This week I won some major victories in my pro-bono (free) family law (child custody and support) case. My client is a dad who was the victim of two of the most malicious and litigious divorce lawyers in the bay area, and a completely wicked and delusional ex-wife. Though I am not a family law lawyer, I have managed to succeed where some of the most prominent family law attorneys on behalf of my client have failed. The judge has agreed to dismiss a supposedly "neutral" vocational expert, who was completely biased against my client, and apparently exclusively serving the interests of the ex-wife. I also succeeded in modifying my client's support obligations. But most importantly, after four years of unsubstantiated lies being told in court about my client, I feel based upon the words of the judge in this case, that she is finally beginning to understand the injustice and the complete alienation of my client's children that my client has suffered over the past four years.
If you are a man who has no career, financial resources or potential, you may ignore this article. Some such men often father multiple children with multiple women without ever supporting those children. Because the women understand that they will never work or earn in a meaningful way, they are not pursued aggressively for support. However, if you are wealthy, successful, or have the potential to amass wealth, you may be pursued relentlessly by an unreasonable spouse, her lawyers, the Court and government agencies, for support far above and beyond that which any reasonable right thinking person would expect. So has it been with my client. After raising and providing for the child of his wife from her first marriage, (with that child receiving no support from her biological father - a former drug addict and petty criminal), the wife, who never pursued the first husband, now relentlessly and ruthlessly fabricates all manner of misrepresentations of domestic and financial abuse, in order to isolate my client from his children so that she might maximize her child support and gain other advantages in the case.
This article is written from a man's perspective since my client is a man. Some of this would apply equally to women. However, men have become fodder in family court for much injustice. Many in the Court system are much too quick to accept that the woman is automatically the victim and the man a villain. If the woman is petite or frail in appearance, the stronger the presumption. If the man is black and the woman white, Asian, or light skinned Hispanic...well, you may use your imagination.
I promised myself that I would never practice family law. I despised the family law course in law school and the pretense of a "no fault" divorce system, which becomes extremely adversarial and conflict driven between the parties once the issues of child custody and child and spousal support are raised. Some law students, keen on establishing family law practices, are inspired by their own messy divorces, and thus would potentially be bringing a great deal of personal baggage to their practices. There are certain family law lawyers who (as I once heard a colleague eloquently state), have never met a woman who was not raped, or a child who was not molested. Their own personal issues poison their cases and their clients are driven to tell the most outrageous and unsubstantiated lies. If your spouse falls into the hands of such a lawyer during your divorce/custody and support proceedings, you will be in deep trouble, and will need an extremely dedicated lawyer to save you. Further, do not be so naive as to believe that the Court will see through the lies. If the lies are repeated loudly and frequently enough to the judge, regardless of whether or not those lies are even the subject of a particular hearing, or are supported by any evidence, and your lawyer is not aggressively rebutting those lies, there may develop a tacit acceptance of the lies by the Court, who may then come to despise you. This was done effectively to my client with the first judge in the case, prior to my entry into the matter. This judge was willing to believe anything he was fed about my client and acted in a manner towards my client that has baffled and confounded me.
Yet, in spite of all of these systemic ills and my own personal distaste, I could not ignore the complete and total injustice which was repeatedly being dealt to this particular man prior to my tenure on the case. For example, while he was not working, and while in the process of looking for a job, the Court "imputed" $300,000.00 per year to him in child and spousal support. He had just completed about a year of paying (out of community funds which he earned exclusively) $20,000.00 per month, until the community finances were spent. Thereafter, pursuant to the imputation, he was ordered to pay $10,000.00 per month in support to his former spouse and children. So whats the big deal? If he's not working, he can't pay right? Wrong! In California, he may pay dearly. Child and spousal support arrearages quickly accumulate to the point that the Department of Child Support Services (DCSS) gets involved as a collector. DCSS does not care about your financial difficulties or about injustices which you, the debtor have suffered. Their job is to GET THE MONEY, and if you do not have the money, to make your life a living hell. How do they make your life a living hell? Well, for one, they get the DMV to suspend your license; they get the US Department of State to suspend your passport; they garnish 50% of your wages. After taxes, payment of your spouse's attorneys and experts' fees and debt accumulated by your spouse's wanton use of community credit cards, you end up with a pittance. This is how very eminent and formerly wealthy men end up in studio apartments, while making six figure salaries. You can even be jailed for contempt, if opposing counsel succeeds in persuading the Court that your failure to find work is as a result of your own refusal to work (you need not have actually refused to work, the judge simply needs to be convinced that you have). You can literally be made a slave to another person in this State and in this free country, while that person sits around and refuses to work or retrain herself.
