More immigration lawyers are serving undocumented immigrants than ever before according to recent reports

Over the past five years, the number of undocumented immigrants in the court system who hire lawyers increased by 20 percent.

Over the past five years, the number of undocumented immigrants in the court system who hire lawyers increased by 20 percent.

Undocumented immigrants are hiring lawyers much more frequently now than just as recent as five years ago.   Many immigration attorneys serve clients who might fall through the cracks in the system.  What may seem like a simple application or petition can easily turn into a nightmare if it is not perfectly prepared and timely submitted, to keep it from being rejected, denied, or causing the initiation of removal proceedings.

Additional funding allows more attorneys to help undocumented immigrants.

In the process of deportation/removal, attorneys may be available for those who cannot afford them through pro bono programs which are also increasing in number. Third party groups are funded in some cases by government money. For example, Health and Human services funds organizations that help juveniles in need legal representation in immigration court. Here is a link to a catalog published several years ago, but demonstrating the number of options for funding: Federal Funds for Organizations That Help Those In Need.

Over the past five years, the number of undocumented immigrants in the court system who hire lawyers increased by 20 percent. According to recent figures from the 2013 statistical yearbook,[1] “In 2013, 59 percent of those in immigration proceedings had legal representation…in 2009, just 39 percent had lawyers.[2]” As the debates in Washington continue over comprehensive immigration reform, more undocumented immigrants being held in detention centers, and in removal proceedings, are speaking up and capturing the attention of the media and lawmakers. The harsh realities of the outdated system are becoming more widely known and this additional exposure helps more lawyers get involved in representing undocumented immigrants in courts.

Getting it wrong can be tragic and immigrants facing removal benefit from having an immigration attorney.

The system is so complex and it is nearly impossible for anyone not trained in immigration law to navigate immigration courts without an attorney. Over the past few years, many of the options for immigration relief come from executive actions and administrative policy decisions. So, where the general rule of law may state one position, an executive order may indicate certain situations where the rule of law will not be enforced or there could be a deferral to enforcement.

More immigrants have lawyers and more are winning their cases according to analysis by Syracuse University, “The US government has been losing more deportation cases each year since 2009, according to the Transaction Records Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, which collects and studies federal prosecution records.[3]” The same study also notes that the overall number of removal proceedings has decreased which is good news giving hope to more undocumented immigrants living and working in the U.S. To learn more about how Attorney KiKi M. Mosley helps undocumented immigrants facing removal, please contact the law firm using the links below.

Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law issues including applications for temporary immigration relief, deportation defense, and adjustments of status. For more information about the law firm, please visitwww.KiKisLaw.com, and do not forget to “Like” the firm onFacebook and “Follow” onTwitter. You can also review Attorney Mosley’s endorsements on her Avvo profile.

[1] Executive Office for Immigration Reform, 2013 statistical yearbook.

[2] National Law Journal: Undocumented Immigrants Are Lawyering Up. By Elahe Izadi, Apr.21, 2014.

[3] The Christian Science Monitor: Immigration reform: More and more deportations are defeated in court. By Alicia Caldwell (AP), Feb. 13, 2014.

Advertisements

Federal Court rules in suit involving mandatory detention without bond hearings.

All of the Plaintiffs were detained without bond hearings at the Northwest Detention Center (“NWDC”) located next to the Port of Tacoma, Washington. The mega facility with a capacity of 1,000 detainees opened in 2004 under DHS management until 2005 when the GEO Group received the contract to operate the facility for ICE. Several critics suggest contract prisons are profit centers.

All of the Plaintiffs were detained without bond hearings at the Northwest Detention Center (“NWDC”) located next to the Port of Tacoma, Washington. 

Three  Plaintiffs detained without bond in an ICE detention center in Tacoma, Washington recently prevailed in their lawsuit over the Department of Homeland Security’s (“DHS”) interpretation and enforcement of the mandatory detention statute that denies bond hearings for individual in pending removal proceedings.  The Court granted relief to the Plaintiffs, enjoined DHS from detaining the plaintiffs and clarified the meaning of the law, stating, “Here, there is no question that all class members will benefit equally from the court’s declaration that the government may not subject an alien to mandatory detention via Section 1226(c) unless the government took the alien into custody immediately upon his release from custody for an offense described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(D).[i]

The Plaintiffs were released from criminal sentences many years before being arrested and detained without bond hearings by ICE.

