Advocating for immigrants for more than 20 years.

Author: Shahid Haque

Montana Teacher’s Citizenship Questioned After Decades of Living in the United States

January 19, 2012Shahid Haque
image

Earlier this month, I was interviewed by the Great Falls Tribune regarding the case of Anke Davis, a school teacher who emigrated to the United States in 1951.  (You can find the full article here.) Of course, Ms. Davis was a young girl when she first came to this country.  Her parents naturalized before she was 18 years old, and she always assumed she was a U.S. citizen as well.  However, after applying for Medicare benefits, she was told for the first time that she was not a citizen.  Naturally, this was a huge shock to her.On several occasions, I have dealt with similar issues.  On one occasion, the government sought to deport a client of mine despite the fact that he had obtained citizenship through his parents.  I recall that during the last legislative session, some lawmakers proposed harsh penalties on anyone who could not prove citizenship or lawful residency.  At the time, I had attempted to explain that immigration status can be extremely difficult to determine — and is outside of the expertise of local police.  This provides a perfect example.Despite being told that she is not a citizen, she may very well have acquired citizenship through her parents when they naturalized.  It comes down to a complex set of laws and requirements.  As I state in the article:

Unfortunately, it’s a situation that is not that uncommon.Shahid Haque is a Helena attorney whose firm, Border Crossing Law, specializes in immigration and naturalization. Haque said that it’s surprisingly common for people who have lived in the U.S. their whole lives to discover that their citizenship status is unsettled.”Immigration laws are very complex,” he said. “I’ve dealt with several people of Canadian decent where one of their parents was an American citizen and one of their parents Canadian, and they always assumed they were U.S. citizens because they had grown up here. But there are specific conditions that need to be met to become a U.S. citizen โ€” even when one of their parents was born in the U.S.”Davis’ situation is made even more tangled by the amount of time that has elapsed since she entered the country.”Since 1934, the laws regulating naturalization and immigration have changed five times, and each individual’s case is determined to some extent by the laws that were in place at the time they entered the country,” Haque said. “What the basic law would say regarding Mrs. Davis’ case is that she would have had to fulfill a series of conditions before she hit the age of 18 in order to get citizenship through her parents.”Haque said that in addition to her parents becoming U.S. citizens, Davis would have had to receive “permanent resident” status prior to her 18th birthday. If, as a child, her parents registered her as a permanent resident, then her citizenship was assured. But if they failed to do that, then Davis’ path to citizenship would have become much more tortuous. She would have been required to leave the country, apply for and receive permanent resident status abroad, then re-enter the U.S., at which time she would immediately have become a U.S. citizen.”If she was here as a child on some form of visitor’s visa and never left the country and came back in to establish a permanent residence, then she would never have acquired citizenship,” Haque said. “If those conditions were never fulfilled before she hit age 18, they might argue that she lost her window of opportunity and therefore never became a citizen. What really matters is, was she a permanent resident on the day and time that her parents were naturalized? It all hinges on her being a permanent resident.”While not irrelevant, the fact that Davis has lived her whole life in the U.S., is married to a U.S. citizen and has long-established ties to the community in which she lives is subsidiary to the status she was assigned at the time she was a child.”The way that the rules are written, there is no discretion to sympathize with her situation or age and just allow her to become a U.S. citizen,” Haque said. “If she doesn’t meet these specific requirements, they would deny her the U.S. citizenship despite any humanitarian factors that they should take into account. It’s a very rigid set of rules.”So much of this Gordian knot of laws and regulation comes down to one, credit-card-sized document Davis was issued at age 4. One side lists her name, her age and her country of origin. The other side shows a 4-year-old Anke d’Hane, white bow in her hair, and an authorization from the Department of Immigration and Naturalization to admit her into the U.S. legally.Haque could not immediately identify the document from a photograph, but he did say it was a strong likelihood that the card was Davis’ original permanent resident status card.If that is the case, than all Davis should need to establish her U.S. citizenship is that card, her birth certificate and a copy of her father’s naturalization certification โ€” all of which she currently has in her possession. If that card is merely a visitor’s visa, then the whole story changes.Haque said that even in a worst-case scenario, it is unlikely that Davis would be deported. However, she could be required to obtain her permanent resident status, and would likely have to wait for up to five years before being eligible for citizenship. She also would lose her right to collect Medicare benefits or vote over that same period of time.”If she wasn’t a permanent resident and hasn’t been all these years, then all her years of working they would consider to be illegal employment,” Haque said.