Surely, you say, the Court would not allow a person to collect spousal support indefinitely from her spouse while she refuses to retrain herself and/or find work. What you should understand however, is that the Court often does not listen to the parties themselves but rather, relies upon certain court appointed experts to make decisions about what should be done. Thus, as in my client's case, the spouse goes to psychologists and tells the psychologists that she was abused, and is having nightmares and flashbacks as a result of the abuse. The psychologists are paid by my client's spouse, and do not perform any independent investigation or evaluation as to whether what she is saying is the truth. They simply accept her incredible stories as true and in fact create a myth in their own minds of the other spouse as a monster based on the stories they have been told. If she claims she is having nightmares and flashbacks because of the alleged abuse, she is promptly diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). The Court appointed expert reads these partisan psychologists' reports and accepts this PTSD diagnosis as sound science, then confirms to the Court that the subject has PTSD and thus, cannot be expected to work. She takes the PTSD diagnosis to the government and receives SSI, since she is now "disabled." Once the court appointed expert declares her unfit to work, the Court will refrain from requiring her from showing the Court any work efforts. She has thus effectively created an entirely fictitious disability which is accepted as real by all. The question then becomes; if she does in fact have PTSD, who caused it? She will stress that the husband (someone like my client) must be a horribly abusive person who has terrorized his poor, frail wife into the same disorder soldiers suffer as a result of their participation in combat. However, it is the easiest thing in the world for a woman to game this PTSD strategy, if she is wilful and hateful enough to do it. There further, are an army of professionals with respectable credentials who would stand before the Court and assert (without any evidence but the word of their patient) that the wife was abused by her husband. These people pay no attention to the consequences of their pronouncements to the Court and do not really care to know the truth.
Further, if she can pump the children up enough, prior to a screening process called an emergency screening by a court appointed psychologist, to tell the screener that they are afraid of their father, or that their father beats them, the emergency screener may massively overreact and place the father under supervised visitation. Supervised visitation means that every time the father is to interact in any way with his children, it must be in the presence of a paid court appointed "visitation supervisor." Who pays this professional? You guessed it - the husband since the wife has no marketable skills and suffers from "PTSD." If the community still has money, it is paid from community funds, however, we all know who actually earned that money. Now bear in mind that the emergency screening process might take less than an hour, and in some cases could last minutes. After supervision is imposed against the father, the mother remains unsupervised and every day, tells the children what a horrible person their father is. Her family assists her in filling them full of hatred, while the father under supervision, can say nothing to the children related to the case, or to refute the brainwashing which is being done by the spouse and her family. Eventually the children become so filled with unreasonable hatred towards their father that supervised visitation becomes impossible since the supervisor herself declares it impossible to secure the cooperation of the children. At this point the father's parental rights are practically (though not legally) terminated with regard to his children. Remember, he is under a restraining order with regard to his wife and children, and so, cannot even contact the children's school to determine how they are progressing academically.
