GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT PARIES IN THE IMMIGRATION COURT.
At the beginning, let me explain in a nutshell a few terms that might confuse those people who do not know piculiarities of the proceedings in the U.S. immigration courts.
The Immigration Court is an administrative court - a subset of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ hereafter). Consequently, Immigration Judges (IJ hereafter) are not real independent Judges representing the Judicial power of the United States in the meaning of the U.S. Constitutional structure presuming separation of Federal Power. The Immigration Judges are federal employees hired by the federal agency DOJ. Thus, they are too dependant on the political agenda in the country. Sometimes, you can hear completely opposite feedback from different attorneys or their clients about the same Immigration Judge, because one case was determined by this Judge within the positive or neutral political agenda for immigrants, the very other case was determined within the adverse political agenda for immigrants in the U.S. So, by my own opinion, you may rare find an Immigration Judge with the state of mind as a real independent Judge would have had, in most cases you may only expect that the Immigration Judge has a state of mind of soldiers that presumes that if the general political message in the U.S. negative for immigrants, the majority of Immigration Judges, since they are a federal workers, will apply adversarial approach to determination of immigration cases. Just keep it in mind in order to not to give a lot of credits to the neutrality of the Immigration Judges.
When an immigrant appears before the Immigration Court, the opposing party is a representative of the General Counsel Office of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS hereafter). Therefore, factually, all immigrants in Immigration Courts have to resist or confront arguments made by one federal official (Counsel - the representative of the DHS) in order to convince another federal official (IJ - the representative of the DOJ) of claims they are making before the immigration courts.
*** (!!!) My explanations about the Immigration Judges should not be taken as a reason to show disrespect to them in the Court. In the Immigration Court, for you, the Immigration Judges are Judges and you must turn to them with all due respect "Your Honor, may I say something....." (!!!) So, please, under any circumstances do not say them "I read on www.underrednotice.com that you are just federal employee but not a real Judge."😊 Otherwise, you will be more likely held accountable for unacceptable or disrespectful behavior in the Court. (!!!) What I explained about their real nature is only for educational purpose and for your understanding that the Immigration Court it is not the epitomy of the U.S. Judicial Power like it would have been before Federal Independant Judges, but rather it is an administrative process of determination of your eligibility or conformity to what you claimed.***
The proceedings in the Immigration Court generally are called removal proceedings. The purpose of the removal proceedings is to determine removable out of not removable immigrants from the United States.
There are two types of the removability (1) deportable and (2) inadmissible. Any immigrant becomes deportable when he or she was legally admitted in the United States however, violated any Immigration or any other laws of the U.S. Inadmissible are those immigrants who, among others, have been convicted of, admit to having committed, or admit having committed some criminal acts enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act.
The removal proceedings consists of three different types of hearings: (1) Master hearing; (2) Individual hearing; (3)Bond hearing (for those immigrants who are detained.)
With this general knowledge, I am turning to the hearing initiating the removal proceedings - Master hearing.
IMMIGRATION MASTER HEARING - WHAT IS IT ABOUT?
Ususally the Immigration Master hearings lasts for 10-20 minutes, and because it is not so longlasting hearing, many immigrants, as well as their attorneys, underestimate the Master hearing at all.
Meanwhile, in the end of the very Master hearing, you will be ordered to be or not to be removed outside of the United States. All the consequent hearings (if any) are usually called "Individual" hearings and are held over the form of relief claimed against the order of the removability issued in the end of the Master hearing. In other words, if you ever be removed from the U.S. be sure - it will happen exclusively on the basis of the order made in the end of the Master hearing. I hope, it is now clear that the Master hearing deserves your attention.
What does it mean "a form for relief against removability"? It is what immigrants usually call as their "immigration cases" for example "asylum case." However it is not just "case," you asked for asylum because you do not want to be removed from the U.S. - in other words it is a form for relief from removability outside of the United States.
The U.S. Immigration law provides many forms for relief from the order of removability such as claim for asylum, withholding of removal, Convention against torture(CAT), family unification, victime of crime committed by the U.S. citizen and many others.
So, if, after being ordered to be removed over the Master hearing, your form for relief that you claimed in Court was granted, your order of removability is to be terminated and you are free to remain in the United States and get your permanent residence card within the appropriate period of time.
However, if your claim (form) for relief was denied (for example - your Asylum claim), the order for your removability issued at the end of the Master hearing would become the document based on which you will be removed outside of the United States.
Thus, it is clear that the Master hearing is as extremely important, as you may be removed from the United States based exclusively on the order issued in the end of the Master hearing.
THE LEGAL PURPOSES OF THE MASTER HEARING.
The Immigration Master hearing is a hearing that has nothing to do with your immigration claim for asylum, or any other forms for relief. The Master hearing is held over the single document that is called Notice to Appear (NTA hereafter). Usually, the Immigration officers serve you with the NTA for your name. This document contains several allegations against you which the Immigration officers believe are true. It also contains an official charge against you. See the NTA below for my name:
So, at the beginning of the hearing, after the IJ finishes his formal statements for the record about the nature, date and parties of the hearing, the IJ usually gives the DHS counsel the opportunity to speak to bring up the issue before the Court.
The DHS counsel usually insists that you must be removed out of the U.S. supporting his or her statements by presenting the NTA before the Court.
The IJ admits the NTA on the record by saying something like "The NTA is admitted as a piece of the evidence from the DHS and filed on the Court's record as an Exhibit 1." Then, the IJ explains to the immigrant that the IJ is going to read one allegation by one and then, the charge and the immigrant must either admit or deny each of the allegations and charge.