The Plaintiffs in this case are: Bassam Yusuf Khoury, a Palestinian and lawful permanent resident since 1976; Alvin Rodriguez Moya, a national of the Dominican Republic and U.S. lawful permanent resident since 1995; and Mr. Carrera, a Mexican national who has been in the U.S. since 1998.[ii]

The issue before the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington concerned the way DHS interpreted the mandatory detention of criminal aliens. The law concerning the apprehension and detention of aliens, 8 U.S.C. 1226(c)(2), gives the federal government authority to “lock away certain aliens who are in removal proceedings, denying them bond hearings via the so-called “mandatory detention authority.[iii]

Many years after they were released by criminal courts to their families and communities, two of the Plaintiffs in this lawsuit, Mr. Khoury and Mr. Rodriguez, were arrested by ICE and held in mandatory detention, without bond hearings, for six months, from April 2013 through October 2013. The third Plaintiff, Mr. Carrera, was held for four months, from April 2013 through August 2013. The Supreme Court has commented in past cases that it may have Due Process concerns about detentions for six months when six weeks would be a more correct period of detention. [p3. Line 10] Without the availability of a bond hearing, the Plaintiffs did not have the opportunity to appear before the immigration court to plea for release back to their families and community pending removal proceedings.

The NWDC, the detention center in Tacoma, operates on a government contract, by GEO Group, who has been the subject of criticism.

All of the Plaintiffs were detained without bond hearings at the Northwest Detention Center (“NWDC”) located next to the Port of Tacoma, Washington. The mega facility with a capacity of 1,000 detainees opened in 2004 under DHS management until 2005 when the GEO Group received the contract to operate the facility for ICE. Several critics suggest contract prisons are profit centers. In an article published in the Huffington Post, the GEO Group was mentioned. “Their business model rests on incarceration, and their profits soared throughout the 1990s and 2000s as harsh sentencing laws, the War on Drugs, and tough immigration enforcement led to a dramatic rise in detention and incarceration.[iv]

When the Court interpreted the law, it clarified that mandatory detention is only allowed immediately upon release from custody for the underlying offense.

The length of time between release from jail sentences and the ICE arrest was upsetting to the court. Mr. Khoury was released in June 2011 from 30 days in jail on a drug charge; ICE arrested him in April 2013. Mr. Rodriguez served part of a three-year sentence and was released in August 2010; ICE arrested him in April 2013. More than two or three years, Mr. Carrera, who served a 60-day sentence, was released in February 2003, and more than ten years later ICE arrested him in April 2013.[v]

The Court clearly stated in its March 11, 2014, Order: “The government violates the law to the extent it continues to subject to mandatory detention aliens who it did not take into custody at the proper time. The court has no reason to expect that the government will not take appropriate action to end its violation of the law.[vi]

To learn more about mandatory detentions and removal proceedings, or if someone you know may be improperly held, you can call the Law Offices of KiKi M. Mosley for assistance. Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law and litigation. For more information about the law firm, please tap/click here to visit the rest of the website, and do not forget to “Like” the firm on Facebook and “Follow” on Twitter.

 

False Claims to United States Citizenship: What May Seem Like a Simple Mistake Can Lead to a Lifetime of Problems.

False claims to U.S. citizenship can cause a permanent bar to legalizing your immigration status.

False claims to U.S. citizenship can cause a permanent bar to legalizing your immigration status.

Making a false claim to United States citizenship is a violation of U.S. federal law.[i] The consequence of false claims to citizenship can include fines, deportation and a permanent bar to legal immigration status. There are cases where undocumented immigrants and non-immigrant visa holders accidentally claim they are U.S. citizens, but there are also times people knowingly lie about citizenship and face harsh penalties. In recent news, a civil trial was declared a mistrial because a juror lied about his citizenship – the juror was a legal resident of Atlanta but was not a U.S. citizen[ii]. The juror was held in contempt and ordered to jail.