All of these things and more happened to my client before I was his lawyer. He paid his lawyers well over $200,000.00 for his legal representation (while simultaneously providing money to his spouse from his earnings, characterized as community funds, to pay a team of law firms and experts on his wife's side of the case). Yes, if you are wealthy, or were once wealthy, you can essentially be forced to pay for expensive lawyers to bash your own skull in on your wife's behalf. My client's former lawyers were a puzzling group. One was a very skilled and well meaning criminal attorney who effectively shot down a number of criminal allegations my client's spouse tried to make against my client in an effort to hang a criminal record around his neck. However, he did not fully appreciate the dysfunction or willfulness of my client's spouse, nor the greed and manipulativeness of her attorneys. The next lawyer was a family law lawyer, who is reasonably well known in the county where my client resides. This lawyer however, was grotesquely under prepared at certain critical hearings in the case, and was unprepared for the onslaught and willfulness of opposing counsel. The final lawyers before I took over were a prestigious and venerable family law firm, brought in because this man was being so badly mauled. This firm, pushed a fair amount of paper (for indeed I inherited over 20 boxes of litigation materials). However, for over $200,000.00, my client had not bought a deposition of the his former spouse, nor of the vocational evaluator who, while posing as a "neutral" evaluator, was apparently working exclusively on behalf of the ex spouse and her lawyers. I had to intervene in the case while these lawyers were still on the case to extract the necessary depositions. With these deposition transcripts, I have finally been able to expose the vocational evaluator's bias and the ridiculousness and falsity of all of the ex spouse's allegations against my client. By the way, when my client was out of money, these lawyers on both sides of the case bailed.
I have represented immigration clients from the administrative asylum office, to the trial court (where I have conducted the actual trial), all the way through the 9th Circuit Court of appeals, for under $30,000.00, sometimes over as much as a ten year period. Yet these lawyers, for fees in the six figures have been unable to achieve the results I am getting working for absolutely no compensation. Please understand, I am not complaining about not being compensated, since every dedicated lawyer has to go on a crusade for justice every now and then. I am simply complaining about lawyers who charge exorbitant fees, but do not conduct the critical depositions or cross examine vigorously when they have a wealth of impeachment evidence and when the chips are down.
I have learned the following, which I would like to pass on to you based on this, my one and only family law case:
1. If early in the relationship you detect that your fiance is unstable and/or dishonest, do not marry her. If you discover the dishonesty or instability in the course of the relationship, GET OUT IMMEDIATELY.
2. If your spouse constantly encourages your children to disregard your authority and is constantly negative towards you in the presence of the children GET OUT. Particularly if you are a hard working dad who spends less time with the children than your spouse. The children will hate you and will be used against you in divorce and custody proceedings.
3. If you are an educated and gainfully employed person, contemplating marriage to someone without marketable skills or education and without the motivation to ever acquire those skills DO NOT MARRY THIS PERSON. Alternatively, if you must marry such a person, make sure that you have an IRON-CLAD PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT, drafted by a very good lawyer. Men should not romanticize this issue of "prenuptial agreements." In other words, do not be guilt-tripped into the notion that you are expressing a lack of love or trust by insisting on a prenup. You have a lot to lose in California if you err and marry the wrong person. Be pragmatic. There are countless men in California paying spousal support for indefinite periods of time, to women who hate and vilify them; who alienate their children against them and who view the man as a welfare institution for their own benefit.
4. Do not stay in a bad marriage for the sake of the children. You will simply prolong your suffering and your children's suffering, and with each passing year, will become more and more intertwined with that person, in a manner which may render your extrication from her affairs and support increasingly difficult or impossible.
There are very few places men who have suffered as my client has suffered can go for assistance or support. Society is simply reluctant to discuss these injustices to men. It is as if our culture has decided that men are only important to their families insofar as they can provide financial support. The man's desire to nurture his children and his very right to his own liberty and happiness, are overshadowed by that which would extinguish such nurture and happiness, and therefore his very motivation in life.
You will be happy to know that this client is a particularly optimistic individual, who in spite of all of this, has found ways to find happiness and fulfillment in life.
This article was written with the permission of the client.
Duane M Hamilton, Esq.
