ICYMI: Important Policy & ASISTA Updates
By Ahlam Moussa
|
February 3, 2021
As usual, there have been many immigration policy updates this past week. Please see below for a brief summary of a few of those updates, as well as some upcoming ASISTA events.
- Flexibility in Deadline Extension Last week, USCIS announced that it will extend its flexibility policy. This policy will now apply to documents in which the issuance date listed on the request, notice or decision is between March 1, 2020 and March 31, 2021. For more information, see USCIS Response to COVID-19 here.
- Challenges to Enforcement Executive Order: As you may have heard, a judge in Texas has enjoined portions of Biden’s Executive Order on Enforcement and the related DHS guidance regarding the 100-day moratorium on deportations. Our partners at NIPNLG and La Resistencia have developed
a fact sheet explaining what has been enjoined and what remains in effect. Based upon our reading of this decision, we believe that the rescission of the 2018 Notice to Appear Memo from 2018 in effect.
- New Circuit Court Decisions
- New First Circuit Decision: This new decision Granados Benitez v. Wilkinson ruled that the BIA abused its discretion in refusing to reopen proceedings for a U visa petitioner who had been placed on the waitlist. Of note, the court found that
Matter of Sanchez Sosa
remains good law and that the
Sanchez Sosa factors apply to motions to reopen where the purpose of the motion is to seek a continuance. ASISTA and other amici were represented by Greenberg Traurig in support of the Petitioner in this case. Huge thanks to Petitioner’s counsel, Paige Austin and Phil Torrey!
- Ninth Circuit Decision: In the published decision, Kaur v. Wilkinson, the panel found that, “The BIA erred in imposing evidentiary requirements of ongoing injury or treatment beyond the sexual assault itself in order to show persecution. Kaur’s credible testimony about the attempted gang rape is sufficient to show persecution. Attempted rape by a gang of men, in broad daylight on a public street, is especially terrorizing because it powerfully demonstrates the perpetrator’s domination, control over the victim and imperviousness to the law. Requiring evidence of additional harms both minimizes the gravity of the sexual assault and demeans the victim. We grant Kaur’s petition for review and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.” (emphasis added)
- ASISTA joins important amicus efforts
- Last week, ASISTA and our partners submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the plaintiffs in the new litigation
Centro Legal de La Raza, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, and Refugee and Immigrant Center for Education and Legal Services v. EOIR. This case challenges EOIR’s new rule regarding administrative closure, and our amicus highlightis the harm that this rule places on survivor-based immigration cases. Read the brief here.
- ASISTA was proud to join over 100 organizations nationwide as amicus on behalf of the respondents in the pending Supreme Court case of Pekoske v. Innovation Law Lab, et al. (previously, Wolf v. Innovation Law Lab, et al.) The government appealed the 9th circuit’s decision upholding an injunction against the continued implementation and expansion of Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). The amicus brief can be found here.
- ASISTA’s 2-day training on March 17-18, 2021: Register now for ASISTA’s Legal Remedies for Immigrant Survivors, Introductory Series Part II: Preparing the Case. In Part II of our skills-based introductory seminar series, participants will learn to effectively prepare survivor-based petitions for immigration status. Participants will have the opportunity to practice these skills through interactive discussions and hands-on activities. This course is intended for legal advocates at agencies that serve domestic violence and sexual assault survivors, new immigration practitioners, and legal staff. Register Today!
As always, thank you for all you do on behalf of survivors and their families.
The ASISTA Team
Leave a Comment
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.