Page 5 - Ohio Vol 4 No 6
P. 5

KATHRYN P. RUSSELL | Immigration Law
USCIS Policy Changes Will Expose Applicants to New Risks
InJuly 2018, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Ser- vices (USCIS) announced two signi cant policy changes that bring the functioning of this U.S. im-
migration agency into step with the Trump administra- tion’s immigration enforcement policies. While Depart- ment of Homeland Security lauds the developments as improving e ciency and furthering the implementation President Trump’s rule-of-law stance on immigration, op- ponents and practitioners alike have criticized the changes as having a chilling e ect on individuals who may be law- fully and legally entitled to immigration bene ts but who may forego applying out of fear and will remain in the shadows.
On July 13, 2018, USCIS Director L. Francis Cissna an- nounced changes to how immigration applications are processed, which may ultimately make it more di cult for immigrants to apply for immigration bene ts.  e changes, took e ect Sept. 11, 2018, make it easier for a USCIS o cer to deny an application, petition or request if required evidence is not submitted with the initial ap- plication. Announced quietly, it is a signi cant departure from existing USCIS policy, which normally allows for applicants to provide any additional documentation that a USICS adjudications o cer may want to review before deciding on an application.
In explaining the new policy, Cissna stated, “For too long, our immigration system has been bogged down with frivolous or meritless claims that slow down processing for everyone, including legitimate petitioners.  rough this long overdue policy change, USCIS is restoring full discretion to our immigration o cers to deny incomplete and ineligible applications and petitions submitted for im- migration bene ts.”
Further, Cissna added that the change “will discourage frivolous  lings and skeletal applications used to game the system, ensure our resources are not wasted, and ulti- mately improve our agency’s ability to e ciently and fairly adjudicate requests for immigration bene ts in full accor- dance with our laws.”
USCIS, the agency of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security charged with processing applications for immi- gration bene ts, adjudicates more than 26,000 applica- tions for various immigration bene ts each day. With so many pending applications – many submitted without the guidance of an immigration attorney – the new practice will inevitably result in a signi cantly higher number of application denials of legitimate cases without fair warn- ing or any opportunity to respond.  is change, among others, has been criticized as e ectively turning USCIS into yet another enforcement tool and sending applicants
into deportation proceedings.
For example, on July 5, USCIS released a policy that
broadens its power to issue Notice to Appear (NTA) docu- ments, which commence removal or deportation proceed- ings in U.S. immigration courts. Individuals who receive NTAs must appear before an immigration judge to deter- mine whether they should be removed from the United States (which carries signi cant penalties) or whether they are entitled to some type of relief from removal, allowing them to remain in the United States legally.
 e new NTA guidance mandates USCIS to issue an NTA upon denial of an application, petition or immigra- tion bene t request where the applicant, bene ciary or re- questor is removable except in very limited circumstances. From the perspective of the government, the changes are implemented to “support DHS enforcement priorities,” broaden the ability of individual USCIS o cers to issue NTAs and send applicants before an immigration judge to defend against deportation.
While the government supports the measure as improv- ing e ciency and supporting the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies, the move is not with- out its critics.  e American Immigration Lawyers Asso- ciation observed that the new NTA policy is a “dramatic change from more than a decade of consistent practice, that will divert scarce USCIS resources and needlessly force a massive number of individuals into our already overburdened immigration court system.”
As with many changes enacted by the Trump admin- istration, these USCIS practices are likely to result in the initiation of scores of new removal proceedings and a massive increase in the immigration court backlog.  e new guidance requires USCIS to issue NTAs in nearly all cases that are denied where an individual is without law- ful immigration status. In terms of volume, this would en- compass not only adjustment of status (green card) cases, but far more than that, including applications to extend/ change nonimmigrant status, asylum, work visas, and U.S. citizenship.
It remains to be seen how the already overburdened U.S. immigration court system will absorb the in ux of new cases when, as of July 2018, the courts were reporting a backlog of more than 700,000 cases.  at, plus a nation- wide shortage of immigration judges,
put the pressure on Congress to act quickly to alleviate the strain on both the immigration system and immi- grants living and working in the United States.
Attorney Kathryn P. “Katie” Russell received her juris doctorate, cum laude, from Cleveland Marshall College of Law and is admitted to practice law in the state of Ohio. She graduated from John Carroll University magna cum laude with majors in History and Spanish. She is  uent in Spanish and studied at the Universidad Centroamericana with the casa de la solidaridad program in el Salvador and at the Universidad del Pac co in Lima, Peru. Katie joined Robert Brown LLC in 2009 and specializes in removal defense, family-based immigration, and employment- based immigration. For more information, visit www.brownimmigration.com.mmigration. For more information, visit www.brownimmigration.com.
AttorneyAtLawMagazine.com
5


































































































   3   4   5   6   7