Friday, August 21, 2009
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Friday, August 7, 2009
VETERAN IMMIGRATION LITIGATION ATTORNEY HAMILTON DISCUSSES HIS EXPERIENCE
After I was licensed to practice law in 1994, I almost immediately started representing Kenyans in asylum cases. In those days, asylum for Kenyans was almost unheard of, and for that matter, an advisory opinion from the State Department published in the 1980s was typically introduced in all of my early cases, which recommended against asylum for Kenyans. In my first asylum case before the Immigration Court, Judge Roy Daniel scoffed, "Kenya Mr. Hamilton? You have got to be kidding." I retorted "No Your Honor, I am not kidding and I will demonstrate that asylum is possible from Kenya."
I was introduced to the Kenyan community while I was in law school in the early 90s. in those days, the Kenyan community in California was relatively small and it seemed as if almost all of the Kenyans either knew each other, or were at least one person removed from any other Kenyan. What was clear to me, was that the community was not being properly represented, and their perception of the availability of asylum to them (in spite of a mini ethnic cleansing called the Rift Valley Conflict which took place in Kenya in 1992) was that asylum was unavailable to them. I struggled to understand why this would be so towards the end of my law school education, and determined that there was no valid reason why the United States should deny Kenyans asylum as a matter of policy (as was the perception in the community at the time).
Interestingly, even many Kenyans scoffed at the notion that the United States would grant Kenyans asylum. To them I was a young lawyer, who was out of his mind. Yet, I was encountering so many honorable Kenyan families with horrific stories of persecution in Kenya and fears of return to that country, which I found impossible to ignore. I repeatedly challenged government attorneys and asylum officers' objections and roadblocks to the approval of Kenyan asylum cases, until it became routine for asylum officers and immigration judges to grant Kenyan cases.
Today, if you ask most experienced immigration judges and asylum officers in Los Angeles, California to associate one lawyer with the Kenyan community, they will uniformly give my name. Mostly, however, the Kenyan community, which has exploded since my early days practicing law, is oblivious to the intense lawyering which had to be done to establish Kenya in the hearts and minds of asylum adjudicators as a country from which asylum could be consistently granted.
I still hold the only published winning Kenyan asylum precedent in the 9th Circuit [Njuguna v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 765 (9th Cir. 2004)] in which the alien's eligibility for aylum and withholding or removal are directly adjudicated. There are a few other published cases in the 9th Circuit in which Kenya is mentioned, however, they either do not address applicants who are nationals of Kenya, or they address ancillary matters such as motions to reopen, as opposed to the merits of the underlying asylum claim presented in immigration court by the applicant. Njuguna is one of only a handful of Kenyan asylum precedents nationwide and may be the only winning asylum Circuit Court of Appeals precedents in the country. Njuguna is also the most frequently cited Kenyan asylum case by the 9th Circuit and other circuit courts in the country. Precedents from the Circuit Courts of Appeal are important since they instruct lower court judges and asylum officers as to how the law of asylum should be applied to individual issues which arise in asylum claims.
My experience ranges from the representation of aliens at the asylum office level, through Immigration Court and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), to the Circuit Courts of Appeal (which are just below the Supreme Court of the United States). In addition to the 9th Circuit, I have represented aliens in several other Circuit Courts of Appeal around the country. Aliens who receive the benefit of being represented by a seasoned appellate attorney at the earliest stage of their asylum cases, can be assured that the attorney has not only been sensitive to how the case might unfold in the AO, but also how it might play out at trial and in appeals. This is important because no lawyer, regardless of his or her skill level or experience, can ever guarantee an asylum applicant that he or she will be granted asylum. Hence, it is advantageous for the legal representative to understand the trial and appellate value of the case before it is filed with the asylum office.
