On December 6, 2011, The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) found that a lawful permanent resident who adjusted status under the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act of November 2, 1996 has been "admitted" to the United States and is thus subject to the grounds of removal, not inadmissibility. Matter of Espinosa Guillot, 25 I. & N. Dec. 653 (BIA 2011).
On December 2, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) found that service of a Notice To Appear (NTA) on a respondent triggers the "stop-time rule", thus halting the accrual of continuous residence or continuous physical presence for an alien applying for cancellation of removal under INA§240A. The BIA also held that to "stop-time", the NTA need not list the date and time of the first hearing or be accompanied by a separate notice of hearing. Matter of Camarillo, 25 I. & N. Dec. 644 (BIA 2011).
On November 18, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that it would uniformly apply its own analysis in determining whether one has been convicted of 2 or more crimes of moral turpitude arising out of a "single scheme" of criminal misconduct, as set forth in INA§237(a)(2)(A)(ii), in all cases regardless of which federal circuit in which it arises. Matter of Islam, 25. & N. Dec. (BIA 2011)
On November 18, 2011 the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) in an unpublished opinion in a case on remand held that refugees resettled in the United States per INA§207 have been admitted and are thus subject to the grounds of removal, not inadmissibility. The BIA also found that removal proceedings are proper and, even where the respondent has not had an application for adjustment of status denied by the USCIS. This ruling may contradict prior precedent. Matter of S-F-D-A number unknown (BIA 2011).
On November 9, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that a Rhode Island felony conviction for solicitation to commit assault with a dangerous weapon, where over a year of imprisonment is imposed, constitutes solicitation to commit a “crime of violence” which therefore qualifies as a crime of violence aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(F). However, the BIA stated that solicitation is not itself an aggravated felony under INA §101(a)(43)(U) as it is not a n attempt or conspiracy to commit an aggravated felony. Matter of Guerrero, 25 I. & N. Dec. 631 (BIA 2011)
On October 19, 2011, The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that in applying INA §101(a)(13)(c) [LPR returning to the US after travelling abroad is not regarded as seeking ‘admission’ unless one of six exceptions applies], the government bears the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence that the LPR is an “applicant for admission”. The BIA also confirmed that a conviction as an accessory after the fact is only a crime involving moral turpitude (CMT) if the underlying offense is a CMT. Matter or Rivers, 25 I. & N. Dec. 623 (BIA 2011).
On October 13, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that the New York State crime of attempted arson in the third degree is an aggravated felony even though the state statute lacked the requirement that the property be used in interstate or foreign commerce. Matter of Bautista, 25 I. & N. Dec. 616 (BIA 2011).
On September 20, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that the rescission statute, INA §246(a), which sets a five-year statute of limitations on rescinding the lawful permanent residence on those who acquire such status is limited to those granted adjustment of status and that the section does not apply to those who immigrate to the U.S. with an immigrant visa i.e., rescission proceedings against them can take place more than five years after their admission. Matter of Cruz de Ortiz, 25 I. & N. Dec. 601 (BIA 2011)
On September 2, 2011, The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Osorio v. Mayorkas, 2011 WL 3873797 (9th Cir. 2011) that derivative beneficiaries of family-based I-130 petitions who age-out (turn 21), while their parents' FB-3rd of FB-4th preference petitions are pending are not entitled to retain the priority date of that case when a new petitions is subsequently filed on their behalf. In coming to this decision, The Court followed Matter of Wang, 25 I. & N. Dec. 28 (BIA 2009)
On August 11, 2011, The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that until a Notice to Appear (NTA) is filed, an alien arrested without a warrant does not have to be advised of his or her right to counsel or that any statements made when questioned by DHS can be used against him or her. Matter of E-R-M-F- & A-S-M-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 580 (BIA 2011).
On August 1, 2011, Governor Pat Quinn signed S.B. 2185, The Illinois DREAM Act, into law.
On July 14, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Nunez-Reyes v. Holder, 2011 WL 2714159 (9th Cir.) that equal protection concerns do not require the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to treat a state conviction for simple possession of a controlled substance that has been expunged the same way it treats an expunged conviction for simple possession under the Federal First Offender Act (FFOA). This ruling overturned the 11-year old precedent case, Lujan-Armendariz v. I.N.S., 222 F.3d 728 (9th Cir. 2000) but only applies prospectively to conviction taking plea after July 14th.
On June 23, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that the K-2 nonimmigrant derivative child of a K-1 fiancé or fiancée is eligible to adjust status to lawful resident even after turning 21 if he or she was under that age when admitted to the U.S in K-2 status. Matter of Le, 25 I. & N. Dec. 531 (BIA 2011). "
On June 10, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that a late initial registrant seeking Temporary Protected Status (TPS) as the “child” of an applicant eligible for TPS need only establish that he or she qualified as a “child” at the time of the initial registration period, not when the application was filed.Matter of N-C-M-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 535 (BIA 2011)."
On June 9, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that whistleblowing in the form of opposition to state corruption may constitute a political or imported political opinion as the basis for a claim to political asylum; that under the REAL ID Act, merely proving retaliation for whistleblowing is not sufficient by itself to obtain asylum because the anticorruption belief must be a central reason for the claimed persecution; and, that the Immigration Judge must look to a) whether and how the applicant engaged in acts expressing anticorruption beliefs, b) any evidence that a persecutor was motivated by such anticorruption beliefs, and c) any evidence concerning the amount of corruption in the home government. Matter of N-M-, 25 I. & N. Dec. 526 (BIA 2011).