Frequent false claims of citizenship occur when non-citizens:

1)      Register to vote – even if they were registered through their local DMV;

2)      Claiming “U.S. citizen” when completing an I-9 Employee Eligibility Verification form;

3)      Claiming U.S. citizenship on student loan applications;

4)      Applying for a U.S. passport and otherwise;

5)      Stating you are a U.S. citizen in order to obtain any benefit only available to U.S. citizens.

Be careful not to accidentally make a false claim of citizenship. Several states offer drivers licenses to non-citizens. The National Voter Registration Act of 1993[iii], also known as the “Motor Voter Act,” requires states to offer an opportunity to register to vote when obtaining or renewing a driver’s license. The department of motor vehicles agent may not know your citizenship status, so if they offer to register you to vote, do not register if you are not a U.S. citizen. Be sure you clearly read any forms you may be asked to sign if you are eligible for a driver’s license. The fine print may state that by signing the application, you swear that you are a U.S. citizen. Likewise, election campaign volunteers might be around town registering people to vote, and they might not ask if you are a citizen. When in doubt, do not sign anything or somehow allow yourself to become registered to vote unless you are a U.S. citizen.

False claims to U.S. citizenship can cause a permanent bar to legalizing your immigration status

Applicants for U.S. permanent residency and citizenship through the naturalization process must demonstrate good moral character (“GMC”).[iv] The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“U.S.C.I.S.”) policy manual addresses acts that could prevent an applicant from establishing GMC.  One example in the USCIS policy manual states, “An applicant may fail to show GMC if he or she engaged in unlawful voting or falsely claimed U.S. citizenship for purposes of registering to vote or voting.[v]” Under the current immigration laws, false claims to citizenship causes a permanent bar to admission to the U.S. since they cannot establish GMC. In addition, removal and imprisonment are possible.

Children may qualify for narrow exceptions to false claims to U.S. citizenship.

The Child Citizenship Act of 2000[vi] amended the Immigration and Nationality Act (“INA”), permitting citizenship in certain circumstances. While many children acquired U.S. citizenship from their parents under the new law, there can be confusion among families who thought their children were citizens when in fact, they were not. Under certain circumstances, a false claim to citizenship may not be a deportable offense. The following are some examples of excusable false claims: the child’s parents were U.S. citizens by birth or naturalization; the child’s false claim was made prior to reaching age 18; the child was a U.S. permanent resident prior reaching age 16; or where the child reasonably believed he or she was a U.S. citizen when the claim was made. Because the penalties for false claims are severe, questions about false claims and exceptions should be brought to a licensed and experienced immigration attorney. Indications of false claims can cause many problems for anyone involved in the naturalization process.

An experienced licensed immigration attorney can help noncitizens who are concerned they might have accidentally taken some action that could lead to a finding of a false claim of U.S. citizenship, or where a limited exception may apply to the false claims rules. Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law issues including false claims to U.S. citizenship. For more information about the law firm, please tap/click here to visit the rest of the website, and do not forget to “Like” the firm on Facebook and “Follow” on Twitter or Google Plus.

 

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and the American Dream: US fund to help DACA Recipients

"THEDREAM.US provides college scholarships to highly motivated DREAMers who, without financial aid, cannot afford a college education that will enable them to participate in the American workforce." http://thedream.us/

“THEDREAM.US provides college scholarships to highly motivated DREAMers who, without financial aid, cannot afford a college education that will enable them to participate in the American workforce.” http://thedream.us/

Approved Applicants of the DACA program are finally seeing some movement to help them attend institutions of higher education and live the American Dream.  There is a program for undocumented students called “TheDream.US” fund[i]. This scholarship program was created to match qualified DACA approved students with the money they need to pay for tuition, fees, and books. TheDream.US fund has already raised $25 million to help approximately 2,000 students over the next ten years, which comes out to $12,500 per scholarship recipient. To learn more about TheDream.US please visit their website.

Why apply for DACA when Immigration Reform is on the Horizon?

As hopes for comprehensive immigration reform wane, children of undocumented immigrants should know that they can still take advantage of a program that helps them obtain certain protections from deportation and also employment authorization.   Many watch as the Comprehensive Immigration Reform (“CIR”) bill is continuously put on hold for political reasons.  Congressional Democrats are focused on offering a path to citizenship for many undocumented immigrants and expired visa holders in the U.S. while Congressional Republicans seek better guarantees that southern border security will get the attention they feel it needs. Negotiation and compromise are on hold until after the November elections.   Please read our blog article, Problems and solutions in bipartisan immigration reform: is President Obama over a barrel? for more information on the current status of CIR.

