Archive for December 2018
By Admin
•
December 20, 2018
ASISTA applauds the federal court decision yesterday which restores critical protections for asylum seekers fleeing domestic violence and gang brutality. The Center for Gender and Refugee Studies and ACLU challenged the Administration’s harmful expedited removal policies which instructed asylum officers to generally deny domestic violence and gang violence-related claims. ASISTA is proud to have supported the plaintiffs in this case as a signatory to an amicus brief organized by Tahirih Justice Center, which you can read here .
By Admin
•
December 20, 2018
In November 2018, ASISTA fought back on harmful USCIS changes to fee waiver practices and forms. USCIS is creating barriers to equal access to survivor protections, especially for survivors who have few financial resources of their own. ASISTA created a template comment for advocates to share how these damaging changes affect survivors, and you can read ASISTA’s fee waiver comment here.
By Admin
•
December 11, 2018
On December 10, 2018, ASISTA filed a Comment on DHS’ Proposed Rule on Public Charge . DHS’ proposed rule will harm immigrant survivors of domestic and sexual violence as well as survivors of human trafficking. Access and use of public benefit programs may make the difference in whether survivors and their children can escape abuse. ASISTA opposes the proposed rule because DHS should not put survivors in the position of choosing between their immigration status and their ability to survive after abuse.
By Admin
•
December 6, 2018
ASISTA weighs in on how harmful changes to immigration policy impacts immigrant survivors of violence. Read more here .
By Admin
•
December 6, 2018
ASISTA strongly condemns USCIS’ decision to implement the updated Notice To Appear (NTA) policy for survivor-based protections on November 19th. This means that domestic and sexual assault survivors, survivors of human trafficking, children eligible for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, and other victims whom Congress intended to help could now face deportation hearings if their cases are denied. For full statement, see here: ASISTA NTA Press Release Nov 2018
By Admin
•
December 6, 2018
ASISTA weighs in on USCIS's recent drastic departure from prior practice and policy, and how it will discourage survivors from coming forward
By Admin
•
December 6, 2018
Annotated Notes on NTA Memo Implementation On November 15, 2018, USCIS held a stakeholder engagement call on the implementation of the NTA memo on survivor-based protections. ASISTA, AILA and ILRC compiled these annotated notes and practice pointers based on USCIS’ responses during that stakeholder call.
Recent Posts
By Maria Lazzarino
•
December 12, 2025
This Practice Alert summarizes USCIS’s new extreme vetting policies, including broad adjudication holds, re-review of previously approved cases, and heightened discretionary scrutiny, and explains their serious implications for immigrant survivors seeking safety and stability. It also provides practical guidance for practitioners on preparing clients for the impact of these measures and on developing case strategies and potential legal challenges.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
December 12, 2025
On July 4, 2025, President Trump signed HR-1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), which significantly impacts immigrant survivors of human trafficking. The law imposes new filing fees for immigration benefits, motions, and appeals before USCIS and EOIR, establishes additional financial penalties for certain immigration violations, and eliminates eligibility for a range of federal public benefits for many immigrants who were previously considered “qualified,” including trafficking survivors. This Practice Alert reviews these fee and penalty changes, explains the new restrictions on public benefits, and outlines the impact on trafficking survivors seeking T visas and other forms of humanitarian relief, offering guidance for practitioners on how to mitigate the law’s potential harms.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
June 11, 2025
In May and June 2025, ASISTA joined partners at Boston College School of Law, Harbor COV, and Tahirih to submit an amicus briefs to the First and Fourth Circuit Courts of Appeals in cases challenging the executive order on birthright citizenship. ASISTA and partners highlighted the importance of maintaining a preliminary injunction against implementing the order. If the order were implemented, many immigrant mothers of U.S.-born children would only be able to prove their child’s citizenship by submitting documentation about the child’s father’s immigration status. For survivors of intimate partner violence, just knowing the need for this documentation could make it difficult or impossible to leave the abusive relationship. For survivors of sexual assault or trafficking, contacting the perpetrator for the paperwork could put them and their families in immediate physical danger. Using real-life examples, the brief illustrates the stakes if immigrant parents were forced to choose between maintaining their safety and establishing their children’s rights. It urges the court not let this become reality. Read the First Circuit Brief, Doe v. Trump , here ; read the Fourth Circuit Brief, Casa, Inc., et al. v. Trump , here .
By Maria Lazzarino
•
May 30, 2025
On March 14, 2025, President Trump attempted to invoke the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 to justify carrying out deportations without the due process of immigration proceedings. Since then, multiple federal courts have ruled the invocation was unlawful, but the government continues to fight for its usage, including before the U.S. Supreme Court. On May 16, 2025, the Supreme Court maintained a temporary prohibition on the deportations planned in Texas and sent the issue back to the lower courts. ASISTA celebrates the positive rulings but notes with condemnation that the push against them is ongoing. Check ASISTA’s alert: The Fight to Protect Survivors from the Alien Enemies Act Continue.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
April 28, 2025
Practitioners have reported receiving RFEs and NOIDs in cases submitted with electronically reproduced signatures for original, wet ink signatures where USCIS has requested the original, wet ink signatures. This Practice Alert describes what USCIS’ current signature policy is and what options practitioners have in these cases.