Archives

ILCM Has a New Executive Director

Contact: Melissa Pfeiffer, Associate Director, ILCM, 651-641-1011 ext. 201

SAINT PAUL, MN, July 19, 2019 —The Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota (ILCM) has selected Veena A. Iyer, JD as our new executive director. Iyer will begin at ILCM on September 9th.

“In this time in our nation’s history, it is vital to defend and advance the rights of immigrants and refugees in our communities,” said Iyer. “The Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota has long been at the forefront of these efforts in the Upper Midwest, and it is my privilege to join this team.”

ILCM board chair Irma Márquez Trapero welcomed Iyer to the team, saying, “We at ILCM have a big task ahead of us to not only continue to provide exceptional legal support, but also to continue to act boldly as community leaders at a time when our immigrant and refugee communities are targets of hateful and racist attacks. Veena Iyer is an outstanding and fearless advocate and we are excited to have her lead ILCM into the future.”

Serving immigrant and other underserved populations is a passion for Iyer. She began her career as an Equal Justice Works Fellow and staff attorney at Legal Aid Chicago (formerly the Legal Assistance Foundation of Metropolitan Chicago), where she represented clients, created and managed a legal clinic for low-income immigrant students, and conducted English and Spanish presentations for community members and service providers. In Minnesota, Iyer has represented low-income clients as a pro bono attorney with ILCM, Tubman and Standpoint.

Iyer has worked at the Nilan Johnson Lewis law firm since 2011, and was named shareholder in 2015. She is the chair of the Diversity & Inclusion Working Group at the firm, received Minnesota Lawyer’s Diversity & Inclusion Award in 2018, and was named to the Minnesota Super Lawyers list in 2019. She is licensed to practice law in Minnesota and Illinois.

An active community leader, Iyer is a past president of the Minnesota Asian Pacific American Bar Association, is a member of the organization’s Advisory Board and its Judicial Committee, and received the organization’s Leadership Award. She has held numerous board roles with Minnesota Women Lawyers and was honored with the Service to MWL Award. She also serves on the board of directors at Portico Healthnet as vice chair and member of the Finance Committee.

Iyer’s educational background includes a BA in History from the University of Chicago (with honors) and a JD from Harvard University, cum laude. She speaks conversational Spanish and Tamil and basic Russian.

Quick Facts About Asylum

(For a printable PDF version of this Fact Sheet click here.)

What is Asylum?

Asylum is a legal protection defined by U.S. immigration law and international laws and human rights protections. Foreign nationals may apply for asylum if they are already in the United States, regardless of how they entered, or at an authorized point of entry.

An asylee, a person granted asylum, is a person who has to flee their country of origin due to persecution, or fear of persecution, based on their race, nationality, political opinion, religion or membership in a particular social group. While asylum is not a permanent legal resident status, asylees may apply for a green card one year after receiving asylum in the United States.

Asylees receive protection from being returned to their country of origin, are authorized to work in the United States, may apply for a social security number, and may petition to bring family members to the United States.

What is the normal asylum process?

U.S. asylum applications may take two forms: affirmative and defensive. An asylum applicant must be physically present in the United States or at a port of entry to apply. They may apply regardless of how they entered the country.

Under the affirmative asylum process, individuals must usually apply within one year of arrival to the United States, or immediately upon arrival at a port of entry. An affirmative application is made to a United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) officer, who then decides whether to grant asylum.

In the defensive asylum process, individuals can seek asylum as a defense against removal after U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or Customs and Border Protection (CBP) apprehends them without a valid visa inside the United States or at a port of entry. A person in the defensive asylum process is already in removal proceedings and requests asylum in immigration court. An immigration judge decides whether or not to grant asylum.

If a USCIS officer denies an affirmative application after the individual’s visa has expired, the individual is referred to removal proceedings where they can use the defensive asylum process to renew their request for asylum.

A person subject to expedited removal must indicate that they have a credible fear of returning to their country of origin. The “credible fear interview” is ordinarily conducted by a trained USCIS officer. However, in the summer of 2019, the administration ordered that credible fear interviews will be conducted by Border Patrol officers.

