U visas

On Monday, Oct. 28, AILA, ASISTA, and ICWC submitted a joint amicus brief to the US District Court for the Middle District of Florida, regarding the proper analysis USCIS should use to assess whether a crime underlying a U visa petition is “qualifying criminal activity.” The complainant in the case had been the victim of a strong arm robbery during which a felonious assault also occurred, but USCIS denied relief based on very narrow and stringent readings of the law. Drawing on a prior ASISTA brief, the amici argued for a more flexible category-based approach to the qualifying crime analysis and criticized the elements-only approach the agency typically employs. Should the lawsuit succeed, the way USCIS analyzes all U visa crimes could be improved and broadened so that more survivors can obtain the protections they need and deserve. Click here to access the Amicus Brief.

ASISTA is pleased to release this Practice Pointer on the age-out protections for U Nonimmigrants. The age-out statute provides critical protections to U principals and derivatives, but the protections are limited in scope and often misunderstood. This Practice Pointer clarifies the scope of these age-out protections and provides practice tips for practitioners to avoid age-out for clients both inside and outside the United States.

When a U applicant or recipient fails to waive an applicable inadmissibility ground at any stage, for any reason, it puts their current and future statuses at risk. Yet there do exist strategies to address these “late-breaking” inadmissibility grounds, depending on when they come into being and when you learn of them. This practice advisory describes the current best practices for protecting survivors in these situations, whether before or after I-918/I-192 approval, before or after adjustment of status, or even during the naturalization process.

In July 2024, ASISTA and partners joined an amicus brief to the Supreme Court in the case of Bouarfa v. Mayorkas. The case centers on the judicial reviewability of DHS’s revocation authority in the family-based immigration context, and the brief aims to highlight how any decision on such reviewability could also impact justice for survivors who are seeking or were granted U, T, or VAWA-based relief. Click here access the amicus brief. Bouarfa v. Mayorkas

In conjunction with the new fee rule that went into effect on April 1, 2024, USCIS updated immigration forms, including the I-918 and related forms. Starting June 3, 2024, USCIS will only accept the new version of the form. This short grace period will create significant hardships and hurdles for those who have sought or obtained signed certifications on the previous version of the form.

Many practitioners report uncertainty about the date their client’s U status expires because the client has multiple documents defining the validity of their status. For instance, a U derivative may have: (1) the I-797 approval notice for the principal’s I-918, (2) the I-797 approval notice for their own I-918A, (3) a U-3 (or other derivative U category) visa in their passport, (4) an I-94 from CBP, and (5) a passport entry stamp. Sometimes the expiration date on one of these documents is different from others. This resource provides strategies to address expiration date discrepancies, obtain a copy of the I-94, which is generally controlling, and develop an appropriate plan for filing that preserves your client’s rights.

This practice pointer synthesizes the current recommendations for using USCIS “hotline emails” for customer service inquiries on cases protected by 8 USC § 1367 privacy requirements, i.e., survivor-based relief applications.

On September 8, 2023, USCIS published a revision of Form I-485 Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust Status greatly expanding the number and type of questions for applicants to complete. On November 7, 2023, ASISTA submitted a comment emphasizing the impact of these form changes on beneficiaries of survivor-based relief.

These four flowcharts were created by Esther Limb, Supervising Attorney at Her Justice, in connection with ASISTA’s March 2023 Virtual CLE Conference, “Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Derivatives.” They are current as of March 2023.

On February 14, 2023 ASISTA and collaborators AILA, ICWC, CAST, and ILRC delivered a letter to USCIS raising concerns about the unavailability of biometrics appointments for U and T visa petitioners and their derivatives abroad, and the negative consequences resulting from their inability to complete application requirements, including prolonged family separation and even unfair denials of otherwise meritorious applications. Click here to access the letter.

ASISTA and other amici filed this brief regarding USCIS’s unreasonable delay in adjudicating U visa work authorization requests. Amici were represented pro bono by Nathan Warecki, Brianna Nassif, Lauren Maynard, and Myra Benjamin from Nixon Peabody. Click here to access the amicus brief.

On August 10, 2021, ICE issued a new agency directive superseding guidance from 2019 regarding stay of removal requests and removal proceedings involving U visa petitioners (hereinafter “Directive”) . The Directive outlines new policies and procedures regarding exercising prosecutorial discretion for victims of crime, including those eligible for victim-based immigration relief (including VAWA self-petitions, U and T visas, and SIJS) as well as victims and witnesses who are assisting in investigations or prosecutions. It also outlines definitions of terms, the responsibilities of different components of ICE with regard to the implementation of these new policies, training requirements, and obligations regarding record keeping.

June 14, 2021

The Ninth Circuit’s decision in Medina Tovar became final on May 2, 2021. The Court held that after-acquired spouses of U visa petitioners are eligible to “accompany or follow to join” the U-1 petitioner through the I-918A petitioning process. ASISTA, CLINIC & ILRC’s new Practice Alert includes the latest information on how and when to file an I-918A for a derivative spouse where the marriage to the U-1 petitioner occurred after the filing of the I-918 but before the U petition was adjudicated.

In December, the 9th Circuit held in Medina Tovar v. Zuchowski that certain after-acquired spouses of U visa petitioners are eligible to “accompany or follow to join” the U-1 through the I-918A petitioning process. The Court recently issued its mandate on 1/25/2021. The judgment in Medina Tovar is therefore in effect as of 1/25/2021 .

The 1st Circuit found that the BIA had abused its discretion in failing to follow Matter of Sanchez-Sosa in adjudicating the U visa petitioner’s Motion to Reopen and ordered remand. Click on the links to access the Amicus Brief and the Decision .

The American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), ASISTA and the Domestic Violence Project (DVP) of the Urban Justice Center have published a new practice advisory based on new USCIS documentation obtained by FOIA litigation brought by Cleary Gottlieb on behalf of DVP.

When a petitioner files multiple interrelated forms for one case, such as a U visa, the denial of one form generally leads to the denial of all ancillary forms as well. In this practice pointer , we will address how many Form I-290Bs to file in this scenario, whether derivatives need to file their own Form I-290B, and pitfalls in completing the Form I-290B.

ASISTA argues that DHS regulations prohibiting U visas for after-acquired spouses of crime victims violates the Congressional goals of the U visa law. See Amicus here .