The first allegation in the NTA is usually the same for all. So, for example, the IJ having read the first allegation in the NTA "You are not a citizen or national of the United States." Then, he asks you if you admit or deny it.
If you are factually a citizen, you must say "I deny it, Your Honor." Usually, of course, people admit this first allegation, since only on extremely rare occasions, the DHS issues an NTA for U.S. citizens' name mistakenly. Thus, the most common answer is "I admit this allegation."
The IJ goes through all allegations one by one and then, the charge inferred on the basis of all the allegations. The IJ asks you again if you admit or deny the charge. Usually, all allegations and charge are true therefore, there is no reason for any contest and in such cases, the whole process takes 3-5 minutes.
Nevertheless, I suggest that you must pay attention to every and each word which the IJ pronounces while he is reading the allegations or charge. If any discrepancies from the official written formulations that are in the NTA – do not agree with that and state respectfully that the formulation in the NTA is different and you cannot admit or deny anything except those precise formulations are lodged in the Notice to Appear. Be confident in that the IJ or the DHS counsel cannot accuse you of anything else but precisely what and how the allegations and charge are formulatied and it is the law, not just rule of sense or assumption.
When the IJ passed through all alegation and charges he is going to explain to you his conclusion over the allegations and charge. In 99.99% cases the IJ's conclusion and order will be that you are ordered to be removed from the United States. But do not be afraid of that or panic, just read furthermore.
After the IJ decided to remove you, he must determine the country to which you will be removed from the United States. There is a nuance here... Imagine, you asked for asylum in the United States that presumably means that you have a credible fear to return to your country and, now, at the Master hearing, after the IJ asked you to what country you want to be removed, your answer is the name of the country where you lived. In this case the doubts about your fear arise themselves. It is simple logic, if you say that you agree to be deported to the country, asylum from which you claimed it is weird that you admit your returning to that country easily. Indeed, a normal person who is not a liar would never agree to be returned to the country where his life or freedom is in danger.
So, if the IJ decided not to ask you about the country to which you will be deported instead of that, he pronounced the name of your country affirmatively, there is your right to say respectfully that you do not agree with that, and ask the IJ for removing you (in case if it happens) to any safe third country but not to your home country. To do that, you need to interrupt the IJ politely and respectfully by finding the small pause between his statements and saying, "May I, Your Honor..." In most cases the IJ will give you the opportunity to say what you wanted to say. Do not be shy or afraid of expressing your arguments and standing on your case - nobody will help you except yourself.
However, if you are represented by the attorney - then, you probably will be allowed only to answer the questions that are directed to you specifically, all the other procedural objections or requests to the IJ to say something can be made only by your attorney.
Backing to the question of the country to which you might have to be deported, based on my experience, it is more likely (if not undoubtedly) notwithstanding what you say about the country, the IJ will still order you to be deported to your home country. However, your disagreement will be just consistent with the fact that you are going to ask for asylum or withholding of removal or CAT claims.
All hearings in the Immigration Courts are recorded and you can request a typed transcript of any of your hearings. Therefore, if the Judge did not care about your requests but you did it, it is the reason for appeal in the future. (if you need it)
After all, the IJ will ask you whether you would like to file any form for relief from the order making you removable. At this moment you shuld claim either for asylum or any other forms of relief. It would be better if you have a filled out form with you to file it right away at the end of the Master hearing.
At this point the Immigration Judge sets up a date for your Individual hearing during which you are going to prove that you must be granted a relief on the basis of what you claimed or applied for... That is all Master hearing...
Summarizing, Master Hearing is the hearing during which you are ordered to be removed out of the U.S.. It means that it is the only hearing about your removability. Your immigration case that might be asylum, unification with family, CAT, and whatever…, it is only form for relief from the order which you received in the end of the Master hearing.
So, why do attorneys in most cases not pay a lot of attention to the Master hearing of their clients? It happens, because the majority cases arise from the immigrants who recently crossed the southern border of the United States. Those cases are very simple and pretty similar in relation to the questions determined during the Master hearing. In these cases, the Master hearing indeed serves the formal purpose of having the IJ sustain what is written in the Notice to Appear.
Helpful Links:
Threat United States Unity
In some Immigration Courts the IJs allow the attorneys to admit in writing all allegations along with a charge in the Notice to Appear and set up an individual hearing without spending time and efforts for Master hearing. In the vast majority of cases arising from the crossing the U.S. southern border, this approach makes sense. However, such attorneys little by little is loosing their proficiency or profound grasp on the matters relevant to the Master hearing which in some cases might play a crucial role for a client.
As a good example, such a case was mine, where the Notice to Appear was issued for my name with a false allegation and false charge and the IJ based on his corrupted perception that he is above the law, falsely ordered me to be removed and no attorneys wanted to hear about false allegations and charge lodged in the Notice to Appear. Instead of critical thinking, all attorneys whom I asked for paying attention for my Master hearing that the IJ conducted in apparent violation of law, told me "Gregory, why you are focusing on these matters, focus better on your asylum claim!" However, I could not put up with my arrest and placing me in deportation proceedings for the violation that I have never committed but was placed in the NTA for my name and I am still fighting for it.
But it is another story for the next post, where I will expose each legal violation that the corrupted Immigration Judge made during my Master hearing.
More to come... Thank you for your time and please, sign up to receive email notifications about new posts.
For More Visit Our Website: Underrednotice
コメント