South Carolina Lawyers Weekly

Where an opinion issued by the Attorney General, holding that immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals, or BIA, lacks authority to administratively close a case, was contrary to the plain language of the regulations and would upend settled ...

A lawful permanent resident could not be removed under the Immigration and Nationality Act based on his conviction for participation in a criminal street gang under Virginia law because an individual can be convicted of that offense without committing a ...

The Board of Immigration Appeals acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it upheld the decision of an immigration judge denying asylum and other relief to an unmarried mother who was repeatedly extorted by a gang member and faced a high risk ...

  The Board of Immigration Appeals acted arbitrarily and capriciously when it upheld the decision of an immigration judge denying asylum to a victim of domestic violence whose uncontroverted testimony established that the police in her home country frequently ignored ...

A defendant who pleaded guilty to taking custodial indecent liberties with a child, a felony under Virginia law, was deportable under the Immigration and Nationality Act because the offense categorically qualified as the aggravated felony of sexual abuse of a ...

Undocumented immigrants who were properly arrested and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement in the state where they lived with their families were not deprived of their constitutional rights when they were transferred to another state without notice or a ...

Although a defendant satisfied the requirements to receive temporary protected status, or TPS, and would have been granted TPS had the Immigration and Naturalization Service reviewed all documents in its possession, the denial of TPS was not fundamentally unfair because ...

Where an immigration judge determined that an imprisoned father did not have physical custody of his child for purposes of the Child Citizenship Act, that decision should have been reviewed de novo by the Board of Immigration Appeals. Background Howard ...

While the question of whether a government would acquiesce in torture is a question of fact for jurisdictional purposes, for purposes of an appeal, it is a mixed question of law and fact that is subject to de novo review. ...

The likelihood that a former gang member would be tortured if removed to his home country because of his gang-related tattoos depended on the total risk of torture posed by rival gangs, anti-gang vigilantes and police forces in the aggregate. ...