I have represented asylum applicants from all of the major tribes of Kenya and many of the smaller tribes such as, but not limited to Kisii, Pokot, and Taita. I have also represented Chinesee, Sri Lankan, Mexican, Guatemalan, East Indian, Iranian, Indonesian, Nigerian, Rwandan, Ugandan, Tanzanian, and Zimbabwean asylum applicants. (There may be countries I have forgotten). However, the great bulk of my cases throughout my career have been from Kenya. In our non-Kenyan cases, my office and I spend a great deal of time emersing ourselves in the country conditions of the target country before filing the case. We further consume the relevant case-law with respect to those countries prior to the asylum hearing, trial or appeal.
My record in asylum hearings, trials and appeals is impecable. Over 90 percent of my clients are granted asylum at some level of proceedings, and most are approved either in the asylum office or immigration court. Having said that, there must be a percentage of cases for any lawyer who litigates asylum claims, which are not approved. This is a hard reality, but is the truth. My article below on the Risks and Benefits of Asylum will explain why asylum can never be guaranteed, and how factors beyond the attorney's control can affect the outcome of any such case. The path to winning an asylum claim can be relatively swift, or incredibly slow, emotionally challenging, and costly over a period of many years.
We are the primier law firm in the United States representing Kenyans and our record and reputation in the Kenyan community speaks for itself. I have enjoyed the process of representing my Kenyan clients and clients from other parts of the world. They have taught me so much as they have benefited from my considerable experience.
Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
I was introduced to the Kenyan community while I was in law school in the early 90s. in those days, the Kenyan community in California was relatively small and it seemed as if almost all of the Kenyans either knew each other, or were at least one person removed from any other Kenyan. What was clear to me, was that the community was not being properly represented, and their perception of the availability of asylum to them (in spite of a mini ethnic cleansing called the Rift Valley Conflict which took place in Kenya in 1992) was that asylum was unavailable to them. I struggled to understand why this would be so towards the end of my law school education, and determined that there was no valid reason why the United States should deny Kenyans asylum as a matter of policy (as was the perception in the community at the time).
Interestingly, even many Kenyans scoffed at the notion that the United States would grant Kenyans asylum. To them I was a young lawyer, who was out of his mind. Yet, I was encountering so many honorable Kenyan families with horrific stories of persecution in Kenya and fears of return to that country, which I found impossible to ignore. I repeatedly challenged government attorneys and asylum officers' objections and roadblocks to the approval of Kenyan asylum cases, until it became routine for asylum officers and immigration judges to grant Kenyan cases.
Today, if you ask most experienced immigration judges and asylum officers in Los Angeles, California to associate one lawyer with the Kenyan community, they will uniformly give my name. Mostly, however, the Kenyan community, which has exploded since my early days practicing law, is oblivious to the intense lawyering which had to be done to establish Kenya in the hearts and minds of asylum adjudicators as a country from which asylum could be consistently granted.
I still hold the only published winning Kenyan asylum precedent in the 9th Circuit [Njuguna v. Ashcroft, 374 F.3d 765 (9th Cir. 2004)] in which the alien's eligibility for aylum and withholding or removal are directly adjudicated. There are a few other published cases in the 9th Circuit in which Kenya is mentioned, however, they either do not address applicants who are nationals of Kenya, or they address ancillary matters such as motions to reopen, as opposed to the merits of the underlying asylum claim presented in immigration court by the applicant. Njuguna is one of only a handful of Kenyan asylum precedents nationwide and may be the only winning asylum Circuit Court of Appeals precedents in the country. Njuguna is also the most frequently cited Kenyan asylum case by the 9th Circuit and other circuit courts in the country. Precedents from the Circuit Courts of Appeal are important since they instruct lower court judges and asylum officers as to how the law of asylum should be applied to individual issues which arise in asylum claims.
My experience ranges from the representation of aliens at the asylum office level, through Immigration Court and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), to the Circuit Courts of Appeal (which are just below the Supreme Court of the United States). In addition to the 9th Circuit, I have represented aliens in several other Circuit Courts of Appeal around the country. Aliens who receive the benefit of being represented by a seasoned appellate attorney at the earliest stage of their asylum cases, can be assured that the attorney has not only been sensitive to how the case might unfold in the AO, but also how it might play out at trial and in appeals. This is important because no lawyer, regardless of his or her skill level or experience, can ever guarantee an asylum applicant that he or she will be granted asylum. Hence, it is advantageous for the legal representative to understand the trial and appellate value of the case before it is filed with the asylum office.
