Call us: (510) 742-5887 | Email: info@peerallylaw.com
Shah Peerally Law radio show



Obtaining Asylum in the United States: Two Paths PDF Print E-mail

 

The two main ways of obtaining asylum in the United States are through the affirmative process and through the defensive process.


 

Key Differences Between “Affirmative” and “Defensive” Asylum Process
AffirmativeDefensive
Asylum-seeker has not been placed in removal proceedings Asylum-seeker has been placed in removal proceedings in Immigration Court
Asylum-seeker affirmatively submits his or her asylum application to a USCIS Service Center Asylum-seeker:
  • Is referred by an Asylum Officer
  • Is placed in removal proceedings for immigration violations, or
  • Tried to enter the U.S. at a port-of-entry without proper documents and was found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture
Asylum-seeker appears before a USCIS Asylum Officer Asylum-seeker appears before an Immigration Judge with the Executive Office for Immigration Review
Non-adversarial interview Adversarial court hearing

 

 

U.S. “Affirmative” Asylum Processing with USCIS

In the affirmative asylum process, individuals who are physically present in the United States, regardless of how they got here and regardless of their current immigration status, may apply for asylum.  They do so “affirmatively” by submitting an application to USCIS. In keeping with the idea that a genuine asylum-seeker should present himself/herself to authorities “without delay,” asylum-seekers must apply for asylum within one year from the date of last arrival in the United States, unless they can show changed circumstances that materially affect their eligibility or extraordinary circumstances relating to the delay in filing, and that they filed within a reasonable amount of time given those circumstances. They file an asylum application (Form I-589) by sending it to a USCIS Service Center and are seen by Asylum Officers – in non-adversarial interviews.  The interviews take place at one of the eight Asylum Offices throughout the U.S. or, if the applicant lives far from one of those offices, at a District Office.

It is important to note that affirmative asylum applicants are almost never detained.  They are free to live in the U.S. pending the completion of their asylum processing with USCIS and, if found ineligible by USCIS, then with an Immigration Judge (see U.S. “Defensive” Asylum Processing with EOIR).  Normally, an affirmative asylum applicant is interviewed by USCIS within 43 days of application and, if not approved, is referred by USCIS to an Immigration Judge at the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) for further and de novo consideration.  The time period is somewhat longer if the applicant does not reside near one of the eight Asylum Offices and an Asylum Officer is required to go to a distant District Office to conduct the interview.  Asylum applicants referred to an Immigration Judge for such processing are also not detained.

Since the successful asylum reforms of 1995, this processing is usually completed within 6 months of the initial application, including processing by the Immigration Judge if USCIS could not approve the application and referred it to the judge.  If USCIS can approve the application, the decision is usually issued within 60 days from the initial application.  During this time, most asylum applicants are not authorized to work.  For more details on the procedures and timeframes involved in this processing, see What is the Affirmative Asylum Process?.

For the latest statistics on the affirmative asylum program, see the Monthly Statistical Report, a publication of the DHS Office of Immigration Statistics.

U.S. “Defensive” Asylum Processing with EOIR

Immigration Judges with the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) hear asylum applications only in the context of “defensive” asylum proceedings.  That is, applicants request asylum as a defense against removal from the United States.  Immigration Judges (IJs) hear such cases in adversarial (court-room-like) proceedings: the IJ is the judge that hears the applicant’s claim and also hears any concerns about the validity of the claim raised by the Government, which is represented by an attorney.  The IJ then makes a determination of eligibility.  If the applicant is not found eligible for asylum, the IJ determines whether the applicant is eligible for any other forms of relief from removal and, if not, will order the individual removed from the United States.

Aliens generally are placed into defensive asylum processing in one of two ways:

  • they are referred to an IJ by Asylum Officers who did not grant asylum to them, or
  • they are placed in removal proceedings because they
    • are undocumented or in violation of their status when apprehended in the U.S. or
    • were caught trying to enter the U.S. without proper documentation (usually at a port-of-entry) and were found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture.

For information on the process after being granted asylum before an Immigration Judge, see “Notice to Individuals Granted Immigration Benefits by Immigration Judge or Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)”.

Asylum-Seekers and Expedited Removal

Most undocumented migrants stopped by immigration officials at a U.S. port-of-entry (POE) may be subject to expedited removal.  This means that, for persons other than genuine asylum seekers, refusal of admission and/or removal from the United States can be effected quickly.

