Your weekly summary from the Council

 LATEST ANALYSIS 

• Trump’s Presidency Begins and Ends With Demonizing Immigrants
  
  President Trump’s final visit to the border cemented his two legacies: violent opposition to immigration and violent opposition to the basic ideas of democracy and a fair legal system. Read More »
   
• ‘Death to Asylum’ Rule Halted in the Last Days of the Trump Administration
  
  The 419-page rule represents the most far-reaching midnight regulation yet. It would have gutted asylum eligibility, preventing countless people from obtaining relief in the United States. Read More »
   
• What You Need to Know About the Latest Changes to the H-1B Registration Process
  
  The Department of Homeland Security issued a final rule changing the way U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services selects registrations of H-1B petitions subject to the annual cap. The result could dramatically reduce the number of recent foreign graduates who can work in the U.S. Read More »
   
• Court Blocks One of Trump’s Final Efforts to Keep Out Refugees
  
  The 4th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the order—which would have required resettlement agencies to get written permission from every state, city, and town in the country before refugees could be resettled there—violated the Refugee Act of 1980. Read More »

 FACTS YOU SHOULD KNOW  

• Immigrants in removal proceedings are far more likely to secure relief if they are represented by an attorney, yet at least 40% are unable to obtain one. The Biden administration can take immediate steps to provide federally funded legal representation programs for people facing removal.
  
  This policy brief by the American Immigration Council and the American Immigration Lawyers Association outlines how President Biden can fill the representation gap with funding, deferral of cases, and increased oversight.
  
  Read More: The Biden Administration and Congress Must Guarantee Legal Representation for People Facing Removal

 ACROSS THE NATION 

• The Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week in the case Pham v. Guzman Chavez. Plaintiffs argue that detained immigrants who fear persecution in their home country have the right to a bond hearing, even if they have prior removal orders. Data provided by the American Immigration Council on the length of time noncitizens would have to endure in detention—ranging from months to years—was cited repeatedly during the arguments.

Read More: Council Files Amicus Brief on Opportunity for Detained Migrants with Prior Removal Orders Seeking Humanitarian Protection to be Released on Bond

 QUOTE OF THE WEEK 

“If the fee hikes are adopted, low-income immigrants will be priced out of a fair day in court.

“We have clients who struggle even to pay the bus fare that it would take to get to our offices to receive our services. We are really concerned about our clients not being able to meet the fee, and even worse, not being able to access the rights that are in our laws.”

– Cristina Dos Santos, director of immigration program at Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, a plaintiff organization in the Council’s lawsuit challenging the immigration court fee increases.

 FURTHER READING 

• The Washington Post: A brutal government report reveals new depths to Trump’s cruelty and inhumanity 
   

• Los Angeles Times: Acting Homeland Security chief Chad Wolf resigns
   

• NBC News: Democrats have a new tool to undo Trump's 'midnight rule-making.' But there's a catch.
   

• JURIST: Supreme Court hears arguments in complex case over bond eligibility for detained non-citizens 

  MAKE A CONTRIBUTION 

         

Immigration Impact | ImmigrationCouncil.org | unsubscribe
1331 G St. NW Suite 200, Washington, D.C., xxxxxx