORTATION, Part Two

HOW TO FIGHT YOUR DEPORTATION, Part Two

In the first segment of this series, I discussed what to do if you are arrested by Immigration (ICE).  In short, don’t sign anything and you will likely be able to fight your deportation in court. 

Once you tell ICE that you want a court hearing, you also can ask for your release on bond, so you can be reunited with your family while your case moves forward.  Below, I will explain how to convince the immigration judge that you deserve to be free on bond, to make the bond as low as possible, and to get the bond paid and get out of immigration custody.

How is the bond set.

If a person is detained but eligible for bond, the government will often set an initial bond amount.   ICE under the Trump Administration has been setting bonds higher than in previous administrations or often dismissing deportation cases altogether.  We can expect that ICE under Trump will set bonds at $10,000 or higher, even for immigrants without any real criminal record.  But this can be lowered by an immigration judge.

In most cases, you have the right to ask the immigration court for a bond re-determination hearing.  The immigration court will then consider the arguments you make and often lower the bond set by ICE.

In setting the amount of bond, the judge will look at a number of criteria.  The most important criterion is whether the person is a “flight risk”; that is, whether he would likely come back to court if released.  In making that decision, the judge will consider factors which tend to show good moral character on the part of the individual held.  These factors include:

• Relatives in the United States: does the person have relatives here who are in legal status?  Do they have a citizen or permanent resident spouse or child?

• Employment: does the person have a regular job and income?

• A residence: does the person have a place to live if released?

• Immigration Court History: Has the person ever failed to show up in court on any of his prior criminal or immigration cases? Can they show the judge that they always went to court when required to do so in the past?

• Tax Records: has the person paid his taxes in the U.S.?

• Eligibility for Relief:  What immigration status does the person qualify for?  Do they have an immigrant petition filed by a relative?  Or can one be filed? Do they have a credible argument that they would fear persecution in their home country?  Do they qualify for some other status here?

How to Pay the Bond.

Once the bond is set, a relative or friend can post the bond if they can show that they are a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.   That person must agree to be responsible for ensuring that the person attends any immigration hearing or interview whenever requested to do so.

The person posting the bond will need to know the last name of the person in ICE custody and their “A” number--the case number which begins with A followed by 9 numbers.   The bond can be paid with a cashier’s check from a bank, or a money order – not by cash or personal check. 

In San Francisco, the person paying the bond must present the money in person at the immigration office located at: 630 Sansome Street, 5^th Floor.  Hours are: Monday – Friday, 8:00am to 3:00pm.

If you pay the bond directly to the government, the bond money will be returned to your family only when your court case is completed and only if you have complied with the court’s order, even if that order is to leave the country.

Next post on this topic will deal with how to fight and possibly win your deportation case in the Immigration Court.

************************************************************************

CHRISTOPHER A. KEROSKY of the law firm of KEROSKY PURVES & BOGUE has practiced law over 25 years and has been recognized as one of the top immigration lawyers in Northern California for 10 years by “Super Lawyers”.   He graduated from University of California, Berkeley Law School and was a former counsel for the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington D.C.

WARNING: The foregoing is an article discussing legal issues. It is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice. We recommend that you get competent legal advice specific to your case.

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AS AN IMMIGRANT.

KNOW YOUR RIGHTS AS AN IMMIGRANT.

Part 1: What to do if confronted by ICE

By Christopher A. Kerosky

          Once again, Donald Trump has declared his intention to start raids against our immigrant communities.  Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) has formulated a plan to find and deport thousands of immigrants, and announced that it will be implemented starting this weekend. 

I’ve written the detailed description below as a guide for immigrants as to their legal rights and remedies when confronted by ICE.  Para leer en espaňol: https://kpbinmigracion.blogspot.com/2019/07/conozca-sus-derechos-ante-el-servicio.html

Part 1 covers what to do if ICE comes to your home. Part 2 of this article covers what to do if ICE comes to your workplace or approaches you on the street.   Part 3 discusses what steps to take if ICE takes you into custody.