If there is one lesson to be taken from this story, it is that we should be a bit more careful when referring to someone as an “illegal alien” or other pejorative terms.  Immigration laws are complex, and this complexity is belied by such rudimentary and offense terms.  Indeed, if you use these terms, you might be referring to people like Ms. Davis.

Firm Prevents Deportation of Father of Two Developmentally Disabled Children

May 13, 2011Shahid Haque
image

Today, the Border Crossing Law Firm celebrates an important victory on behalf of our client and his two developmentally-disabled children.

Over twenty years ago, our client came to the United States from Guatemala. He was only 20 years old when he first arrived without inspection in the country. He has two children who were born in this country and are U.S. Citizens. His older son requires special care due to developmental delays. When our client’s younger son was also born with severe developmental disabilities, the mother abandoned the family. Our client obtained legal custody of the children and has been working tirelessly to care for them.

Our client’s younger son is terminally ill, and requires 24/7 care and attention. He was born with cerebral palsy, is blind, has lung and heart damage, and is prone to seizures. Due to his brain damage, he has limited movement and will never be able to walk. For over a year, our client has been his son’s sole caretaker, and has only been able to leave the house for a few hours a week to buy groceries and supplies. Apart from these brief hours outside of the house, he provides his sons with constant love, care, and medical attention.

After being placed into removal proceedings, our client faced deportation to Guatemala. He was faced with an impossible decision: Would he take his children with him to Guatemala, where they would be unable to get the care they need? Or, would he go to Guatemala alone, splitting the family apart and leaving his children as wards of the state?Shahid Haque represented our client at his removal hearing. We are pleased to announce that our client was granted cancellation of removal, which means that he is now permitted to live in the U.S. as a legal permanent resident.

This is an extraordinary remedy that is only available to individuals who demonstrate that their deportation will cause exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to U.S. citizen dependents.Within weeks, our client will receive his “green card” in the mail. Now that his immigration status is resolved, our client can concentrate on providing loving care for his children.

Why the term “anchor babies” is offensive and inaccurate.

February 13, 2011Shahid Haque
image

KULR 8 news in Billings interviewed both me and Rep. James Knox about his unconstitutional bill to exclude children of immigrants and dual citizens from Montana state citizenship. The interview also focussed on the term “anchor babies” and why it is a highly offensive term.   The news story and video are available by clicking here.

The term “anchor babies” is one of the most offensive and pejorative terms being thrown around when talking about immigrants. It is based on the false belief that when an immigrant has a baby in the United States, that prevents the child’s parents from being removed and gives them some form of immigration status.  That is not true.  In actuality, a child can only confer immigration status to his or her parent when the child reaches age 21.  Every years, tens of thousands of parents of U.S. citizen are deported — amounting to over 100,000 deportations over the last ten years.

Of course, the term is not intended to be accurate.  It is designed to dehumanize these young children, by stereotyping and casting a false motivation on their birth. Rather than recognizing that immigrants have families for the same reasons as the rest of us, this term is meant to differentiate immigrants, so that we can justify treating them as less than human, and less deserving of the same rights are privileges as the rest of us.

Dehumanizing language like this is dangerous.  Historically, we have seen this kind of language referring to children the “disfavored” groups of the era.  These included Irish, German, Chinese, Eastern European, and, most prominently, African-Americans.  Rather than merely having children, members of these groups were said to be “breeding” or “multiplying.”  The term “anchor babies” is just another example of language meant to dehumanize children of immigrants and infringe upon their reproductive freedoms.