The reality for many undocumented immigrants and those who has overstayed visas is that their parents brought them into the United States as children and now they find themselves in the only country they know without control over their ability to change their immigration circumstances.   The problem for these children is that without legal status they not only do not qualify for federal student loans and aid, they cannot legally work, and they live with the constant fear of deportation.

Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) is a policy making it possible for undocumented immigrants to go to work and school without fear of deportation. 

DACA was created by President Obama’s administration and became effective on June 15, 2012[ii]. The Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) issued orders to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CPB”), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”), and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) directing that they use the policy called “prosecutorial discretion” (read our article Prosecutorial Discretion in Immigration Enforcement) when addressing those who came to the U.S. as undocumented immigrant children and who still do not have a lawful immigration status. DACA provides a formal application process so that immigrants who meet all of their requirements of the DACA initiative may apply for this special immigration relief.

If approved, applicants for relief under DACA reprieve from their fear of deportation as  they will not be subjected to removal from the U.S. assuming that they meet DACA’s strict requirements that they not have any serious issues with law enforcement.  DACA does not provide a path to permanent residence at this time.  DACA is still available as many wait for CIR as promised by politicians on both sides of the aisle many times over.

Who is eligible for DACA?

From the DHS website[iii], the following is a list of criteria for DACA eligibility: 

  1. Have come to the United States under the age of sixteen;
  2. Have continuously resided in the United States for a least five years preceding the date of this memorandum  (June 15, 2012) and are present in the United States on the date of this memorandum (June 15, 2012;
  3. Are currently in school, have graduated from high school, have obtained a general education development certificate, or are honorably discharged veterans of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States;
  4. Have not been convicted of a felony offense, a significant misdemeanor offense, multiple misdemeanor offenses, or otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety;
  5. Are not above the age of thirty.

If you or someone you know may qualify for DACA relief and wants to go to college or work in the U.S. after finishing high school, you may contact the Law Offices of KiKi M. Mosley for assistance with their applications. Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law issues. For more information about the law firm, please tap/click here to visit the rest of the website, and do not forget to “Like” the firm on Facebook and “Follow” on Twitter or Google Plus.


[i] The Washington Post: Scholarship program to aid immigrants. Associated Press. Feb. 4, 2014

[ii] U.S. Department of Homeland Security: Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals.

[iii] U.S. Department of Homeland Security: Eligibility for Deferred Action.

Criminal conduct can lead to nonimmigrant visa revocation and removal from the U.S.

Once a nonimmigrant visa is revoked ICE may initiate removal proceedings to deport the individual if they otherwise do not voluntary leave the U.S.

Once a nonimmigrant visa is revoked ICE may initiate removal proceedings to deport the individual if they otherwise do not voluntary leave the U.S.

Justin Bieber’s recent arrest in Florida for DUI, street racing and resisting arrest without violence has people talking about immigration as the singer is not an American citizen.  Bieber is a Canadian residing in the U.S. on a performance visa known as an O-1 visa, described by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) as follows: “The O-1 nonimmigrant visa is for the individual who possesses extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics, or who has a demonstrated record of extraordinary achievement in the motion picture or television industry and has been recognized nationally or internationally for those achievements.[i]” If convicted on pending and possible charges from several recent incidents, Bieber could be deported, according to one Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) agent quoted in the article, “Justin Bieber Drugs, Rehab and Deportation According to ICE Official.[ii]

Nonimmigrant visas can be revoked for several reasons including criminal conduct.