          At your house

          ICE can enter your home in three situations: (1) if they have a warrant; or (2) if you give them permission; or (3) they think there is presently a crime being committed in your home.  If ICE comes to your house and knocks on your door, you do not have to open the door or let them in. Typically, to legally enter your home, ICE must have a search warrant or arrest warrant with your name and address on it.  A warrant is an order signed by a judge to search a place and/or arrest a person. 

If ICE comes to your home, you should ask to see a warrant. ICE must show you the warrant. If the officials do not have a warrant, you do not have to let them in or speak to them at all.  However, if you give them permission to come in, then they can legally enter your home and search it.

         The right to remain silent

          Whether ICE comes to your house and knocks on your door, enters your workplace, or even questions you in jail, you have the right to remain silent.  In other words, you do not have to provide your citizenship information to Immigration Service officials. You can just indicate that you do not want to speak to them. 

          An immigration official may not request evidence of your immigration status in your home or another private place without a warrant. Even if they have a warrant, you must only provide proof of your immigration status if you are in legal status. After showing evidence of your status, you still have the right to remain silent.

         The right to speak to an attorney

         

          Once you have shown evidence of your legal status, if you have it, you do not have to talk to officers further – it is up to you. In most cases, you may be better off remaining silent and talking to a lawyer first, depending on your situation. This is your right under the law.  If the Immigration Service asks anything about your political and religious beliefs, groups you belong to or contribute to, things you have said, where you have traveled or other questions that do not seem right, you do not have to answer them.

HOW TO FIGHT YOUR DEPORTATION. Part One: What to do if you are arrested by ICE?

HOW TO FIGHT YOUR DEPORTATION.

Part One: What to do if you are arrested by ICE.

Yet again, Donald Trump has promised to start deportation raids against our immigrant communities.  It is important that people know they have the right to defend themselves and fight their deportation in court.  In many cases, it can result in an immigration judge deciding that the immigrant can stay in this country and even obtain permanent residence. However, if they accept their removal, they are typically barred from the U.S. for 10 years or more.

This series of articles will cover what an immigrant can do if they or their family member is arrested and put into deportation proceedings. 

Part 1: The Important Things to Know if you or your family member is taken by ICE.

Many people believe that if they are undocumented and arrested, then they have no choice but to go home.  That is simply not the case.  With skillful and thoughtful representation, many undocumented immigrants can successfully avoid deportation.

It is very important that undocumented immigrants and their families know what to do in this situation.  The important thing is not to sign any document which agrees to your deportation or voluntary departure.  Instead, get legal advice and it is very often the case that you can get bonded out of custody very soon.

How does one get a family member out of ICE custody once they’ve been taken? The answer to this question depends upon the situation.  The government is required to hold non-citizens in jail if they were convicted of certain very serious criminal charges.  If he was not convicted of any crime or if it was a misdemeanor crime, then usually the person can be “bonded” out of jail if the bond set by the court is paid.  The amount of the bond varies significantly depending upon the judge and the facts of the case.  The best thing is to get your relative out of jail, if you can, and then hire a lawyer to protect his rights in court. 

Even if the relative is bonded out of jail, he will be required to go to immigration court and explain to the judge will he should not be deported.  If you ignore the court case once he is bonded out, a deportation order will be issued by the court, the bond money will be lost, and he will probably lose any chance of ever becoming legal in the United States.

It is often possible to proceed with a claim for relief in court, such as cancellation of removal, asylum, adjustment of status, or other claims.  These arguments apply in many situations where the undocumented person arrested has family here legally or has been a victim of a crime, or a victim of domestic violence, or can prove that he would be harmed if he is returned to his home country. 

These will be covered in subsequent segments of this series.

JUDGE SAYS U.S. CANNOT JAIL ASYLUM SEEKERS INDEFINITELY

JUDGE SAYS U.S. CANNOT JAIL ASYLUM SEEKERS INDEFINITELY.  Today, a federal judge in Seattle blocked the Trump administration from denying bond hearings to asylum seekers.