People who use the term “anchor baby” would actually be referring to me.  I am the child of two immigrants.  Over 30 years ago, my parents came to the U.S. from Pakistan. My father was a doctor, and he came here to work in an underserved community with a shortage of medical professionals.  When I was born, my parents weren’t citizens yet.

My parents certainly didn’t have me in order to stay here in the country.  They became citizens on their own several years later.  But that’s the problem with using a term like “anchor baby” to sweepingly refer to children of non-citizens.  It is clear stereotyping and assigns a cynical motive behind one of our most fundamental human rights — the right to raise a family.I just had my first son.  If you don’t know why the term is so offensive, try imagining how you would feel if someone referred to your own child in that way. I know how angry I would be if I ever heard that term used about my son.  I’d imagine you would feel the same way.

Firm Wins Permanent Residence for Client Who Entered the U.S. Without Inspection at Age 10

April 6, 2010Shahid Haque
image

Today, the Firm won permanent residence for a client from Mexico who had entered the United States without inspection in 1993, when he was only 10 years old.  For the last 16 years, our client has lived in the United States without documented status, getting work as he could find it.  After today, he can search for a job on the open market, and pursue a fair living wage for himself and his family.Initially, it appeared that there would be no relief available to our client.  A few years ago, he got married to his wife, who is a U.S. citizen.  However, someone who entered the country without inspection typically cannot obtain a “green card” through marriage.  While it is commonly believed that anyone can get a green card through marriage, this is not true.  Typically, only individuals who lawfully entered the country can adjust their status through marriage.  Despite being only 10 years old when he entered the country, he was still considered to have entered without inspection.  Therefore, our client would normally be left without any form of relief available to him, and would have to live his life in constant fear of being separated from his family.Thankfully, our client was eligible to take advantage of a special law that is no longer on the books.  In the late 1990’s, Congress passed a law that would allow people who entered without inspection to pursue permanent residence, as long as a qualifying petition was filed on their behalf on or before April 30, 2001.  Any petitions after this date do not qualify for any special treatment.  Luckily, it so happened that our client’s parents got sponsored for a green card a mere one week before the deadline.  As a beneficiary of his parents’ petition, this meant that our client was “grandfathered” under the law, and could still take advantage of it.After an interview today, our client was granted adjustment of status, and will be receiving his Permanent Residence Card in the mail.Our client was lucky.  The law that he took advantage of expired in 2001, and has not been renewed.  Most immigrants in his situation have no avenue to obtain permanent residence, and must always remain in the shadows.  For our client, the plastic card he will receive in the mail will make all the difference in the world.  In three years, we will apply for naturalization, and he will be proud to become a citizen of the country he grew up in.

Governor Schweitzer on Immigration and Reform

March 21, 2010Shahid Haque
image

“Families who want to come to America, work in America, raise families in America ought to be welcome because that’s the thread that has made this blanket so warm in this country. We need to have a system that allows people a path to citizenship. That’s the way we’ve done it for the last 150 years.”  – Governor Brian Schweitzer, 2008.Most of us haven’t had the opportunity to hear our governor speak on the issue of immigration and the need for reform.  However, I highly recommend that everyone read an interview that  Governor Schweitzer gave to the Iowa Independent in 2008.  I was surprised by the insight he provided into the issue, and I look forward to his input as the debate on immigration reform ramps up this year.The governor is half Ukranian and half Irish, and his ethnic heritage had a huge affect on him.  While some politicians, including Senator Jon Tester, are quick to support English as a national language, our governor understands the complexity of this issue:

My father’s family were homesteaders in Montana and they came from Ukraine but they were German speakers. They were so-called German-speaking Russians.While his parents and their parents had never been to Germany, when World War I came around, they were discriminated against across this country and they passed the Sedition Act and made it against the law to speak or read in German in Montana.My father served in World War II, but since German was his first language, there was always a concern about โ€˜Is he a patriot or not?โ€™And my grandmother, she never learned to speak English, only German. My parents, they kind of kept us away from her because they saw it as a detriment to be able to speak German.

