DAPA and DACA
Attention! Current Clients of Thomas Esparza, Jr. If you have not had your consultation regarding: Deferred Action of Parent Accountability (DAPA) or Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals (DACA) Call and make your appointment with either: Thomas Esparza, Jr. or Jacqueline L. Watson To schedule an appointment click on the link on the right or call (512) 441-0062.
Parole in Place
Practice Pointer: Understanding the November 15, 2013 Policy Memorandum on Parole of Certain Military Family Members December 10, 2013 By: The AILA Military Assistance Program Task Force On November 15, 2013, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued a memorandum amending the USCIS Adjudicator’s Field Manual “to ensure consistent adjudication” of parole requests made on behalf of certain military family members.1 The memo states that, generally, it would be an appropriate exercise of discretion to grant “parole in place” to the spouses, children, and parents of active duty military personnel, reserve members, and veterans, who are already physically present in the United States without inspection or admission. The policy ...
Half of eligible immigrants sign up for deferred deportation program
By Cindy Carcamo August 14, 2013, 7:00 a.m. TUCSON -- Stifled by a variety of obstacles — from fees to fear — fewer than half of those eligible for immigration relief have taken advantage of an Obama administration program launched a year ago, according to a new study. About 49% of those eligible have applied for a work permit and a two-year reprieve from possible deportation, according to the Migration Policy Institute, a think tank in Washington D.C. that studies the worldwide movement of people. This week marks the one-year anniversary of the implementation of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which ...
Supreme Court Declares DOMA Act Unconstitutional
The Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which discriminated against same sex marriages for the purpose of Federal benefits. The decision positively impacts immigrant and non-immigrant immigration benefits based on marriage. Ahora en efecto, La Corte Suprema ha declarado inconstitucional la ley federal que descrimina a los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo. Esta decision tendra impacto en casos inmigratorios basados en el matrimonio. Fije una cita, si este importante paso adelante para los derechos civiles afecta su caso imigratorio. Ya hay visas disponibles para conyuges e hijos menores de 21 de un residente permanente. Fije cita par ...
Starting Monday, May 6, 2013, USCIS will implement Customer Identity Verification (CIV) in its field offices. Individuals will now be required to submit biometric data, specifically fingerprints and photographs, when appearing at USCIS offices for interviews or to receive evidence of an immigration benefit. CIV will help to both defend against threats to national security and protect customers from identity fraud by enhancing the agency’s ability to verify identity.
Deferred Action for Childhood ArrivalsDeferred Action for Parental Accountability & Expanded Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Program Frequently Asked Questions on Childhood Arrivals Young immigrants poised to apply for temporary deportation exemption Read More Posts From This Category
Featured Posts for FamiliesAbbott warns sheriffs to comply with federal immigration requests DAPA and DACA Mexican birth certificates now available in Austin Read More Posts From This Category
Learn the Issues
TOLL-FREE MILITARY HELP LINE
1-877-CIS-4MIL Available to Help Military and Families with Immigration Questions
Learn the Issues
“A good immigration lawyer should be able to give you an honest and thorough assessment of your case and be able to explain the options that are available to you based on not only the current law, but changes that are in the legislative and judicial pipeline at any given time. He should tell you the bad parts of your case as well as the good. If it can’t be done, he should say so.”
“Un buen abogado de inmigración debe poder darle una accesoria completa y honesta en relación a su caso y ser capaz de explicarle las opciones que tiene disponibles basadas no solo en las leyes corrientes, pero también en los cambios hechos en el proceso legislativo y judicial en cualquier momento dado. El deberia decirle lo bueno y lo malo de su caso. Si no se puede hacer nada, deberia decirselo.”
Click here for the Map of South Austin
Salameda v.INS. 70 F.3d 447, 449 (7th Cir 1995)
Community Tax Centers of Austin
In tax year 2007 volunteers wrapped up another big tax season, with more than 17,200 tax returns prepared for free and $21 million in refunds returned to local taxpayers!
For children’s books, music, adult English as Second Language educational materials, citizenship education books, videos and educational software
Please visit StarLightPress.com
We have had occasion to note the striking resemblance between some of the laws we are called upon to interpret and King Minos’s labyrinth in ancient Crete. The Tax Laws and the Immigration and Nationality Acts are examples we have cited of Congress’s ingenuity in passing statutes certain to accelerate the aging process of judges. In this instance, Congress, pursuant to its virtually unfettered power to exclude or deport natives of other countries, and apparently confident of the aphorism that human skill, properly applied, can resolve any enigma that human inventiveness can create, has enacted a baffling skein of provisions for the I.N.S. and courts to disentangle. The fate of the alien faced with imminent deportation often hinges upon narrow issues of statutory interpretation. The instant petition, which requires us to determine whether the petitioner is ineligible for the discretionary relief afforded by Section 212(c) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. s 1182(c), because he has not accumulated seven years of residence in this country since his admission to permanent resident alien status, is no exception. Emboldened by Thesean courage and fortified by a close examination of the statutory language, we believe that the Board of Immigration appeals erred in denying the petitioner relief on the ground that it did, and remand for consideration on a proper basis.
Lok v. Immigration and Naturalization Service, 548 F.2d 37, 38