When a nonimmigrant visa applicant seeks a visa to come to the U.S. to work, they apply through a U.S. embassy consular office and that visa can be revoked if the visa holder becomes ineligible to maintain the nonimmigrant visa, which can occur for a variety of reasons. There are criminal and related grounds for visa ineligibility, among other additional reasons a visa can be revoked.  An excerpt from the statute containing grounds for visa revocation identifies criminal and related issues and states, “…any alien convicted of, or who admits having committed, or who admits committing acts which constitute the essential elements of (I) a crime involving moral turpitude (other than a purely political offense) or an attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime, or (II) a violation of (or a conspiracy or attempt to violate) any law or regulation of a State, the United States, or a foreign country relating to a controlled substance…[iii]

What constitutes a crime of moral turpitude, for purposes of visa ineligibility, is a unique question best answered on a case-by-case basis, and a licensed immigration attorney may be necessary to represent the nonimmigrant. While it may not always be clear what constitutes a crime for moral turpitude, it is clear that multiple criminal convictions can trigger visa revocation and deportation. In addition to what is stated above, the ineligibility statute also states regarding multiple convictions, “Any alien convicted of 2 or more offenses (other than purely political offenses), regardless of whether the conviction was in a single trial or whether the offenses arose from a single scheme of misconduct and regardless of whether the offenses involved moral turpitude, for which the aggregate sentences to confinement were 5 years or more is inadmissible.” In other words, the combination of options that could trigger visa revocation can be complex.

What happens if a nonimmigrant visa is revoked as a result of criminal activity?

If revoked, the visa will be stamped “REVOKED” and if the visa holder is not present at the time of revocation (or the visa is not available) additional authorities may be notified, including airline personnel. Once a visa is revoked the holder will not be permitted to enter the U.S. and can be detained while traveling to the U.S. Once a nonimmigrant visa is revoked ICE may initiate removal proceedings to deport the individual if they otherwise do not voluntary leave the U.S. Note that ICE may use “prosecutorial discretion” in deciding whether to proceed with removal. Click/tap here to read more about prosecutorial discretion.

Removal proceedings can be challenged and a visa reinstatement may also be applied for by the nonimmigrant visa holder and/or their attorney. The complex immigration and criminal law rules are best followed with an experienced licensed immigration attorney who understands the effect of the options available in criminal courts and how they can affect nonimmigrant visa status.

If you or someone you know who holds a nonimmigrant visa is involved in police activity and is charged with an offense, which if convicted could trigger deportation, you can call the Law Offices of KiKi M. Mosley to learn what options are available to prevent being deported. Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law issues. For more information about the law firm, please tap/click here to visit the rest of the website, and do not forget to “Like” the firm on Facebook and “Follow” on Twitter or Google Plus.

Prosecutorial Discretion in Immigration Enforcement

What happens if an undocumented person is detained by ICE but poses no significant threat to safety or security?

What happens if an undocumented person is detained by ICE but poses no significant threat to safety or security?

A recent article in the L.A. Times highlighted a reported rise in the use of prosecutorial discretion in United States immigration system. There are many undocumented immigrants in the U.S., many of whom want nothing more than to reside in the U.S. legally in hope of eventually obtaining U.S. citizenship. ICE officers and their departments are under a directive to prioritize whom they prosecute under the current immigration laws for removal.  They are expected to target those with criminal backgrounds and those whom they otherwise believe pose a threat to national security.

The article on prosecutorial discretion suggests that, “Immigrants facing deportation are increasingly likely to have their cases dismissed because of mitigating factors such as having U.S. citizen children, according to an analysis by researchers at Syracuse University.”[i]  In reality, the use of prosecutorial discretion varies widely between jurisdictions and is often up to the attorney assigned to the case at that particular time by the Office of Chief Counsel for DSH/ICE.

Prosecutorial discretion in immigration means ICE should focus on national security and public safety.

In 2011, the director of ICE, Mr. John Morton, issued a memorandum directing that immigration officials review a few factors before making the decision to prosecute the individual and seek a removal order from the very busy immigration courts. Factors for consideration include how many years the person has been living in the U.S., how and when they arrived in the U.S. (as a child 10 years ago?), whether their family members served in the military, and also the person’s relationship to other family members who are U.S. citizens[ii].

The 2011 orders sent to ICE field office directors, special agents in charge and chief counsel focus on the civil immigration enforcement priorities. The memo states in its “Background” section that, “ICE must prioritize the use of its enforcement personnel, detention space, and removal assets to ensure that the aliens it removes represent, as much as reasonably possible, the agency’s enforcement priorities, namely the promotion of national security, border security, public safety, and the integrity of the immigration system.”

What happens if an undocumented person is detained by ICE but poses no significant threat to safety or security?