I have represented asylum applicants from all of the major tribes of Kenya and many of the smaller tribes such as, but not limited to Kisii, Pokot, and Taita. I have also represented Chinesee, Sri Lankan, Mexican, Guatemalan, East Indian, Iranian, Indonesian, Nigerian, Rwandan, Ugandan, Tanzanian, and Zimbabwean asylum applicants. (There may be countries I have forgotten). However, the great bulk of my cases throughout my career have been from Kenya. In our non-Kenyan cases, my office and I spend a great deal of time emersing ourselves in the country conditions of the target country before filing the case. We further consume the relevant case-law with respect to those countries prior to the asylum hearing, trial or appeal.
My record in asylum hearings, trials and appeals is impecable. Over 90 percent of my clients are granted asylum at some level of proceedings, and most are approved either in the asylum office or immigration court. Having said that, there must be a percentage of cases for any lawyer who litigates asylum claims, which are not approved. This is a hard reality, but is the truth. My article below on the Risks and Benefits of Asylum will explain why asylum can never be guaranteed, and how factors beyond the attorney's control can affect the outcome of any such case. The path to winning an asylum claim can be relatively swift, or incredibly slow, emotionally challenging, and costly over a period of many years.
We are the primier law firm in the United States representing Kenyans and our record and reputation in the Kenyan community speaks for itself. I have enjoyed the process of representing my Kenyan clients and clients from other parts of the world. They have taught me so much as they have benefited from my considerable experience.
Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
ASYLUM OFFICE BLUES
Today I completed another one of my numerous Kenyan cases at the Anaheim Asylum Office (AO) in Anaheim California. However, I felt terrible for my clients, a wonderful father and daughter, who waited for their interview from 7:00 a.m. until almost noon, when the lead applicant was finally called. The interview then lasted until almost 2:00 p.m.. Unfortunately, this is not unusual for asylum cases in Anaheim (which is the AO for the Los Angeles District).
Applicants attending the AO in the Los Angeles District should be prepared for long waits prior to their asylum and NACARA hearings. They should bring with them reading materials or other diversions (except for i-pods, since they have to listen for their numbers to be called) to help them pass the time and relax prior to their interviews. Otherwise, the nervousness which naturally accompanies such an important and life-changing event can be excruciating. Applicants should also understand that their attorneys have no power over how long the wait will be and must be patient and disciplined in waiting (as my clients were today).
Officers receive their interview files on the morning of the interview, and must prepare for the interview by reviewing the file prior to the interview. If supplementary documents are submitted on the day of the interview, as they often are, the officer would have to review those materials also. Additionally, numerous cases are scheduled by the AO for the same time slot. Hence, where an asylum officer will be interviewing two applicants with 6:30 a.m. appointments, and the first of those interviews takes all morning, the second 6:30 interview would have to be called in the afternoon, or rescheduled for another day. Remember, some officers can take several hours conducting a single interview.
In spite of those blues, I am always honored to serve these very deserving clients and grateful that there is a forum by which they can be heard.
Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
Applicants attending the AO in the Los Angeles District should be prepared for long waits prior to their asylum and NACARA hearings. They should bring with them reading materials or other diversions (except for i-pods, since they have to listen for their numbers to be called) to help them pass the time and relax prior to their interviews. Otherwise, the nervousness which naturally accompanies such an important and life-changing event can be excruciating. Applicants should also understand that their attorneys have no power over how long the wait will be and must be patient and disciplined in waiting (as my clients were today).