US District Judge Marsha Pechman ruled that people who are detained after seeking asylum protection are entitled to bond hearings and the chance to be released from custody. "It is the finding of this Court that it is unconstitutional to deny these class members a bond hearing while they await a final determination of their asylum request," Pechman wrote.

The Justice Department announced a policy in April that some asylum seekers cannot be released on bond by immigration judge—even if they have already proven a credible fear of persecution in their home countries.  The policy would have effectively blocked immigration lawyers and immigrant rights advocates from asking judges to release detained asylum seekers on payment of a bond.

The judge ordered the Justice Department to resume bond hearings for asylum seekers within two weeks. 

UNDERSTANDING THE CHANGES DONALD TRUMP JUST PROPOSED TO ASYLUM PROCEDURE

UNDERSTANDING THE CHANGES DONALD TRUMP JUST PROPOSED TO ASYLUM PROCEDURE.  

The Trump Administration just announced its plan for new regulations to further restrict the rights of asylum seekers arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border.  These newly announced plans would further limit the legal rights of asylum seekers, accelerate their deportation procedures making it difficult for them to defend against deportation, limit their right to work while their cases go forward and charge them a fee for applying for asylum. 

Here’s a brief summary of what those new proposed changes would do: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/understanding-changes-donald-trump-just-proposed-asylum-kerosky

(To read about what steps the Administration has taken previously to limit asylum and restrict legal immigration, and California’s efforts to fight these proposals, see: https://www.sonomacountygazette.com/sonoma-county-news/immigration-stories-by-christopher-kerosky-may-2019)

All of these changes would significantly change the asylum procedures set up 40 years ago by Congress when they passed the Refugee Act of 1980 setting up the asylum system.   

1. Limiting Options in Deportation Proceedings

Asylum seekers at the border already have to pass detailed interviews to convince a federal officer that they have a “credible fear” of persecution in their home country based on race, religion, political opinion, or social group.  Now. Trump proposes putting them into special deportation court proceedings, which would limit their options for rights to request other relief-- for example, denying them a right to stay based on marriage to a U.S. citizen.

2. Accelerating Deportation Proceedings

Trump also proposes that all asylum cases to be heard within a six-month period except in “exceptional circumstances.” The problem is that this would make it harder for asylum seekers to get a lawyer, obtain all the documents from their home country to prove their case and prepare for their deportation hearing properly. 

3. Charging a Fee to Apply for Asylum

Applying for protection has been free since ever since the Refugee Act of 1980 created the procedures almost 40 years ago. Under Trump’s new plan, asylum seekers would have to pay a fee to apply.  For people fleeing their country with little or nothing, this would cause more people to abandon their asylum claims.

4. Banning Work Authorization

Under the current rules, asylum applicants can obtain the right to work legally while they wait for a final decision on their application.  Under the new rules, most recent asylum seekers would be banned from getting work authorization. This would deny them the right to legally work while going through the asylum process. Clearly this would make it more difficult for them to survive in the U.S. while they try to prove they would be persecuted if they go back to their home country.

RESTRICTIONS ON ASYLUM BLOCKED.  A San Francisco judge issued a temporary restraining order last night, preventing the Trump Administration from implementing its new limitations on asylum.  Those regulations sought to deny access to asylum to many refugees at our Southern border.  Judge Michael Tigar of the U.S. District Court held that the law appears to violate the U.S. Refugee Act of 1980, as well as other provisions of law.

The United States Refugee Act (Public Law 96-212) was passed by Congress in 1980 to provide an established procedure for the admission to the United States of refugees of special humanitarian concern to the U.S.   That statute guarantees individuals the right to seek asylum whether at the U.S. border, a port of entry or even from the interior of the country. https://www.thoughtco.com/united-states-refugee-act-1980-1952018

Many of the refugees arriving as part of the caravans seek to apply for asylum at the U.S. border port of entry.   As reported in the Washington Post, some of those and others have gone to the wrong port of entry or crossed the border in desperation when they were turned away at a port of entry.  The U.S. Customs and Border Patrol has limited access to ports of entry and closed lanes of access routinely, greatly restricting the numbers of asylum seekers who may apply through the port of entry.   

