The backlog of pending cases in immigration court reached an all-time high in the month of June. According to records obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests by the Transactions Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University the immigration court backlog jumped by about 11,000 cases in one month, reaching a record high of 610,524. The TRAC report also detected a 9.3 percent drop in final dispositions issued in immigration court cases since President Trump took office, decreasing from 84,956 over a five-month period last year to 77,085 over that same time frame this year. The TRAC report breaks down the backlog by state and then court within that state and provides numerous graphs to help create a visual image of the drastic increase in pending cases since the mid-2000’s. It can be found here.

The increase in backlog and decrease in final dispositions could be attributed to a number of variables. These include recent shifts in judge assignments, revised case processing priorities, and the almost complete end of prosecutorial discretion in closing cases. The use of prosecutorial discretion had helped lessen the court’s backlog in recent years; however, the number of cases pending in courts nationwide has been steadily increasing since about 2008. Prosecutorial discretion has been essentially handcuffed by the current administration and ICE has even started reopening cases that had been closed for years under previous priority hierarchies.

President Trump allocated additional funds to the Department of Homeland Security in his May budget proposal and there has been talk of hiring additional judges and support staff. Since the backlog has been increasing for almost a decade and high numbers of judges have been hired and trained in recent years, it is unlikely that throwing more judges into the mix will have any meaningful impact on the backlog because of the rate that people are being put in proceedings and because old cases are being reopened.

Our office recently had an individual hearing postponed from December 2017 until May 2020. If something is not done to prioritize cases more effectively and provide for a shorter start to finish timeline for non-detained individuals, then efforts at increasing border security and discouraging people from overstaying their visas will not be able to overcome the current culture of “press you luck”. Word will get around that a person who gets put in proceedings and applies for relief can remain and wait in the U.S. for an additional two years, five years, ten years, who knows. What incentive does a person have to return to his or her home country if our current laws, policies, and outrageous backlog will allow that person to remain here for an almost indefinite period of time? Now, each case presents its own issues and a person’s immigration and criminal history may dictate whether he or she lingers in proceedings for years or is sent back to his or her home country on a bus or plane the next day. However, if our overarching goals are to create a set of immigration laws that encourage and reward compliance and to ensure that our borders are being respected—we have a mountain of over 610,000 cases to climb before we get there.

Here are some key things to keep in mind in light of President Trump’s most recent Executive Order regarding immigrant and non-immigrant citizens and refugees of certain countries:

• The Executive Order applies to all individuals “from” the seven designated countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. That can include Legal Permanent Residents (LPRs), non-immigrant visa holders, immigrant visa holders, refugees, derivative asylees, Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs), etc.
• Anyone who holds a passport from a designated country is “from” there—this includes dual citizens.
• Until we have clarity on the ability of a certain person to gain entry, we advise anyone from a designated country not to travel outside the United States.
• If you, an employee, or someone you know, is from a designated country and is already outside the US, obtain his or her return date and current status and contact us so that we may determine his or her ability to re-enter the US at that time.
• Further study regarding this new vetting process is needed, and the little information that is available does not allow us to provide answers on the process or timing with much certainty.
• The order itself and the court cases associated with it are constantly evolving, so please make sure you have the most up to date information prior to making a decision.

We also anticipate another Executive Order to be signed sometime soon that may impact the way in which visas are issued at Consulates. This could include additional vetting as well as prohibiting the waiver of an interview, meaning all applicants may be required to attend an interview at the Consulate. Please be prepared to adapt to these new procedures and reach out to us if you have any questions.

We will provide updates on the ever-changing immigration environment as often as we are able, but please do not hesitate to call or email us if you have any questions, concerns, or issues.

It is important to take a step back and review what the one sentence tie vote decision leaves open:

1. We don’t have any further clarification on the extent of Executive Action by any President in the future on immigration or any other issue which needs attention as the result of inaction by Congress.

2. States appear to be left with the power to sue the federal government any time they disagree with a federal policy. Will states ramp up such lawsuits in the future?

3. What do we do with the millions of unauthorized aliens currently living in the U.S? Do we try to deport them all regardless of their age when or how they came in, whether they overstayed visas, committed crimes, have a family in the U.S.and/or are gainfully employed? Do we try to categorize these immigration violators by a gradient of punishment  which matches the gravity of the offense (e.g. minor to major fines, incarceration, deportation)? Think of traffic violators, who range from parking tickets to negligent homicide from a DUI.

Perhaps it is best the U.S. Supreme Court has left the issues open for citizens and their elected federal officials to make the hard decisions which will lead to concrete guidelines on who and how foreign nationals get punished for violations and who and how others in the future can visit, work, and/or live in our country.

Senators and Representatives of Congress, are you listening to your people, who are frustrated and mad at your inability and lack of desire to solve problems?

I’ve worked with foreign investors seeking to live in the U.S. since 1974. The current program, called EB-5, was started in 1990 as a means of promoting economic development. In its early years it was so limited very few investors came forth. When other nations, like Canada, attracted investors and let them live in their country, the U.S. took note and expanded the program. If the rules are followed, it works well – projects get funded (with otherwise unavailable or more expensive alternatives), jobs are created, talented and wealthy individuals come to live in the U.S. However, as is true in many “too good to be true” opportunities, greed begets cheating but it is accepted because “everyone is doing it”. Unfortunately, the flood of developers wanting cheap money and investors needing to move funds broke the dam of the government’s compliance efforts. The government has been overwhelmed, the SEC has gotten under the tent, and investigations appear to be uncovering actors from benign negligence to outright fraud.

It will be a shame if the politicians burn down the barn to get rid of rats. The EB-5 program brings in funding for needed projects and creates new jobs. The government’s job should be to create a better set of rules, provide timely service and enforcement, and let entrepreneurs do what they do best. Then everyone wins – the investor, the developer, and the community.

Please click here to read the full article – http://abcnews.go.com/US/forget-red-cards-soccers-500k-green-card-wealthy/story?id=39169790