On June 1, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that a late initial registrant seeking Temporary Protected Status (TPS) as a derivative spouse must be a national or habitual resident of a country designated for TPS eligibility. Matter of Echeverria, 25 I. & N. Dec. 512 (BIA 2011).
On May 31, 2011, The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Irigoyen-Briones v. Holder, 2011 WL 2119908 (9th Circuit), that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has the authority – despite the BIA’s protests to the contrary – to extend the thirty (30) day time period for filing an appeal in the appropriate circumstances, i.e., for equitable considerations when the reasons are “extraordinary”. This ruling specifically addresses situations when next-day or overnight express carriers fail to deliver a notice of appeal in a timely fashion.
"On May 26, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court found that Arizona's new state law, the Legal Arizona Workers Act, which suspends or revokes the business licenses of employers who knowingly hire unauthorized workers and which requires all state businesses to use the E-verify system, is not preempted by federal immigration law. Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. Whiting, No. 09-115, 2011 WL 20239365 (2011).
On May 23, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari and agreed to hear arguments over whether convictions for filing, and aiding and abetting in the filing, a false statement on a tax return, e.g., tax offenses other than tax evasion, constitute aggravated felonies. Kawashima v. Holder, 2011 WL 1936082 (2011).
On April 11, 2011, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower, Federal District Court’s preliminary injunction barring enforcement of parts of the State of Arizona’s S.B. 1070. The District Court, in U.S. v. Arizona, 703 F. Supp. 201980 (D. Ariz. 2010) had enjoined – the sections requiring police officers to try to determine the immigration status of someone arrested or detained if there is a reasonable suspicion that the person is undocumented; making it a crime to fail to apply for or carry alien registration documentation; making it a crime for an undocumented immigrant to apply for or perform work; and, authorizing the warrantless arrest of someone if there is probable cause to believe he or she is removable. U.S. v. Arizona, 2011 WL 1346945 (9th Cir. April 11, 2011).
On March 3, 2011, USCIS published a proposed rule seeking to implement an electronic H-1B preregistration program (76 Fed. Reg. 11686). The regulation will require prospective employers to register intended H-1B employees during a designated period. There would be no filing fee and a separate registration would be required for each beneficiary, who will need to be named. Only one beneficiary can be listed in each registration and only one registration can be submitted by an employer for a specific worker, although more than one employer can file to register the same beneficiary.
On March 5, 2011, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held a conviction for attempt to commit a crime involving moral turpitude is itself a crime involving moral turpitude. Matter of Vo, 25 I. & N. Dec (BIA 2011).
The state of Arizona has filed a counter-claim against the federal government, responding to the U.S. suit against the state’s enactment of S.B. 1070, a restrictive immigration bill, and affirmatively claiming that the federal government has failed in its constitutional duty to secure the Arizona-Mexico border. On February 10, 2011, Arizona submitted a claim alleging that the U.S. has: failed to control the border; violated the U.S. Constitution by failing to protect Arizonans against invasion and domestic violence; ignored its statutory duty under 8 USCA § 1373(c) to verify citizenship status and under 8 USCA § 1231(i) to compensate Arizona for costs incurred in incarcerating illegal aliens; and, has violated Arizona’s rights under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution by usurping powers reserved to the state.
As of January 18, 2011, Barbadoes, Estonia, Fiji, Hungary, Kiribati, Latvia, Macedonia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Slovenia, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuata have been added to the H-2A and H-2B programs. Previously, only nationals of Argentia, Australia, Belize, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Honduras, Ireland, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Lithuania, Mexico, Moldova, The Netherlands, Nicaragua, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and Uruguay were eligible to take part. Indonesia's designation was not renewed for 2011.
In Matter of Sosa Ventura, 25 I. & N. Dec. 391 (BIA 2010) the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) held that a grant of Temporary Protected Status (TPS) is insufficient grounds for an Immigration Judge to terminate removal proceedings, finding administrative closure or a continuation of proceedings to have been the proper course of action.
In Matter of Gruenangerl, 25 I. & N. Dec. 351 (BIA 2010) the Board of Immigration Appeals held that a conviction under 18 USC A § 201(b)(1)(A) does not qualify as crime "relating to" commercial bribery and therefore is not an aggravated felony, even if the term of imprisonment is at least one year.
On November 9, 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Dent v. Holder, 2010 WL 4455877 (9th Cir. 2010) that due process requires the government to provide non-citizens in removal proceedings with copies of their alien files ("A files").
On July 12, 2010, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held in Perdomo v. Holder, 2010 WL 2721524 (9th Cir. 2010) that women in Guatemala may constitute a particular social group for purposes of qualifying for political asylum under INA 101(a)(42).
In Matter of Velasquez, 25 I. & N. Dec. 278 (BIA 2010), the Board of Immigration Appeals found that a conviction for misdemeanor assault and battery against a family or household member in the state of Virginia is not categorically a crime of violence per 18 USC A 16(a) and thus does not qualify as a crime of domestic violence for purpose of removability under INA 237 (a)(2)(E)(i).
