These summaries are not intended as legal advice. Please contact a licensed attorney to discuss the specifics of your case.
Viewing entries tagged
SIJS
The Ninth Circuit has determined that the jurisdiction stripping provision at 8 USC 1252(f)(1) does not affect a court’s authority to issue an injunction requiring USCIS to timely adjudicate SIJS petitions because section 235(d)(2) of the TVPRA (which contains the relevant SIJS provisions) was passed after the effective date of IIRIRA.
The full text of Moreno Galvez v. Jaddou can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2022/11/03/20-36052.pdf
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has adopted three Administrative Appeals Office decisions governing eligibility for Special Immigration Juvenile Status (SIJS). The decision make clear that USCIS will expect SIJS orders to cite specific state law provisions governing abuse, neglect, and abandonment, and will undertake an inquiry into whether state court proceedings were brought to address abuse, neglect, or abandonment or solely for the purpose of obtaining immigration status. USCIS has clarified that it will no longer require that the juvenile court have jurisdiction to place the juvenile in the custody of the unfit parent(s) in order to make a qualifying determination regarding the viability of parental reunification.
The text of Matter of D-Y-S-C- can be found here:
The text of Matter of A-O-C- can be found here:
The text of Matter of E-A-L-O- can be found here:
The Fourth Circuit has affirmed an agency determination that a temporary custody order issued by a North Carolina state court is insufficient to establish SIJS eligibility.
The full tex of Perez Perez v. Cissna can be found here:
The Fifth Circuit has upheld the denial of SIJS petitions by USCIS, finding that the Texas state court orders for child support for individuals over the age of 18 were not the equivalent of the necessary “care and custody” rulings required for SIJ status.
The full text of Budhathoki v. Nielsen can be found here:
http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/16/16-51449-CV0.pdf
The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate Division, has determined that no notice is required to a parent of a child's request for the appointment of a guardian at litem in a parentage action, even if the child will be seeking a finding of neglect, abuse, or abandonment by the parent in connection with a predicate order for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status. The court noted that notice is given to a parent of the parentage action after a summons is issued, and that the summons cannot be issued until the guardian is appointed. As such, the parent's due process rights would be protected by the later notice requirement, and the child's best interests would be represented by the guardian in the parentage action.
The full text of Alex R. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles can be found here:
