How to file a Mandamus in Federal Court

[Lemonslice 4,989]

9 hours ago, wazzujoel said:

Since USCIS are no longer processing any cases for people that came on CHNV (Biden's Humanitarian Parole for Cubans, Hattians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans), I am questioning if I should start this process of filing a lawsuit. I have 3 family members that are still pending permeant residency with application dates from April 2024. I personally filled out 5 i-485 applications for this family group and 2 of the 5 were approved in September. Their parole period ends this spring, and I know that since they are pending residency they will be allowed to stay legally until a decision has been made with their application... However once their parole period ends, so does their work authorization... and from what I have read USCIS is stopping work on all applications related to anyone who came on CHNV which means they wont be able to get a work authorization renewal as they wait for the "indefinite suspension of processing any case of a CHNV individual" to end.  

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-pauses-immigration-applications-for-certain-migrants-welcomed-under-biden/

 

How is this legal? Does Trump expect these immigrants who are here legally to just stop working, and go on public assistance until USCIS decides to start processing their applications again? These immigrants that I helped come here are not on any form of public assistance, work full time on minimum wage paying jobs that Americans don't want, pay taxes, and abide all laws. 

About the bolded part, how do you know for sure? 

I would also prepare a plan B. 

[wazzujoel 81]

8 hours ago, Lemonslice said:

About the bolded part, how do you know for sure? 

I would also prepare a plan B. 

 

I am 99.9% on the bolded part? I have read multiple cases where someone comes to the US, and then while here they find some immigration path to become a Permanent Resident, and while they are waiting for a decision on their i-485 that status here lapses and they are allowed to stay until a decision has been made. I see no reason why this should be any different. Everything I have read is that when your status expires but you have a pending i-485 you are allowed to stay indefinitely until a decision has been made; however, if the application ends up being denied than the foreigner is required to immediately leave the country because they no longer have any legal basis for remaining. 

 

I know you have been around these forums a lot and you seem quite knowledgeable.... Are you saying you've never heard of situations such as this? This being CHNV seems pretty irrelevant in my opinion, because although that was their legal entry into the country (call it a 2 year tourist visa if you want) was CHNV, at this point in time they legally applied for permanent residency meeting all conditions of the 1966 Cuban Adjustment Act Law. They applied for for residency 1 year before their "2 year tourist window" expired, and USCIS has taken more than the 180 days to process a residency application which brings USCIS in violation of the law per 8 USC Chapter 13. Thoughts? Do you really think that Trump will try and deport someone who has a pending permanent residency application? 

 

It's really quite frustrating to me... The 5 people I sponsored are all great people. One is in HS and graduating this spring with honors. One is my partner. The other three have full time jobs, working hard, paying taxes, not living on any form of government assistance... So USCIS approved the dad of this family unit, and then a friend of my partner. Who has not been approved is my partner, her mom, and her brother. All five i-485 applications were exactly the same with the only difference being biographic data.... It's the same code, just different names and dates. USCIS then approves 2 of them in roughly 90 days and then the other 3 just remain in limbo and then they announce they are not going to process any application regarding people that arrived with CHNV no matter if they have a legal basis for being here. 

[wazzujoel 81]

14 hours ago, Boiler said:

I remember Cubans who moved to Spain, became Spanish citizens entered on the VWP overstayed the 90 days and the filed under the CAA. So they would have had status for 90 days and the nothing until they filed.

 

The HP programme I tend to think of as a 2 year tourist visa with benefits, free health insurance, work priveleges etc, really makes no sense and seems even Biden administration knew it was invested with Fraud.

 

This programme was not a law, Congress was not involved, I assume there was seen to be some political benefit.

 

Although I sponsored these people under Biden's Humanitarian Parole program, I do agree with you that the program was very disorganized, had instances of people getting paroled through fraud, and was very short sighted in vetting the people and making sure they had actual support here in the USA. A large fault to the programs failures should be attributed to USCIS inadequacies which is not only seen with this CHNV program but is wide spread across ALL immigration paths. Not processing applications generally in order, and not using standard practices for vetting applications are two huge reasons for the failures of our agency in charge of making sure we have fair, ethical immigration pathways.  USCIS needs to instantly stop the practice of processing newer cases while older cases remain untouched only to prop up their average processing times. If you aren't going to fairly process cases that arrive legally then don't be surprised when desperate people find other ways to skirt a system that isn't even following their own laws and rules. 

 

Politics aside - I am not arguing on this forum about what should have been done but talking about real people that are personally apart of my family. I am looking to do what is best for my three people. You stated that they are not immigrants and I am asking you what are they then? These three people are foreigners who were allowed to legally come here temporarily for 2 years. It's perfectly fine if you want to think of this as a two year tourist visa they received, however I will correct you that the people I sponsored did not receive cash benefits from the government, did not receive food benefits from the government, do not receive any sort of housing stipend from the government, nor do they receive health insurance from the government. They paid roughly 500 to USCIS to apply for the authorization to work in this country, which USCIS granted 30 days after their arrival, and then they got overnight jobs at Walmart stocking shelfs because those were jobs Americans didn't want because Walmart couldn't find anyone to do that work. In the last 1.5 years they have worked full time, and have paid taxes on the money, bought cars, pay for insurance, pay for a non-subsidized apartment, and would love to buy a house this summer if they can find one. They have applied for Permanent Residency i-485 under the 1966 law titled Cuban Adjustment Act. They have satisfied all conditions of this US law and as such 2 of the 5 people I sponsored on CHNV have been approved. The other three will be approved if someone at USCIS bothers to look at their application that they submitted 10 months ago. 

 

So if they are not immigrants what are they? Are you saying they are "non-immigrants that have legally applied for permanent residency per US law"?  

[Lemonslice 4,989]

I'm not an expert.  However, I don't think we can assume that the rules from yesterday still apply today or tomorrow.  

 

This part of the article is what had me worried for you.

 

"But under the internal USCIS directive, officials will no longer be able to process any applications for these programs or any other benefit if the requests were filed by migrants who arrived in the U.S. under the targeted Biden administration policies.

 

"This effectively freezes their ability to move into another legal status," said Lynden Melmed, who served as the top lawyer at USCIS during the administration of former President George W. Bush and now works as a partner at Berry Appleman & Leiden LLP. "In the interim, they would remain susceptible to removal from the country if the government terminates their parole status.""

[wazzujoel 81]

1 hour ago, Lemonslice said:

I'm not an expert.  However, I don't think we can assume that the rules from yesterday still apply today or tomorrow.  

 

This part of the article is what had me worried for you.

 

"But under the internal USCIS directive, officials will no longer be able to process any applications for these programs or any other benefit if the requests were filed by migrants who arrived in the U.S. under the targeted Biden administration policies.

 

"This effectively freezes their ability to move into another legal status," said Lynden Melmed, who served as the top lawyer at USCIS during the administration of former President George W. Bush and now works as a partner at Berry Appleman & Leiden LLP. "In the interim, they would remain susceptible to removal from the country if the government terminates their parole status.""

 

hm. I really would be nice if someone official within USCIS would offer some clarification on what they have been directed to specifically do. Because it appears that USCIS might be "effectively freezing" them in their status preventing their ability to move to another legal status; however, unless I misunderstand immigration policies, I believe my fiancée (as an example) became "Pending permanent residency" April 10th 2024 when USCIS received her application and sent us a i-797C receipt of i-485 application informing us that she is pending AOS. From everything I have read, if someone has a pending AOS than they have a protected status of being removed from the country even if the underlying pathway they arrived on expired. The thing is, this is pretty new territory for someone who arrived on CHNV and is seeking AOS based on the law of CAA of 1966. As far as I can tell, her status of "pending AOS" should allow her lawful presence in the USA until USCIS makes a determination on her Residency application. Perhaps that will be the entirety of Trumps presidency. 

 

Note per US law 8 USC chapter 13, USCIS is supposed to make a residency decision within 180 days which is the whole point of this thread..... My fiancée is now going on 316 days of pending AOS and I am wondering if filing a writ of Mandamus is advised in a situation where USCIS is already in violation of immigration law and unsubstantiated information is being rumored that USCIS plans to not work on such cases.  Thoughts? 

 

btw - thanks for the messages. I understand not many here will claim to be experts however there are a lot here who have been around the community a lot so I value the opinions I see here. Reading the forum messages on this site has allowed me to file a successful K1 application That was approved by USCIS before we abandoned it due to the CHNV HP route, file 5 successful CHNV HP petitions that were approved, file 5 i-765's that were all approved, and file 5 i-485's with 2 approved and 3 in limbo. Never received an RFE and I credit the help I have received here for a good chunk of that success.  

[Boiler 46,277]

The CHNV programme is no more, I do not know how many applicants are outstanding, many many years worth, I do know once it got going they were overwhelmed tweaked it but still had a many year backlog.

 

i do know from years of watching these things is never to assumewhat the media say is correct.

 

Most of course will have no way of adjusting anyway.

[TBoneTX 46,294]

Dude, contact your U.S. Senator or Congressman's immigration liaison ASAP, if you haven't yet.  This is too big for you to fight alone.

[Boiler 46,277]

Could you link to the law, I would think the average adjustment case is over a year.

 

i do not see how a regular adjustment could be banned?

[Crazy Cat 42,563]

3 hours ago, wazzujoel said:

Note per US law 8 USC chapter 13, USCIS is supposed to make a residency decision within 180 days which is the whole point of this thread

 The only reference I have found says that part of an improvement plan, USCIS "should" make a determination within 180 days.  I'm not certain USCIS is bound to a hard deadline.  

[OldUser 7,910]

53 minutes ago, Crazy Cat said:

 The only reference I have found says that part of an improvement plan, USCIS "should" make a determination within 180 days.  I'm not certain USCIS is bound to a hard deadline.  

Yep, should is not a must

[wazzujoel 81]

15 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

Dude, contact your U.S. Senator or Congressman's immigration liaison ASAP, if you haven't yet.  This is too big for you to fight alone.

 

Thanks TboneTX. I have contacted my congressman when the news broke. One issue with the news is that the CBS news article sited a undisclosed "leaked internal memo" that stated that USCIS is not to process any Residency applications or work authorizations or any other  application if the person arrived via CHNV. This hasn't been official announced however several sources have claimed that the memo and directive is real. I contacted my congressman pointing them to the CBS news article (posted below if you are curious) but I am not sure how much help my congressman and senator will be with secret, closed door, possibly-illegal actions Trump directed USCIS will be. But hopefully these elected officials can intervene before things get out of control. 

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-pauses-immigration-applications-for-certain-migrants-welcomed-under-biden/

 

14 hours ago, Crazy Cat said:

 The only reference I have found says that part of an improvement plan, USCIS "should" make a determination within 180 days.  I'm not certain USCIS is bound to a hard deadline.  

 

Thank you for the clarification, I was reading that as more of a requirement. You're correct it does say "should" make a determination within 180 days. Amazing how such a small word can turn a sentence from something that would add accountability to one that really is kinda meaningless. 

 

[Lemonslice 4,989]

1 hour ago, wazzujoel said:

 

Thanks TboneTX. I have contacted my congressman when the news broke. One issue with the news is that the CBS news article sited a undisclosed "leaked internal memo" that stated that USCIS is not to process any Residency applications or work authorizations or any other  application if the person arrived via CHNV. This hasn't been official announced however several sources have claimed that the memo and directive is real. I contacted my congressman pointing them to the CBS news article (posted below if you are curious) but I am not sure how much help my congressman and senator will be with secret, closed door, possibly-illegal actions Trump directed USCIS will be. But hopefully these elected officials can intervene before things get out of control. 

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-pauses-immigration-applications-for-certain-migrants-welcomed-under-biden/

 

 

Thank you for the clarification, I was reading that as more of a requirement. You're correct it does say "should" make a determination within 180 days. Amazing how such a small word can turn a sentence from something that would add accountability to one that really is kinda meaningless. 

 

Please keep us updated.  

[Boiler 46,277]

So much misinformation out there all I will say is time will tell and I certainly would not assume the media has it right.