Officers receive their interview files on the morning of the interview, and must prepare for the interview by reviewing the file prior to the interview. If supplementary documents are submitted on the day of the interview, as they often are, the officer would have to review those materials also. Additionally, numerous cases are scheduled by the AO for the same time slot. Hence, where an asylum officer will be interviewing two applicants with 6:30 a.m. appointments, and the first of those interviews takes all morning, the second 6:30 interview would have to be called in the afternoon, or rescheduled for another day. Remember, some officers can take several hours conducting a single interview.
In spite of those blues, I am always honored to serve these very deserving clients and grateful that there is a forum by which they can be heard.
Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Monday, August 3, 2009
THE RISKS AND BENEFITS OF ASYLUM CONTINUED
In my last post regarding the risks and benefits of asylum, it would appear that I was a bit heavy on the risks and much too light on the benefits. Thus, the following are some of the wonderful benefits to be realized by alien asylees in the United States:
1. ONGOING STATUS IN THE UNITED STATES
Individuals granted asylum are termed "asylees" and are allowed to remain in the U.S. indefinitely. While it is possible that an asylum grant may be reversed where country conditions in the country from which the alien applies for asylum change, it is unlikely that a change in such conditions would send the Government on a quest to actively reverse this particular status. Certain criminal convictions or certain subsequent findings of fraud in the asylum process may result ultimately in the loss of asylee status. The alien's return to the country from which he or she is granted asylum while an asylee may also result in the loss of asylee status.
2. TRAVEL TO ANY PART OF THE WORLD (EXCEPT THE COUNTRY OF PERSECUTION) ON A REFUGEE TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Asylees are entitled to apply for and receive refugee travel documents from the US Government which they may use to travel anywhere in the world during the validity period of the document, except to the country in which they were persecuted or fear persecution. The asylum approval itself however is not a travel document and may not be used as such. Applying for the travel document is relatively simple process, which should be undertaken by the alien's attorney to best protect her interests.
3. SPONSORSHIP OF SPOUSES AND UNMARRIED CHILDREN.
Asylees, upon approval of their asylum claims become eligible to petition for their spouses and unmarried children under 21 to come to the United States as asylees. The petition process involves the filing of a relative petition with USCIS and, subsequent to approval, the relative(s)processing with the US Embassy overseas for a travel document to enter the US in derivative asylee status. This process sometimes appears simple to applicants, but can quickly become extremely complicated, where the relationships are not clearly defined, or are created by tribal or customary law as opposed to civil process. There are also certain advisories which a careful lawyer should give to asylee relative petitioners prior to the consular processing phase of the case.
4. ELIGIBILITY TO APPLY FOR LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Asylees may apply for lawful permanent residence one year after their asylum claim is finally and fully approved. The green-card is not dispatched automatically and the alien must apply for what is known as an adjustment of status. Though the adjustment process may appear simple on the surface, there is some fairly important legal analysis with respect to the alien's "admissibility" and criminal background, among other things, which should be conducted prior to the filing of the adjustment application. Further, there are aspects of the adjustment application which, if filled out carelessly, could lead to a reopening and investigation of the underlying asylum claim.
5. ELIGIBILITY FOR CERTAIN SOCIAL SERVICE BENEFITS
Asylees are immediately eligible for certain social service benefits, including but not limited to, cash assistance and other programs designed to allow the asylee to adjust to and establish his or her life in the new country. These programs are available through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).
6. INDEFINITE WORK AUTHORIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Asylees are entitled to work in the United States indefinitely and are not required to provide employment authorization documents (EADs) to employers. The problem however, is that most employers are not familiar with this exception to the EAD requirement and will demand EADs from asylees. Immigration lawyers knowledgable in this area are often able, if employed to do so by their clients, to demonstrate to employers how and why asylees are exempt from the EAD requirement. I however, urge all of my asylees to apply for and receive their EADs so as to simplify their lives and the lives of their employers or prospective employers.
7. FREEDOM AND DELIVERANCE FROM PERSECUTION
Above all else, the asylee is free to start a new life, without the burden of contemplating the return to a country in which she may have suffered severe past persecution or in which her life or liberty may be threatened.
