PLEASE HELP

[randomstairs 264]

It may be easier and faster to leave the country and apply for the waiver from abroad rather than fighting the case in the US (detentions may be indefinite and I presume that being in their country of origin is more comfortable than those detention centers are). If he had been deported prior to entering illegally there is little hope for him. Find a good lawyer though.    

[aaron2020 11,651]

14 minutes ago, cyberfx1024 said:

 

The difference with that case and this case is that she was actually caught working and had used someone else's identity to get that job and to keep working. So she had a trial in 2009 and Plead Guilty on that charge which was a felony. She was then issued a Deportation Order in 2013 and has been checking in every six months since then. She tried to fight the deportation order and appeal it but was denied. So now we have an administration that actually is following the rule of law and she was deported.

 

She was convicted of a crime thus a criminal and should have been deported.

Immigration is civil.  The rule of law allows the Executive branch to apply discretion.  It's like when a police officer catches you running a red light, the officer has the discretion to issue a ticket or just give you a warning.  Obama was following the rule of law.  Obama gave a warning.  Drumpf is issuing a ticket.

 

The distinction that you are making is irrelevant.  How do you think the OP's friend has been working?

Edited February 10, 2017 by aaron2020

[aaron2020 11,651]

9 minutes ago, randomstairs said:

It may be easier and faster to leave the country and apply for the waiver from abroad rather than fighting the case in the US (detentions may be indefinite and I presume that being in their country of origin is more comfortable than those detention centers are). If he had been deported prior to entering illegally there is little hope for him. Find a good lawyer though.    

The OP stated that individual was "taken in by immigration."  The bell has already rung.  It can't be unrung by leaving the country.  Voluntary departure at this point makes no difference.

[randomstairs 264]

1 minute ago, aaron2020 said:

The OP stated that individual was "taken in by immigration."  The bell has already rung.  It can't be unrung by leaving the country.  Voluntary departure at this point makes no difference.

They can't hold him indefinitely if he wants to leave the country. He doesn't have to wait for the immigration judge to decide on his case (huge backlog there). People held indefinitely are all fighting their cases in the US but that's not the only option. He can leave (he'll probably get deportation on the record) and fight the case from the country of origin.  

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

32 minutes ago, aaron2020 said:

Immigration is civil.  The rule of law allows the Executive branch to apply discretion.  It's like when a police officer catches you running a red light, the officer has the discretion to issue a ticket or just give you a warning.  Obama was following the rule of law.  Obama gave a warning.  Drumpf is issuing a ticket.

 

The distinction that you are making is irrelevant.  How do you think the OP's friend has been working?

Actually the rule of law states that you if you are legal permanent resident and convicted of a felony then you can be subject to deportation. So if someone is here illegally and working under a false ssn/identity then they are subject to the rule of law even more so because they are broke the law. 

 

I suspect either their friend was working under the table who with false papers. 

[Jawaree 717]

OP mentioned nothing about crimes being commiyyed by the person, they need

to hire an atty ASAP, see if COR could work, adjusting inside the US was never an

option because they entered illegally, they have to interview in their home embassy,

getting an expert atty on this matter could help

[HAPPYHIPPO 0]

I hope everything works out

Edited February 10, 2017 by HAPPYHIPPO

[aaron2020 11,651]

5 hours ago, randomstairs said:

They can't hold him indefinitely if he wants to leave the country. He doesn't have to wait for the immigration judge to decide on his case (huge backlog there). People held indefinitely are all fighting their cases in the US but that's not the only option. He can leave (he'll probably get deportation on the record) and fight the case from the country of origin.  

Once a person chooses voluntary departure, then it's over.  There is no fighting the case from the country of origin.

[aaron2020 11,651]

4 hours ago, cyberfx1024 said:

Actually the rule of law states that you if you are legal permanent resident and convicted of a felony then you can be subject to deportation. So if someone is here illegally and working under a false ssn/identity then they are subject to the rule of law even more so because they are broke the law. 

 

I suspect either their friend was working under the table who with false papers. 

You are using "rule of law" incorrectly. 

 

A civil law.  Not a criminal law.  You are not getting that distinction.

[sparkles_ 456]

You guys, please stop saying cancellation of removal. That's a non option for this person. It's terminating removal proceedings based on a relief to removal via marriage to a citizen. Cancellation is only for a person who has no relief options. 

 

Anyway. We have actually won a termination but my husband overstayed, versus this person who entered w/o inspection. Has the person ever been given parole in those 10yr and went home at all? If so, they are considered as having been inspected after via the matter of Arabelly decision, but it's not something a common person should try and argue. If not then they must return home to adjust eventually. 

 

Foremost, you should worry about this person's bond and securing a 220-A release. Which is release with check in til trial. Contact your local congress rep. and start gathering the usual $5000 bond money. Get a lawyer on deck while you're at it, because you will need one for the waiver and also for the days this person will have in removal court. Basically what happens is that the person should now find their AOS application denied and start over. Doing an i130 application first and waiting for that approval, then filing for AOS and the waiver since that is the required order of steps when facing removal. There is no more concurrent filing option

[sparkles_ 456]

Also please clarify. Did this person have an existing deportation in process and were picked up for that?? I am confused about that in this post. There are a lot of variables here missing that could determine if they can adjust in country, if they need TOR vs COR, criminal history, etc.

 

Best forum for this person is immigrate2us.net, where the complex case folk go. VJ is awesome but i2u has many people who have been there, done that and got the t shirt for such things. 

Edited February 10, 2017 by sparkles_