If an undocumented immigrant is arrested and detained on suspicion of being a threat to public safety, as ICE memorandums describe, an attorney can intervene and work to negotiate a release or dismissal of pending charges, as suggested in the Los Angeles Times article suggesting more frequently, ICE is using prosecutorial discretion and letting people go about their lives.  If you want to learn more about prosecutorial discretion or believe someone you know if being improperly detained and prosecuted you can call attorney KiKi M. Mosley to find out what options might be available to help.

Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law issues. For more information about the law firm, please tap/click here to visit the rest of the website, and do not forget to “Like” the firm on Facebook and “Follow” on Twitter or Google Plus.


[i] Los Angeles Times: Prosecutorial discretion on the rise in immigration courts. By Cindy Chang. Jan. 15, 2014

[ii] U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Prosecutorial Discretion Memorandum. By John Morton, June 17, 2011.

Decreases in deportation: less enforcement is not immigration reform, but appreciate the policy effort.

If ICE officials have more choices in enforcing immigration laws, who is not being deported?

If ICE officials have more choices in enforcing immigration laws, who is not being deported?

Under President Obama’s oversight, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) is deporting less undocumented immigrants in connection with its new policy limiting enforcement resources on, ““public safety, national security and border security,” said ICE spokeswoman Barbara Gonzales.[i]” “ICE has been vocal about the shift in our immigration-enforcement strategy,” she said. “Our removal numbers illustrate this.” The Center for Immigration Studies published their report in October 2013, titled, “Deportation Numbers Unwrapped. Raw Statistics Reveal the Real Story of ICE Enforcement in Decline,” and as to the source of information, CIS states, “This report examines data from a collection of mostly unpublished internal Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE statistics, to provide an alternative evaluation of the administration’s record on immigration enforcement that is based on raw statistics rather than pre-packaged press kits.[ii]

If ICE officials have more choices in enforcing immigration laws, who is not being deported?

Central to the disagreement among Democrats and Republican lawmakers are many of the approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants who may, for all intents and purposes, live among U.S. citizens day to day without any call to consider their immigration or citizenship status. As indicated in the CIS report, a 2011 ICE memorandum directed officers, “not to arrest certain broad categories of illegal aliens, including minor criminals, long-time residents, students, parents, caregivers, and a long list of other excepted categories for whom there was otherwise no statutory basis for special treatment.” Despite a policy decreasing the number of new arrests and detentions, there are still thousands of the same people stuck in the immigration court system, waiting for asylum hearings, waiting in detention facilities, and waiting to move forward with life.

How will ICE officers determine who should be targeted for arrest and detention?

A policy directive suggesting ICE officers not arrest and detain the less threatening illegal immigrants to the U.S. does not guarantee any sense of safety for undocumented residents living in fear. Imagine you are driving around on a suspended drivers license and fear all it would take is for another driver to hit you to expose your illegal presence to a law enforcement officer. No, you probably should not drive on a suspended drivers license, but many do, and have little choice. The necessity to get yourself and family members to work or school, for instance, can create fear in undocumented immigrants who may wonder when their luck may run out and they are arrested and detained for not being present in the U.S. with a lawful immigration status.

President Obama said during his (re)election campaign(s) that he would work to provide undocumented residents with a pathway to citizenship. The decrease in the number of ICE arrests and deportations must give some people a feeling of safety. Meanwhile, critics of immigration reform must argue that an effort to reduce enforcement of out-of-date laws does not cure the underlying problem that those old laws do not reflect the spirit of the will of the people in the United States.

In the event you, a friend or family member is arrested and detained by ICE officers, you should immediately contact an attorney to learn what, if any, rights you or the detained person has, and how the detention and removal processes work and how the attorney can help.

The Law Office of KiKi M. Mosley, works to counsel and represent detained immigrants and file the proper petitions with immigration courts necessary to protect an undocumented man, woman or child. Attorney KiKi M. Mosley is licensed to practice law by the State of Illinois and Louisiana. She is skilled and experienced in complex immigration law issues. For more information about the law firm, please tap/click here to visit the rest of the website, and do not forget to “Like” the firm on Facebook and “Follow” on Twitter or Google Plus.


[i] Bloomberg Businessweek: Deportations Drop as Obama Pushes for New Immigration Law. By Michael C. Bender, Dec. 17, 2013.