U visas
By Maria Lazzarino
•
November 18, 2024
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
September 4, 2024
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
August 14, 2024
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
July 19, 2024
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
By Maria Lazzarino
•
April 30, 2024
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
February 15, 2024
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
January 25, 2024
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
December 21, 2023
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
April 6, 2023
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
March 10, 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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
January 18, 2022
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
August 24, 2021
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.
By Admin
•
June 14, 2021
June 14, 2021
By Maria Lazzarino
•
June 11, 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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
February 12, 2021
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 .
By Maria Lazzarino
•
January 29, 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 .
By Admin
•
November 23, 2020
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
July 7, 2020
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.
By Maria Lazzarino
•
June 1, 2020
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 .
By Admin
•
February 27, 2020
ASISTA has updated its practice advisory regarding U visa application rejections due to blank spaces on the Form I-918 and I-918A. This updated advisory has filing practice pointers, as well as suggestions for re-filing rejected forms.
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.