Difficult Cases and Possible Strategies

There can be situations in which there is not much hope for a case.

It can be that the lawyer handling the case states that it is only being buyed time, doesn’t explain that possibilities are low, and you’re trying to know other options if the case results denied.

Each case is different. It is not stated that it’s impossible to win the following types of cases; however, an overview of the possible scenarios with this type of processes based on experienced is provided.

Among the most difficult cases to succeed with, are those in which it is in front of an Immigration judge. When in front on an Immigration judge, requirements to succeed in a case tend to increase, and merits must be high in order to have better chances of succeeding.

It is more difficult to have an Immigration judge approve a case than an Immigration officer who works for the USCIS. Certain people in courts know that the system can get to be slow. There are cases that can take up to 8 years, and even more. Several years can pass for a decision to solve a case is made.

Something to try is to have an agreement with the prosecutor. If the case is submitted on time to the prosecutor along with the merits of the case, and a Discresion is requested with enough time, an agreement can be reached for the case to be removed from courts and another opportunity to be provided in order to regularize migratory status through USCIS, or even with the prosecutor.

That can be a favorable factor to contemplate, since strategies in courts in front of an immigration judge can be more difficult.

An advise for those in difficult situations with migratory processes, mainly in courts where they can get to become even more difficult, is to look for an agreement with the prosecutor anticipatedly enoigh for the case to be removed from courts.

Common procedures in immigration courts that can be difficult to succeed with

For a free case evaluation, call +1 (202) 933-3379

The Ten Years Law (42B Deportation Cancellation)

Certain people can get to think that having a child with certain health conditions, and having 10 years in the US, can make easy to succeed in a case through The Ten Years Law. The possibilities for these cases are low. These can be useful to buy some time. The Ten Years Law consists of, if having 10 years within the US, and a child with certain health conditions, one might be eligible for regularizing migratory status.

Even though proving 10 years of good moral character in the US can be easy, the requirement which usually causes difficulties is to prove having a child, spouse or parent, who is US citizen or legal Resident and that will suffer extreme difficulties if the immigrant cannot stay in the US.

Some people have the idea that, if having a child with anxiety, autism, who attends to special education schools; or a spouse who has depression or that will have some economic diffuclties, that can be considered as extreme difficulties. In most cases, these reasons are not enough if trying to regularize migratory status through The Ten Years Law.

Certain cases of this style can be approved, but are few. It can be a good practice, while waiting for approval, to look for another way to regularize migratory status; or to ask the lawyer to look for an agreement with the prosecutor for the case to be removed from courts so it might be possible to look for another way to regularize migratory status later.

Click to contact our immigration lawyers today

Asylum

Difficulty with Asylum cases depend on the applicant’s country of origin.

For people coming from Mexico is difficult, nearly impossible, to win these cases, however, is not a rule. For instance, if someone from Mexico asks for asylum in a city like El Paso (TX) based on fear of drug-dealers and the violence in his/her home country, it must be considered that there is less than 5% of possibilities of succeeding on this type of cases.

For those from other countries, such as Venezuela, possibilities can be higher, specially if having good merit on the case, and emphasizing on being afraid to return to their home country due to political chasing. These cases have higher possibility of success.

Likewise, for those from Cuba, there is higher chance of succeeding in this type of cases.

For people from other countries like Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras or Colombia, these cases are more difficult; specially if based in fear of gangs, domestic violence or being chased due to being from a specific family.

Difficulty in these cases depend on the place; the jurisdiction influence directly the possibilities of succeeding with the case. In a State like Texas, these cases are more difficult. On the other hand, in a State such as New York, where judges can be more open to the idea of providing asylum, these cases might pass the test.

Asylum cases depend on the person’s country of origin, and the jurisdiction hearing the case.

If a lawyer mentions that possibilities of succeeding on a case are low, a good practice might be to look for a B plan and check if there is other way to regularize migratory status.

For those who recently entered the US and have less than 6 months, i.e., that have not reached unlawful presence, the case can be submitted bona fide explaining merits, and later apply for residence through a employment-based petition.

For those whose employer wants to help regularizing his/her migratory status, they must consider that is not always possible. In fact, there are few the times in which, if having unlawful presence for the accumulated time within the US, regularizing migratory status through an employment-based petition might be possible. On the other hand, a person who has an asylum case which was submitted before reaching unlawful presence, might have a way to regularize migratory status through an employment-based petition in sum to the bona-fide asylum application.

Another situation that can make cases difficult, always having in mind that jurisdiction have a big influence, is in front of what kind of public servants is it.

If the person is in immigration courts, the case can become difficult. If there is no process with immigration and the immigrant is stopped by a transit officer, he/she can go directly to detention center, i.e., immigration prison.

In this type of cases, judges are strict. Something a lawyer might try is to bail the person out of jail, but is up to the public servant who custody the immigrant.

People being under custody of ICE might have it difficult on trying to convince judges of being freed by bail. Once the person reaches the detention center, is difficult to win these cases.

For those who have the way to regularize migratory status through a procedure via USCIS, it is recommended to take action as soon as possible. If the procedure is via USCIS it can be easy, but if the case is on immigration courts, it tends to be more difficult to succeed on those cases.

Another type of case that can be hard is pardons when is required to leave the country; the I-601 waiver, through which it must attended to Ciudad Juarez or the migrant’s home country US consulate. If the case is considered clean, it can be easier.

To find out if a case is considered clean, it can be a good idea to consult with an immigration attorney for him/her to verify the case history. On the other hand, if having crimes, arrests, unlawful enters and exits, problems with the immigration system, sometimes even tattoos; the case can get more difficult. If entered the country unlawfully with sons/daughters, spouse or another person too. All these things can make cases more difficult. If at any point there were lies to the government to be able to cross the border, e.g., by declaring being another person, this can affect cases in which it must be attended to Ciudad Juarez or immigrant’s home country consulate.

If it’s intended to attend to an interview at Ciudad Juarez consulate or immigrant’s home country’s, it is recommended to check on the case with an immigration attorney before, given that it wouldn’t be wanted to exit and have the case being denied while out of the US.