Governor Schweitzer notes that the disfavored immigrant groups have changed over the years, depending on social and political factors.

Some say that the derogatory term “wop”ย actually stands for “without papers”ย and that they referred to all of the Italian immigrants for a time that way.. . .My first day of school, I’m going to school, and my mother sits me down โ€” and I just went to a little country school, nine kids in my class โ€” and she said, because by this time itโ€™s 1961 and we are in the Cold War, “If anyone asks you about the name Schweitzer, don’t tell them we’re Russian, tell them we’re German.”So it swings back and forth in this country, and it has for a long time.

Immigration policy is not a debate that just happened this year. We’ve been debating it for 150 years.  There’s an ebb and flow. The bottom line is almost everybody here comes from an immigrant family including myself.

While individuals of Ukrainian and Irish ancestry no longer experience quite the same level of scrutiny, I am grateful that Governor Schweitzer has internalized the experiences of his youth and understands that we must be welcoming to our newest immigrants.  I am hopeful that his experiences can influence Senators Tester and Baucus, who have espoused views that are diametrically opposite to our governor’s.Thanks to Governor Schweitzer for his refreshing take on immigration and the need for reform.

Firm Wins Cancellation of Removal for Clients from Zimbabwe

January 14, 2010Shahid Haque
image

Today, the Border Crossing Law Firm won cancellation of removal for two clients from Zimbabwe who had been in the United States for over twenty years, and feared that they would be persecuted by the government of Zimbabwe if they were forced to return.  Their removal proceedings began in a very unfortunate manner, as they were stopped by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) in a seemingly unwarranted stop near the Canadian border.For the next several years, we represented our clients in Immigration Court, as we worked through several steps in the process to prevent their deportation.  The couple has several children who are U.S. citizens, and these children would experience  significant hardship if the whole family had to move to Zimbabwe — a country experiencing political turmoil as well as devastating poverty and outbreaks of illnesses like cholera.Cancellation of removal is an extraordinary form of relief that is available to individuals who can demonstrate:  (1) continuous physical presence in the U.S. for at least 10 years; (2) good moral character during this time; (3) no relevant criminal convictions; and (4) exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a U.S. citizen that would result from removal.Although it is extremely difficult to obtain cancellation of removal, the Firm was able to prove that our clients satisfied each of these criteria.  Based on the dangerous political climate in Zimbabwe, the rampant spread of cholera, and the disastrous school system — among other factors — we were able to demonstrate that the conditions in Zimbabwe would have caused exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to our clients’ children.We are deeply proud to have ensured that our clients and their children can remain in the United States on a permanent basis.

Shahid Haque Wins Neil Haight Pro Bono Award

September 13, 2009Shahid Haque
image

Shahid Haque was the  winner of the Neil Haight Pro Bono Award, given out by the State Bar of Montana to attorneys who have served their communities by providing free legal services to low-income clients.  It is an honor to have been selected for the award, and I am overjoyed with the news.I received the award based on pro bono work that I did on behalf of especially disadvantaged immigrants:

Shahid Haque is the managing attorney of the Border Crossing Law Firm PC.  He devoted a considerable amount of time last year to providing pro bono services to immigrants in Montana and nationwide. Immigrants are an underserved community here in Montana, because they often cannot afford to pay for legal services, but usually don’t qualify for services from the Montana Legal Services Association. Mr. Haque has attempted to fulfill this need and provides pro bono legal services to immigrants who fall below the federal poverty line, are not receiving sufficient support from family or friends, and cannot afford to pay for legal services.In his pro bono practice, Mr. Haque has won asylum for seven refugees who fled from their home countries to escape torture, persecution, and death on account of their political beliefs. He spent much of his time last year representing his eighth pro bono asylum client, who is in removal proceedings in Chicago. This client is from Eritrea – a country that is ruled by a brutal dictator who is responsible for mass killings of political opponents. The final hearing in this case will occur in April 2009.Last year, Mr. Haque also assisted a married couple that was referred by the Montana Legal Services Association. They needed assistance with the husband’s application for adjustment of status, but were facing several roadblocks from the Department of Homeland Security. In addition to applying for a green card, the husband needed to obtain work authorization in order to support their five children. They were trying to feed a family of seven on a single Wal-Mart salary.  Mr. Haque has submitted part of their application and is continuing to work with them to resolve other issues in their case.Mr. Haque also represented a homeless Cuban refugee who was referred by the Poverello Center. This client had fled from Cuba in the 90s and swam to U.S. soil. However, he never obtained a green card, and ended up homeless for many years. Upon discovering that he had a valid claim to legal permanent resident status, Mr. Haque began work on his petition. The lengthy process is ongoing, but he is now close to obtaining his green card.Mr. Haque is listed as a free legal service provider with the Department of Homeland Security. When individuals are arrested and placed in deportation proceedings, they are given his phone number to call. Mr. Haque provides free legal advice and assistance to these detainees without any compensation. He represents many of these individuals with bond requests and removal proceedings.Mr. Haque has served on the Helena International Affairs Council since September 2008, which is tasked with promoting the city as an international gateway and embracing the cultures and traditions of our international residents and visitors. Mr. Haque has recently begun lobbying efforts to defeat anti-immigrant legislation that is being proposed by the Montana Legislature. There were more than 1 0 bills proposed this session that would have an adverse affect on. immigrants in Montana. Mr. Haque testified at each and every one of these hearings, without receiving any compensation for doing so.It is important to note that all of Mr. Haque’s pro bono activities are purely volunteer efforts. He receives no grant money or other compensation for these services. He balances these free services along with his ordinary workload.

The award will be presented Friday, September 18, 2009 in Missoula, Montana.  While I won’t be able to accept the award in person, a pro bono client of mine will be accepting the award in my place.

Feature on Shahid Haque in the Helena Independent Record

September 13, 2009Shahid Haque
image

John Harrington of the Helena Independent Record wrote a really nice article about the Border Crossing Law Firm in today’s paper:

Next week, the State Bar of Montana will present Haque with its Neil Haight Pro Bono Award for his work in providing free legal services to low-income Montanans.

Shahid Haque was born and raised in the heartland of America. But as the son of immigrants from Pakistan, he’s perhaps more sensitive than most to the issues that can confront people from around the world who want to make the United States their home.

After growing up in southern Illinois and Indiana, Haque went to college in Evansville, Ind., then onto the Chicago-Kent College of Law. He met his wife, an Idaho native and University of Montana graduate, while in school in the Windy City.

He worked for several firms in Chicago before the couple set its sights on the West. They moved to Helena about two years ago, and Haque-Hausreth opened his own practice, the Border Crossing Law Firm.

Next week, the State Bar of Montana will present Haque-Hausreth with its Neil Haight Pro Bono Award for his work in providing free legal services to low-income Montanans.

Immigration law can run the gamut from the mundane to the fascinating. While work visas and residency requests can require a great deal of paperwork, patience and legal advice, Haque-Hausreth takes particular pride in his work securing asylum for clients. He has won asylum for seven refugees who fled their native lands under threat of torture, persecution or death as a result of their political beliefs.

“It was really interesting and I really liked doing it,” the 30-year-old said of his work with political refugees. “You’re in effect saving their lives by preventing their having to go back to their home countries.”

In order to earn asylum, a refugee must show a well-founded fear of persecution. And unlike American citizens, refugees aren’t guaranteed the right of counsel.