However, some of the individuals arriving at an Immigration POE without proper documentation are genuine asylum-seekers fleeing persecution in their home country.  Because of the circumstances of their flight from their homes and departure from their countries, they may arrive in the U.S. with no documents or with fraudulent documents obtained as the only way out of their country.

Any person subject to expedited removal who raises a claim for asylum – or expresses fear of removal – will be given the opportunity to explain his or her fears to an Asylum Officer.  Recognizing that some refugees may be hesitant to come forward with a request for protection at the time of arrival, immigration policy and procedures require Inspectors to ask each individual who may be subject to expedited removal the following series of “protection questions” to identify anyone who is afraid of return:

  • Why did you leave your home country or country of last residence?
  • Do you have any fear or concern about being returned to your home country or being removed from the United States?
  • Would you be harmed if you were returned to your home country or country of last residence?
  • Do you have any questions or is there anything else you would like to add?

If the individual expresses a fear of return, the individual is detained and given an interview by an Asylum Officer.  The role of the Asylum Officer is as an Asylum Pre-Screening Officer (APSO) who interviews the person to determine if he or she has a credible fear of persecution or torture.  This is a standard that is broader -- and the burden of proof easier to meet -- than the well-founded fear of persecution standard needed to obtain asylum.  Those found to have a “credible fear” are referred to an Immigration Judge to hear and then judge their asylum claims.  This places the asylum seeker on the “defensive” path to asylum. Most individuals who are found to have a credible fear of these are almost immediately released to relatives or community groups, or on their own recognizance.  However, some are not released, and instead are detained while their asylum claims are pending with the Immigration Judge.

If the individual who expresses a fear of return is arriving from Canada at a U.S.-Canadian land border port of entry, or is being removed from Canada and transiting through the United States, the APSO will conduct a threshold screening interview to determine whether he or she must seek protection in Canada instead of the United States. If the individual is eligible to seek protection in the United States, the APSO then will determine whether he or she has a credible fear of persecution or torture.

 

 
< Prev   Next >


Join us facebook Join us in Linkedin Join us in Twitter Share

Specialty Immigration Services

Corporate Immigration:
Immigration Court and Appeals: Immigration Delays and Citizenship:
Inadmissibility:
I-9 Compliance
E-Verify

LCA/Public Access File Compliance and Audits
Mergers and Acquisitions
Defensive Asylum
Motion to Reopen
BIA Appeals
9th Circuit Appeals
Voluntary Departure
Cancellation of Removal
 

 

Naturalization
Certification of Citizenship
Mandamus and 1447(B) Complaints
I-601 Immigrant Visa Waiver
INA 212(d)(3) non-immigrant Visa Waiver
I-212 Readmission after Removal

Immigrant and Non- Immigrant Visas

Family Based Immigration: Employment Based Immigration: Temporary Work Visas: Other Visas:

Immediate Relative Petitions Spouse, Parents & Children of Citizens
Spouses & Children of Permanent Residents
Married Sons & Daughters of Citizens
Siblings of Citizens

VAWA (Victims of Abuse)

EB1A: Aliens of Extraordinary Ability
EB1B: Outstanding Researchers, Professors
EB1C: Multinational Managers, Executives
EB2 NIW: National Interest Waiver
EB2: Advanced Degree Worker (PERM – Labor Certification Based)
EB3: Professional / Skilled / Unskilled Workers (PERM – Labor Certification Based)
EB4: Religious Worker
EB5: Investor Visa

E1: Treaty Trader
E2: Treaty Investor
H-1B: Specialty Worker
L1A/L1B : Intra-company Transfers
O1: Aliens of Extraordinary Ability
P1: Athletes and Entertainers
R1: Religious Workers
TN: Professional Canadians and Mexicans

B1/B2: Business or Tourist Visas
F-1: Students at Academic Institutions
J1: Exchange Visitors – Home Residency Waivers
K1: Fiances of U.S. Citizens
U: Criminal Victims
Refugees: Political Asylum Seekers

 

