Category: Immigration News

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.

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 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.

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.

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.

The Firm is proud to announce that it has won permanent resident status for José Auraz, a Cuban citizen and resident of Missoula, Montana. José has a compelling story that he would like to share.In 1993, José fled from Cuba and swam to Guantanamo Bay.  The swim was a lengthy and dangerous one — during the 82 minute swim, José managed to ward off sharks by pouring gasoline on himself.  After arriving at Guantanamo Bay, the U.S. military eventually brought José 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, José’s path to permanent residency was not an easy one.It was difficult for José to earn a living in Miami, and he eventually fell into a cycle of poverty from which it was hard to escape.  Although José was lawfully present in the U.S., he didn’t have papers, and couldn’t get a good job without these papers.  José needed an attorney to help him through the complex application process, but he simply couldn’t afford an attorney.For thirteen years, José 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, José can take custody of his son and resume his life.  We wish José the best of luck in all his endeavors!To read José’s full article from the Missoulian, please click here.

A friend recently forwarded me a ridiculously inaccurate e-mail that is being forwarded across the country. The e-mail fuels anti-immigrant hysteria by claiming that immigrants and refugees are enjoying better access to public benefits than U.S. citizens.  Here is the text of the e-mail:

If an immigrant is over 65 they can apply for SSI and Medicaid and get more than my mom (in her 80’s) gets for Social Security, and she worked from 1944 till 2004, only getting $791 per month because she was born before 1924 and there is a ‘catch 22’.It is interesting that the federal government provides a single refugee with a monthly allowance of $1,890.00 and each can also obtain an additional $580.00 in social assistance for a total of $2,470.00/month.  This compares very well to a single pensioner who after contributing to the growth and development of America for 40 to 50 years can only receive a monthly maximum of $1,012.00 in old age Pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement.Maybe our pensioners should apply as Refugees! Consider sending this to all your American friends, so we can all be ticked off and maybe get the refugees cut back to $1,012.00 and the pensioners up to $2,470.00 and enjoy some of the money we were forced to submit to the Government over the last 40 or 50 or 60 years.Please forward to every American to expose what our elected politicians(Nancy Pelosi Included) have been doing over the past 11 years – to the over-taxed American.

This message is replete with lies.  To begin with, it creates a false comparison between very different federal programs — SSI and Medicaid are different from social security retirement payments.  SSI and Medicaid are “means-tested public benefits” for people with low income and qualifying disabilities.  The e-mail might as well complain about anyone who receives these benefits.  But to claim that immigrants and refugees somehow enjoy these benefits more than citizens is absurd.An immigrant who is over 65 cannot automatically apply for SSI and Medicaid.  The Welfare Reform Act of 1996 imposed broad restrictions that prevent immigrants from getting most public benefits.  These laws are very detailed, but here are the basic facts:

• Most lawful immigrants (except refugees and some other humanitarian immigrants) who entered the country after 1996 are barred from receiving SSI at all.  It is simply not available to them until they become citizens or work for 10 years in the U.S.  After that, they are eligible to the same extent as any other resident.

• Undocumented immigrants cannot get SSI and Medicaid at all.  They can only get emergency Medicaid, which is for immediate medical treatment that is severe and could cause serious jeopardy to the patient’s health.  Basically, this means that they can get emergency room services only, with no follow-up care.

• Most lawful immigrants (except refugees and some other humanitarian immigrants) who entered the country after 1996 are ineligible to receive any “federal means-tested public benefit” for five years after their lawful admission to the United States.  The only major public benefit available during those five years is emergency Medicaid.  Otherwise, they have to wait five years before getting any benefits.

• Refugees are entitled to apply for SSI if they are disabled, but they can only receive it for seven years.  After that, they are cut off unless they become citizens.

• The “facts” about the support payments that refugees get are totally false.  Refugees do get some support payments for 8 months, and certain other benefits like food stamps.  However, payments that refugees are given are not permanent.  They are for a very limited duration of time.  The purpose of these payments are to help displaced refugees find their footing in a new country.  These are not comparable to retirement payments!

Snopes.com also does a good job of debunking this myth, which has been circulating the Internet for many years now.E-mails like these use lies to fuel xenophobic sentiment.  If you come across this message, or hear it repeated in public, please do your part to correct these falsehoods.

After President Obama’s appointment of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court, many in the media referred to Judge Sotomayor as the daughter of immigrant parents. However, this characterization appears to be incorrect.Judge Sotomayor’s parents are Puerto Rican. Puerto Rico is a self-governing “unincorporated territory” of the United States, and has been since the Spanish-American War. Since 1917, people born in Puerto Rico have automatically acquired U.S. citizenship.  Oddly, they cannot vote in federal elections so long as they reside in Puerto Rico, but they can vote when they reside in the incorporated United States.Because Judge Sotomayor’s parents appear to have been born in Puerto Rico, they were U.S. citizens at birth. As such, they weren’t truly immigrants to the United States. The United States and Puerto Rico have very different cultures, and I’m sure the experiences they had in the United States were similar in many ways to Spanish-speaking immigrants. However, I would argue that a U.S. citizen at birth cannot be characterized as an immigrant to his or her home country.