“Having an attorney makes such a difference just in making sure their story is heard, and in telling the story the way the court wants to hear it,” Haque-Hausreth said.

Helena may seem like a strange place for an immigration attorney to find work, but while Haque takes clients from around Montana as well as other states, he said there’s no lack of work here.

“We’ve got lots of families here, more than you might think, that are mixed-status,” he said. “I was pretty convinced the work would find its way to me. The business has been successful, although I do spend a lot of pro bono time.”

Nor is his work mostly with Canadians, or with Hispanic clients. He’s had clients from Nigeria, Kenya, Zimbabwe and many other countries around the world.

“They find their way to Montana probably for the same reason a lot of people come to Montana,” he said. “You can raise kids here, it’s a great community. It’s beautiful here.”

Haque-Hausreth also lobbies for immigration-related causes at the Montana Legislature, and recently joined the board of directors of the Montana Human Rights Network. He’s also active with the Helena International Affairs Council.

Haque said that his work serves as a constant reminder of how postively many people from around the world view America, and the good fortune that comes from calling this country home.

“After doing this type of work, it gets to you and you realize how lucky you are to be a citizen,” he said. “I took it for granted, but when you see people who aren’t citizens and you see what’s going on in other countries, it makes you so thankful to be a U.S. citizen.”

Reporter John Harrington: 447-4080 or john.harrington@helenair.com.

In the News: Firm Files Writ of Habeas Corpus Action in Montana District Court

September 5, 2009Shahid Haque
image

One of the Firm’s cases was recently profiled in both the Helena Independent Record and the Missoulian.  This case implicates important constitutional issues regarding the misuse of authority by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) — an agency within the Department of Homeland Security.

Pro Bono Victory for Cuban Refugee Who Was Homeless for Over Ten Years

September 5, 2009Shahid Haque
image

The Firm is proud to announce that it has won permanent resident status for Josรฉ Auraz, a Cuban citizen and resident of Missoula, Montana. Josรฉ has a compelling story that he would like to share.In 1993, Josรฉ fled from Cuba and swam to Guantanamo Bay.  The swim was a lengthy and dangerous one — during the 82 minute swim, Josรฉ managed to ward off sharks by pouring gasoline on himself.  After arriving at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. military eventually brought Josรฉ to Miami, Florida.  Under the “wet feet, dry feet” policy instituted by the Cuban Adjustment Act, any Cuban who arrives on U.S. soil can apply for permanent residency after one year.  However, Josรฉ’s path to permanent residency was not an easy one.It was difficult for Josรฉ to earn a living in Miami, and he eventually fell into a cycle of poverty from which it was hard to escape.  Although Josรฉ was lawfully present in the U.S., he didn’t have papers, and couldn’t get a good job without these papers.  Josรฉ needed an attorney to help him through the complex application process, but he simply couldn’t afford an attorney.For thirteen years, Josรฉ bounced between homelessness and poverty, but all of this changed when he found himself at the Poverello Center in Missoula, Montana.  A newspaper article from the Missoulian explains what happened next:

For one year, Whitt said Poverello Center director Ellie Hill went on the hunt for an immigration attorney who would take his case. It wasn’t an easy pitch. Missing documents complicated the case, as did the request for pro bono work. Thirteen lawyers later, Shahid Haque, a lawyer at the Border Crossing Law Firm in Helena, agreed to take on the task.

And he succeeded.

“My life changed when I received my employment authorization,” Auraz said.

Now that he is able to earn a living, Josรฉ can take custody of his son and resume his life.  We wish Josรฉ the best of luck in all his endeavors!To read Josรฉ’s full article from the Missoulian, please click here.

Advocating for immigrants.

The Border Crossing Law Firm is a full-service immigration law firm, offering help with visas, green cards, citizenship, and deportation proceedings. We have been committed to the immigrant community for two decades, representing thousands of immigrants and their families across the country.

image