A new unpublished BIA Decision reverses an Immigration Judge’s decision denying a motion to reopen removal proceedings where the immigrant was ordered removed in absentia. Amazingly, because the immigrant “declined to state his name” at the hearing, the Judge ordered him removed in absentia for refusing to identify himself. The Board sustained the appeal and said the IJ should not have done that.
Top Posts:
- The New Human Smuggling Law in Kansas - HB 2350 - What is it, and What Does it Do?
- 7 Easy Ways to Violate Your Student Visa and Get Deported
- U Visa Backlog Updates - Why is My U Visa Taking So Long?
- When the BIA Denies An Appeal, Consider Your Options
- Matter of Pinzon: Making a Materially False Statement is a CIMT
- Filing a Late BIA Appeal (or failing to file a timely appeal)
- New Form I-485 is a Huge Change From Old Form
- Waivers for False Claims to Citizenship - is Matter of K Still Good Law?
- How Long Does a BIA Appeal Take?
- FOIA Results: Immigration Judges' Conference Materials for 2018