2020 AILA Virtual Asylum Conference

Since January 2019, over 60,000 asylum seekers from Central America, Cuba, Venezuela, and Brazil have been returned to Mexico under the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). MPP practice can be very different from what most asylum practitioners have experienced in the past. With courts in San Diego, El Paso, Harlingen, Brownsville, and Laredo, procedures vary depending on the jurisdiction.

In addition to MPP, the current administration has implemented other border programs to deter asylum-seekers and deny due process to anyone attempting to enter the United States and pursue protection. Panelists will discuss the particularities of MPP in each jurisdiction, including the Asylum Cooperative Agreements (ACAs), border closures, metering, parole and non-refoulement, and fast-track deportation programs like the Prompt Asylum Claim Review (PACR) and the Humanitarian Asylum Review Process (HARP).

• Updates on Access at the Border: Metering, Center for Disease Control (CDC) Border Closures, and More
• MPP: Logistics and Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
• What Are PACR and HARP? And How Do I Help Individuals Subject to Them?
• What Are the ACAs? Is There Any Way to Help People Subject to These Agreements?

Faculty:

• Constance R. Wannamaker (DL), Conference Program Committee, El Paso, TX
• Bashir Ghazialam, San Diego, CA
• Kim Hunter, St. Paul, MN
• Nicole E. Ramos, Refugee Program Director, Al Otro Lado, Tijuana, Mexico

Session Link: https://zoom.us/j/91849845030

Secrecy, denial of due process, and failure to follow the federal rule-making process are hallmarks of the Trump administration. Sadly, the federal courts have provided cover for the administration’s actions, including its blatant attacks on immigrants. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit (DDC), for instance, upheld the Trump administration’s expansion of expedited removal to include undocumented immigrants found anywhere in the United States within two years of crossing the border.

In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that federal law limits habeas review obtainable by a noncitizen detained for expedited removal. Finally, Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) litigation is currently pending before the DDC, seeking to uncover information about the government’s practice of replacing trained asylum officers with U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers to conduct Credible Fear Interviews (CFIs). The panelists will explore recent and anticipated developments with CFIs and Reasonable Fear Interviews (RFIs).

• Changes to CFI Eligibility Standards
• Expansion of Expedited Removal
• Judicial Review: DHS v. Thuraissigiam
• Practice Pointers for Dealing with Affirmative vs. Defensive Jurisdiction Issues

Faculty:

• Sheila T. Starkey Hahn (DL), Conference Program Committee, Dunkirk, NY
• Bridget Cambria, Reading, PA
• Dorien Ediger-Seto, San Diego, CA
• Shalyn “Shay” Fluharty, Director, Proyecto Dilley, San Antonio, TX

Session Link: https://zoom.us/j/93046292779

Across the country, seeking asylum has become an uphill battle in which attorneys face increasingly restrictive case law and regulations, adversarial opposing counsel and adjudicators, and constantly changing policies and procedures. Panelists will provide expert guidance on how to overcome these challenges and develop a strong record in order to place clients in the best position before the immigration judge, the BIA, and federal courts.

• How to Develop Affidavits, Identify Corroborating Evidence, and Preserve Arguments in Anticipation of Appeal
• Determining Whether and How to Seek Release for Detained Asylum Seekers
• Preparing Asylum Seekers for Merits Hearings
• Strategic Decision-Making When a Merits Hearing Is Not the Best Option

Faculty:

• Ashley Huebner (DL), AILA EOIR-ICE Joint Committee, Conference Program Vice Chair, Chicago, IL
• Jeremy L. McKinney, AILA 1st Vice President, Greensboro, NC
• Tatiana Obando, Program Director, RAICES Qualified Representative Program, Houston, TX

Session Link: https://zoom.us/j/92690035828

With the current administration’s onslaught on our asylum system, it is incumbent upon practitioners to consider the Convention Against Torture (CAT) as an alternative, and perhaps the only, form of relief available to clients. The panelists first will present a brief overview of CAT, then address changes wrought by recent case law and strategies for how to deal with them. Panelists will conclude with a discussion of recently proposed regulations.

• A Brief Overview of CAT Fundamentals: Withholding of Removal vs. Deferral of Removal
• Recent Case Law: Matter of O–F–A–S–, Matter of R–A–F–, Nasrallah v. Barr
• Non-State Actors, Rogue Officials, and Government Acquiescence
• Proposed Regulatory Changes and Implications for CAT

Faculty:

• R. Mark Frey (DL), Conference Program Committee, St. Paul, MN
• C. Shane Ellison, Durham, NC
• Valeria Gomez, Hartford, CT
• Anne Peterson, San Francisco, CA

Session Link: https://zoom.us/j/92413505784