The Trump Administration was attempting to limit access to asylum to only those persons applying at the port of entry.  Those who crossed the border at other points would be ineligible.   But the judge held that this limitation runs contrary to the express terms of the 1980 law.

 “If what Defendants intend to say is that the President by proclamation can override Congress’s clearly expressed legislative intent, simply because a statute conflicts with the President’s policy goals, the Court rejects that argument also,” the judge found

“This ban is illegal, will put people’s lives in danger, and raises the alarm about President Trump’s disregard for separation of powers, “ stated the ACLU lawyer who brought the case.   “There is no justifiable reason to flatly deny people the right to apply for asylum, and we cannot send them back to danger based on the manner of their entry. Congress has been clear on this point for decades.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/11/20/blow-trumps-immigration-agenda-federal-judge-blocks-asylum-ban-migrants-who-enter-illegally-mexico/?utm_term=.10c4a89558a2

SEEKING ASYLUM: Part Two: Applying for Asylum in Court.

By Christopher Kerosky

[This article was published in La Voz Bilingual Newspaper, http://www.lavoz.us.com/Read_La_Voz.html]

This is the second installment in a series about the asylum process for the many citizens of Mexico and Central America coming to our U.S. border to seek refuge from violence and persecution.  That first step, covered last month, is the interview conducted by an asylum officer at the border.  This article will describe the second step – the immigration court process. 

In order to stay in the United States (and eventually permanent residency), asylum seekers must prove to an Immigration Judge that they have a “well founded fear” that they will be persecuted if they were forced to return to their countries of origin. 

The applicant needs to demonstrate that he or she has a fear of future persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership to a particular social group. 

To obtain such protection from U.S. authorities, the asylum applicant should prepare an application known as I-589, and file it before an Immigration Judge.  The application should include declarations from the applicant and other witnesses and other detailed information as to why the applicant fears returning to his home country.  All of the information should be true; otherwise, the immigrant can be accused of presenting a “frivolous” application, which carries serious penalties.

The chances of obtaining asylum are greater if the application is filed within one year (365 days) from the applicant's entry into the United States. If this is not possible, then the applicant needs to demonstrate that the delay in the filing was due to extraordinary circumstances or that that the application was filed within a reasonable time after a change of circumstances that make the applicant eligible for asylum.

The asylum process could take approximately from six months to six years, depending on the judge's calendar and the backlog in the courts generally.  I have been representing clients in asylum proceedings since 1988 and over the years, I’ve handled more than 1000 asylum cases.  Over that time, the length of time asylum applicants wait for a hearing has steadily increased, recently averaging about 5 years.  However, the Trump Administration is attempting to increase the number of judges and expedite the process, especially for new applicants.

At the end of the immigration court case, a trial is held before a judge where the applicant is able to give testimony and present evidence favorable to his or her case. After the asylum applicant presents their case, the government's attorney is given the opportunity to convince the judge that the applicant is not eligible for asylum in the United States. Normally, the judge renders a decision at the end of such hearing.

If the judge denies the request for asylum, the applicant may appeal the decision with the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) and thereafter before the federal Court of Appeals.  During the time the appeals are pending, the applicant can remain in the U.S. legally.

If the judge decides to grant the individual asylum, he or she can remain in the United States indefinitely. One year after being granted asylum, the applicant and their qualified relatives can apply for Permanent Residency.

The asylum process is often long, complicated and stressful.  Despite some common misconceptions to the contrary, it is generally very difficult for asylum seekers to stay in this country.  However, if they present their case well, asylum seekers can often succeed in convincing a judge that they deserve refuge from the growing violence and persecution in Mexico and Central America.

SEEKING ASYLUM: PART 1

The Credible Fear Process at the U.S. Border.

By Christopher Kerosky

The asylum process has received increased attention lately with the Trump Administration’s decision to separate parents from their children at the border.  But now that Donald Trump has reversed his policy, once again the spotlight has moved away from the many refugees at our border seeking asylum.