Every asylee should cherish the benevolence and discretion of the US Government and its asylum officers and immigration judges who dispense the asylum program. Asylum is truly in some significant aspects, the gift of life for many who have been fortunate enough to make it to these shores from countries and experiences which hold for them only misery and persecution.
Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
1. ONGOING STATUS IN THE UNITED STATES
Individuals granted asylum are termed "asylees" and are allowed to remain in the U.S. indefinitely. While it is possible that an asylum grant may be reversed where country conditions in the country from which the alien applies for asylum change, it is unlikely that a change in such conditions would send the Government on a quest to actively reverse this particular status. Certain criminal convictions or certain subsequent findings of fraud in the asylum process may result ultimately in the loss of asylee status. The alien's return to the country from which he or she is granted asylum while an asylee may also result in the loss of asylee status.
2. TRAVEL TO ANY PART OF THE WORLD (EXCEPT THE COUNTRY OF PERSECUTION) ON A REFUGEE TRAVEL DOCUMENT
Asylees are entitled to apply for and receive refugee travel documents from the US Government which they may use to travel anywhere in the world during the validity period of the document, except to the country in which they were persecuted or fear persecution. The asylum approval itself however is not a travel document and may not be used as such. Applying for the travel document is relatively simple process, which should be undertaken by the alien's attorney to best protect her interests.
3. SPONSORSHIP OF SPOUSES AND UNMARRIED CHILDREN.
Asylees, upon approval of their asylum claims become eligible to petition for their spouses and unmarried children under 21 to come to the United States as asylees. The petition process involves the filing of a relative petition with USCIS and, subsequent to approval, the relative(s)processing with the US Embassy overseas for a travel document to enter the US in derivative asylee status. This process sometimes appears simple to applicants, but can quickly become extremely complicated, where the relationships are not clearly defined, or are created by tribal or customary law as opposed to civil process. There are also certain advisories which a careful lawyer should give to asylee relative petitioners prior to the consular processing phase of the case.
4. ELIGIBILITY TO APPLY FOR LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENCE
Asylees may apply for lawful permanent residence one year after their asylum claim is finally and fully approved. The green-card is not dispatched automatically and the alien must apply for what is known as an adjustment of status. Though the adjustment process may appear simple on the surface, there is some fairly important legal analysis with respect to the alien's "admissibility" and criminal background, among other things, which should be conducted prior to the filing of the adjustment application. Further, there are aspects of the adjustment application which, if filled out carelessly, could lead to a reopening and investigation of the underlying asylum claim.
5. ELIGIBILITY FOR CERTAIN SOCIAL SERVICE BENEFITS
Asylees are immediately eligible for certain social service benefits, including but not limited to, cash assistance and other programs designed to allow the asylee to adjust to and establish his or her life in the new country. These programs are available through the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR).
6. INDEFINITE WORK AUTHORIZATION IN THE UNITED STATES
Asylees are entitled to work in the United States indefinitely and are not required to provide employment authorization documents (EADs) to employers. The problem however, is that most employers are not familiar with this exception to the EAD requirement and will demand EADs from asylees. Immigration lawyers knowledgable in this area are often able, if employed to do so by their clients, to demonstrate to employers how and why asylees are exempt from the EAD requirement. I however, urge all of my asylees to apply for and receive their EADs so as to simplify their lives and the lives of their employers or prospective employers.
7. FREEDOM AND DELIVERANCE FROM PERSECUTION
Above all else, the asylee is free to start a new life, without the burden of contemplating the return to a country in which she may have suffered severe past persecution or in which her life or liberty may be threatened.
Every asylee should cherish the benevolence and discretion of the US Government and its asylum officers and immigration judges who dispense the asylum program. Asylum is truly in some significant aspects, the gift of life for many who have been fortunate enough to make it to these shores from countries and experiences which hold for them only misery and persecution.
Duane M. Hamilton, Esq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)