Special Note for H1B and H4 Visa Holders

Since the passing of the 2010 Neufeld Memo (as amended), obtaining an H1B visa has become increasingly difficult for many, in particular, IT consulting companies, due to the additional documentary requirements. Additionally, US consulates, particularly those in India, have been creating additional requirements which are not authorized by any regulation, such as filing an amended petition when an H1B worker changes locations while still preserving the same position. USCIS has clearly stated in their policy memos/correspondences that in such cases, only a new LCA is required. Still, consulates seem to have created these requirements without the legal authority to do so, and for those who do not meet such requirements, there is a heightened likelihood of having the consulate place the case on hold under INA 221(g) for further administrative processing, and even possible revocation of the underlying petition. This causes extreme hardship over the petitioning companies and their candidates. This situation is worsened in cases of IT consulting firms’ H visas where non-lawyers are hired to prepare their H1B petitions and H4 petitions. Preparing an H1B petition is a matter of law, and you can only be best served by an experienced lawyer. Our law firm has handled hundreds of H1Bs successfully.

Moreover, if the H-1B visa is not well prepared, the spouses and children of the H1 visas holders are being denied an H4 visa stamp at the U.S consulate/embassy. Lately we have also noticed that many US lawyers are outsourcing their work to non-lawyers in other countries to prepare the application. This can be a dangerous practice resulting in practicing law without a license and eventually hurt the candidates who are expecting good service form a "real lawyer". It is also worth noting that because non-lawyers (immigration consultants) are not bound by the attorney's professional code, many tend to either be giving poor service, or even commit fraud on the application. Such behavior can create a situation which might eventually result in a finding of H1B fraud and bar the non-immigrant H1 visa or H4 visa holders from any future immigration benefits under INA 212(6)(c)(i).

At the Shah Peerally Law Group PC, we believe that you are better served by a legal team who are familiar with H1B cases and who sincerely want to help their clients. Whether you are an individual or a company who wants to file for H-1 visas or H-4 visas through an H1B transfer or a new H1B application, our law firm will make sure that your interests are well-served. We understand and appreciate that individual’s careers and in some cases, the future of their employer may well depend of obtaining approval on the petition.

Spacer
Spacer




Download our iPhone App





Shah Peerally Law Group, Pc

Contact Us






Our Location

Shah Peerally Law Group P.C.
37600 Central Ct., Suite 202
Newark, CA 94560
Ph:  510-742-5887
Fax: 510-742-5877

and

47 W Sixth Street
Tracy, CA 95376
Ph:  209-222-8529
Fax: 510-742-5877
 

Click Here for Directions

 

Announcements

FOR UPDATES & LEGAL NEWS 

IMMIGRATIONLEGALBLOG.COM 

SHAHPEERALLY.COM

 

TUNE IN ON 1170 AM ON EVERY MONDAY FROM 12 PM TO 1 PM FOR THE SHAH PEERALLY LAW SHOW


EVERYDAY ONLINE WWW.USAFRICANINDIANRADIO.COM 

VIEW OUR VIDEOS ON YOUTUBE

Corporate Clients




Recommended

Debt Settlement Services


User Login






Lost Password?
Not Member yet? Register
Spacer


Attorney Shah Peerally is a California Immigration Lawyer offering immigration legal services in the San Francisco Bay area. As a Californian immigration attorney in the Bay Area, his law firm situated in Newark focuses on immigration laws with an emphasis on employment based immigration including but not limited to H1B visa, L1A visa, L1B visas, PERM Labor Certifications. His law firm in Newark, California also handles Family based petitions and VAWA petitions. H1B Immigration attorney Shah Peerally provides immigration legal services to clients in Northern California, Silicon Valley vicinity, and Southern California, including: San Jose, Fremont, Newark, San Francisco, San Rafael, San Mateo, Millbrae, San Bruno, South San Francisco, Oakland, Berkeley, Hayward, Pleasanton, Redwood City, Milpitas, Saratoga, Livermore, Richmond, Santa Clara, Palo Alto, Dublin California, Mountain View California, Mt. View California, Silicon Valley, South Bay, Campbell, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Sunnyvale California, Gilroy California, Los Angeles California, and San Diego California. In addition, we are an American Immigration Law Firm serving PERM Labor Certfication clients in USA

Disclaimer: The information in this web site does not constitute legal advice. We make no guarantees about the accuracy or adequacy of the information contained or linked to this web site.

Copyright © 2012 Shah Peerally Law Group, PC :: All Rights Reserved :: Disclaimer
37600 Central CT. Suite 202, Newark CA 94560
Designed byDreamsnfx || Web Marketing Bay Area