Meanwhile, this humanitarian tragedy continues.  A large number of those pursuing asylum eventually come to California and the North Bay specifically.  Beginning in the first days at the border, the Department of Homeland Security starts a lengthy process to consider any arguments and evidence the asylum applicant might have to support their claim of asylum.

I felt it would be useful to describe the process for those in the public who are interested and to provide some guidance to persons going through it.  This segment covers the first step of the process, known as the “Credible Fear Interview” (CFI).

Credible Fear Process.

A person detained at the border without proper documents to enter generally does not  have the right to stay in the United States or file an application for immigration benefits. The only exception is if that individual has “a well-founded fear of persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion or social group”.   The person also needs to prove that the persecution was by the government or that the government could not stop it.

If a person at the border declares they are afraid to return, ICE will ask them some preliminary questions to determine if they are afraid and then the US asylum office will conduct a formal interview to determine if they  have "credible fear" of returning. to their country.

The purpose of the credible fear interview is to determine if there is a significant possibility that the immigrant could be eligible for asylum. During the credible fear interview, the officer will ask the asylum applicant many questions about their fear, who they are afraid of and why. 

The interview is typically conducted by the an asylum officer, often by video. A lawyer can be participate, typically by telephone.   

If the the asylum officer finds that there is not a sufficient credible fear of harm based on one of the five statutory grounds, the applicant can ask for the opportunity to appeal the ruling before an immigration court.  However, the asylum seeker will remain in custody while he or she goes through further appeals of the denial of asylum.  Typically future courts affirm the denial of credible fear and the person is ultimately deported. 

Even if the applicant is successful and convinces the asylum officer that he or she has a credible fear of persecution during the CFI interview, they are still placed in deportation proceedings before an immigration court, where they must convince a judge that their “credible fear” rises to the level of a “well-founded fear”, a higher standard of proof.  If they fail to do so, they are also deported. 

Part Two of this series will cover the asylum process before an immigration judge.

HOW TO FIGHT YOUR DEPORTATION, Part Two

In the first segment of this series, I discussed what to do if you are arrested by Immigration (ICE).  In short, don’t sign anything and you will likely be able to fight your deportation in court. 

Once you tell ICE that you want a court hearing, you also can ask for your release on bond, so you can be reunited with your family while your case moves forward.  Below, I will explain how to convince the immigration judge that you deserve to be free on bond, to make the bond as low as possible, and to get the bond paid and get out of immigration custody.

How is the bond set.

If a person is detained but eligible for bond, the government will often set an initial bond amount.   ICE under the Trump Administration has been setting bonds higher than in previous administrations or often dismissing deportation cases altogether.  We can expect that ICE under Trump will set bonds at $10,000 or higher, even for immigrants without any real criminal record.  But this can be lowered by an immigration judge.

In most cases, you have the right to ask the immigration court for a bond re-determination hearing.  The immigration court will then consider the arguments you make and often lower the bond set by ICE.

In setting the amount of bond, the judge will look at a number of criteria.  The most important criterion is whether the person is a “flight risk”; that is, whether he would likely come back to court if released.  In making that decision, the judge will consider factors which tend to show good moral character on the part of the individual held.  These factors include:

• Relatives in the United States: does the person have relatives here who are in legal status?  Do they have a citizen or permanent resident spouse or child?

• Employment: does the person have a regular job and income?

• A residence: does the person have a place to live if released?

• Immigration Court History: Has the person ever failed to show up in court on any of his prior criminal or immigration cases? Can they show the judge that they always went to court when required to do so in the past?

• Tax Records: has the person paid his taxes in the U.S.?

• Eligibility for Relief:  What immigration status does the person qualify for?  Do they have an immigrant petition filed by a relative?  Or can one be filed? Do they have a credible argument that they would fear persecution in their home country?  Do they qualify for some other status here?

How to Pay the Bond.

Once the bond is set, a relative or friend can post the bond if they can show that they are a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident.   That person must agree to be responsible for ensuring that the person attends any immigration hearing or interview whenever requested to do so.

The person posting the bond will need to know the last name of the person in ICE custody and their “A” number--the case number which begins with A followed by 9 numbers.   The bond can be paid with a cashier’s check from a bank, or a money order – not by cash or personal check. 

