Immigration Benefits and Relief
The immigration laws and regulations provide some avenues to apply for lawful status from within the U.S. or to seek relief from deportation. The eligibility requirements for these benefits and relief can be stringent, and the immigration agencies often adopt overly restrictive interpretations of the requirements. Learn about advocacy and litigation that has been and can be undertaken to ensure that noncitizens have a fair chance to apply for the benefits and relief for which they are eligible. Providing avenues for legal status, protection, and family reunification is vital to ensuring humanitarian protection for immigrants. We are leading policy changes that open more opportunities like asylum, visas for victims of crime or human trafficking, and relief for long-term residents. Explore the resources below to learn more.
Letter to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano (submitted Feb. 9, 2012)
This sign-on letter expresses concerns about DHS’s implementation of the new prosecutorial discretion policy, including the agency’s failure to grant work authorization to those who receive a favorable exercise of discretion. The letter also makes recommendations to ensure that DHS fulfills its pledge to implement an effective and fair prosecutorial discretion policy nationwide. Read More
Regulatory comment: Adjustment of Status of “arriving aliens” who are in removal
The Council submitted comments on June 12, 2006, on the interim regulations that lifted the ban on “arriving aliens” being able to adjust their status if they are in removal proceedings.
Second Letter Requesting Modifications to USCIS DACA FAQ (submitted April 8, 2014)
The American Immigration Council along with American Immigration Lawyers Association, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, National Immigration Law Center, National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, New York Immigration Coalition, and United We Dream, submitted proposals to USCIS seeking certain modifications to the DACA Frequently Asked Questions page. Read More
NIJC Recommendations Regarding Implementation of the Prosecutorial Discretion Initiative (submitted Sep. 30, 2011)
This letter to several Administration officials was submitted in response to the DHS/White House announcement on August 18, 2011 that it would form a “Prosecutorial Discretion Working Group” to review pending removal cases and identify low priority cases for administrative closure. The letter urges the government to address some of… Read More
Response to DHS’s notice of revisions to Form I-821D, Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, and accompanying instructions (submitted Feb. 12, 2013)
The American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., and the National Immigration Law Center welcomed changes made by USCIS, but encouraged several additional changes to Form I-821D and the accompanying instructions to make it more understandable and accessible to DACA requesters, particularly those requesters who are unrepresented. Read More
Memorandum, “Executive Branch Authority Regarding Implementation of Immigration Laws and Policies” (April 29, 2011)
This memorandum, which was released by the American Immigration Council and co-signed by two general counsels of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, offers an overview of the scope of executive branch authority and outlines specific steps the Administration could take to forestall removals in sympathetic cases. Read More
Response to DHS’s notice of revisions to Form I‐131, Application for Travel Document and accompanying instructions (submitted Dec. 31, 2012)
The American Immigration Council, the American Immigration Lawyers Association and the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc. jointly submitted comments addressing numerous aspects of the Form I-131 instructions including revisions to the instructions that provide guidance to DACA recipients on their eligibility for Advance Parole. Read More
Letter to DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano (submitted April 6, 2011)
This letter requests written guidance setting forth detailed criteria for the favorable exercise of prosecutorial discretion and the assignment of a high-level officer to monitor implementation of the policy.
Bona v. Ashcroft – Ninth Circuit
The Council filed amicus briefs in numerous courts of appeals challenging the pre-2005 regulatory bar to adjustment of status for “arriving aliens” in removal proceedings. Several courts accepted our arguments that the regulation violated the adjustment of status statute. Succar v. Ashcroft, 394 F.3d 8 (1st Cir. 2005); Zheng v. Gonzales, 422 F.3d 98 (3d Cir. 2005); Bona v. Ashcroft, 425 F.3d 663 (9th Cir. 2005). Ultimately, DHS withdrew the challenged regulation and replaced it with one providing USCIS with jurisdiction to adjust the status of an "arriving alien" in removal proceedings. 71 Fed. Reg. 27585 (2006). The amicus brief filed in Bona v. Ashcroft is representative of the briefs filed in other circuits. Read More
Matter of Yauri – Board of Immigration Appeals
Following DHS's adoption of an interim regulation that gave USCIS jurisdiction over the adjustment application of an "arriving alien" in removal proceedings, the Council filed amicus briefs with the BIA and Federal Courts challenging the BIA's general refusal to reopen removal proceedings so that an "arriving alien" with an unexecuted final order could adjust with USCIS. The BIA rejected our arguments in Matter of Yauri, 25 I&N Dec. 103 (BIA 2009). Meanwhile, however, USCIS made clear that it retained jurisdiction over these cases despite the final order. Read More
Make a contribution
Make a direct impact on the lives of immigrants.