In San Francisco, the person paying the bond must present the money in person at the immigration office located at: 630 Sansome Street, 5^th Floor.  Hours are: Monday – Friday, 8:00am to 3:00pm.

If you pay the bond directly to the government, the bond money will be returned to your family only when your court case is completed and only if you have complied with the court’s order, even if that order is to leave the country.

Next post on this topic will deal with how to fight and possibly win your deportation case in the Immigration Court.

************************************************************************

CHRISTOPHER A. KEROSKY of the law firm of KEROSKY PURVES & BOGUE has practiced law since 1984 and has been recognized as one of the top immigration lawyers in Northern California for 7 years by “Super Lawyers”.   He graduated from University of California, Berkeley Law School and was a former counsel for the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington D.C.

WARNING: The foregoing is an article discussing legal issues. It is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice. We recommend that you get competent legal advice specific to your case.

THE TRUTH  ABOUT THE IMMIGRANT FAMILIES AT THE BORDER

By Christopher Kerosky

There is so much misinformation about the asylum seekers coming to our Mexican border, including a plethora of “alternative facts” put forth by Donald Trump. 

Our office has represented many families who went through the same process like those incarcerated at the border now and so I will try to address here some of the most common fallacies and provide some accurate information.  It’s important that the public understand why this is happening and who is to blame for a policy of separating children from their parents in our name.   

Are these immigrants all coming in illegally?

No, a large portion of these refugees are entering the U.S. border legally, seeking asylum through a legal procedure established by the U.S, by statute in 1980, and in accordance with the UN Human Rights Treaty.  This is true of all of those coming in the caravans of desperate refugees from Central America, organized by humanitarian organizations.  Donald Trump has condemned these caravans, but the fact is these people are following our own laws that provide a procedure for refugees to seek asylum at our border.

According to the Washington Post, some of the others who have been separated from their children were also seeking asylum but were apprehended because they went to the wrong port of entry or crossed the border in desperation when they were turned away at a port of entry.   

The majority of those seeking asylum are from Mexico, Honduras and El Salvador, all countries ravaged by violence at the hands of criminal organizations.  Extortion, kidnappings and even murder are very common in many of the areas from which these refugees come.  Virtually all of the asylum seekers I’ve met reported that their families were targets of this violence and were threatened with more violence if they stayed in their communities.

Are these immigrants able to stay forever in the U.S. just by coming to the border?

No, all applicants for asylum have to go through a rigorous interview process to establish they have a credible fear of persecution in their home country before they are ever allowed to leave the custody of the border officials.

Those who fail these interviews are deported. 

Those who succeed in proving to a DHS official that they credible fear of persecution still have to go through a trial before an immigration judge in deportation proceedings.  There, they are subject to a higher standard of proof, requiring that they prove have a well-founded fear of persecution based on religion, race, nationality, political opinion or social group; if they fail to prove this to a judge, they are deported.

Are the Democrats responsible for this family separation policy?

Donald Trump continues to falsely blame Democrats for an administration policy that has led to more than 2,000 children being separated from their parents at the U.S. border.

The family separations began earlier this year after the Administration announced a so-called “zero tolerance” policy of referring all border crossings for federal criminal prosecution, which leads to children being separated as their parents are sent to jail.

A law intended to protect children from trafficking was  passed by a Democratic Congress and signed into law by George W. Bush in 2008.  It establishes certain due process rights for unaccompanied minors .  That is apparently the law Donald Trump is referring to; however that law does just the opposite. 

Isn’t there an alternative to incarcerating them and separating them from their children?

Yes, even if the U.S. government insists on criminally prosecuting all these immigrants, I believe these families could be given electronic ankle bracelets or other devices commonly used by immigration or law enforcement to ensure a person will attend future court hearings and not disappear. 

There has never been an adequate explanation from the Trump Administration why these refugees cannot be given electronic devices to track their whereabouts, instead of incarcerating them at greater cost to our government, not to mention the cost to their children who are taken away from them.