If the officer says that the individual does not have credible fear, authorities refer them for removal. They can then appeal the negative decision to an immigration judge.

How long does the asylum process take?

The length of the asylum process varies from six months to several years. The length of time needed to process an application depends significantly on whether it is an affirmative or defensive claim, and on the individual circumstances of the case. Under the defensive system, applicants must go through the immigration court system, which faces significant backlogs. According to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, as of July 2019, there were over 900,000 pending cases with an average wait time of 727 days. The backlog continues to worsen with funding for immigration judges failing to keep pace with the need to hire more judges.

What are the acceptance rates?

In FY 2018, 22,740 individuals were granted asylum, about 35 percent of the 64,974 individuals who underwent asylum decisions. Most asylum seekers come from China, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Mexico.

Denial Rates

Denial rates on asylum decisions increased in 2018, with 65 percent of asylum petitions denied, compared to a 42 percent denial rate in 2012 and a 50 percent denial rate in 2016. In 2018, Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered that claims of domestic violence and gang violence could no longer be used as a basis for asylum applications. That order was one of the reasons causing the rate of asylum denials to increase during the Trump Administration.

Applicants who have attorneys have a far higher approval of asylum petitions, compared to those without representation. The process is extremely complicated, and navigating immigration courts without an attorney is difficult.

Applicants who are held in detention have lower rates of approval of their asylum claims than those who are free in the community. Locating documents, witnesses and evidence needed to support an asylum claim is extremely difficult for an applicant who is held in detention.

How is asylum changing?

In January 2019, the Department of Homeland Security implemented the “Migrant Protection Protocols” (MPP) also known as “Remain in Mexico”, sending asylum seekers back to Mexico and forcing them to wait there for the completion of their immigration court proceedings. This, in effect, denies asylum seekers the protection allowed to them under international and U.S. immigration law. In many cases, asylum seekers in Mexico face the very dangers they fled, as well as having difficulty in finding places to stay and in making contact with attorneys or getting notice of court dates.

Metering

Metering is a term that Customs and Border Protection uses for a process by which it severely restricts the number of people who can request asylum at a port of entry or at a U.S.-Mexico border crossing each day. When asylum seekers reach a port of entry, they are turned away and told that they have to put their name on a waiting list. As a result of these lists, asylum seekers wait for weeks, sometimes months for an opportunity to request asylum. As of late June 2019, 19,000 asylum seekers were waiting on the Mexican side of the border for a chance to request asylum in the United States. After going through the metering process, asylum seekers then seek asylum, but most are required to remain in Mexico while the U.S. government processes their asylum application. Metering has resulted in potential asylum seekers crossing the border without authorization rather than waiting for a process that is rife with corruption and uncertainty.

Ending Asylum at the Southern Border

On July 15, 2019, the Trump administration issued a new regulation that effectively ends amnesty for any migrants arriving at the U.S. – Mexico border if they have traveled through another country. The new rule covers everyone except Mexican and Canadian citizens. The rule denies people who have traveled through a third country any opportunity to apply for asylum in the United States unless they have applied for and been denied asylum in that third country. The rule nullifies national and international obligations to protect asylees.

Several organizations, represented by attorneys from the ACLU, Center for Constitutional Rights, and Southern Poverty Law Center, filed a lawsuit on June 16 asking a federal court to declare this regulation invalid and enjoin the administration from enforcing it.

Other pending lawsuits challenge the metering and Remain in Mexico policies.

Say No to Ending Asylum in the United States

July 15, 2019 – The new rule posted by the Trump administration effectively ends asylum in the United States. This blatant violation of human rights and U.S. and international law cannot be allowed to stand.

“We are totally abrogating our international responsibilities through this regulation,” said Lenore Millibergity, interim executive director of the Immigrant Law Center of Minnesota (ILCM).  “We are condemning people who are in fear of their lives to possible death.  Every time that the United States has denied asylum to entire classes of desperate refugees in the past, we have had to look back in shame at such decisions. We must say no to this inhumane and illegal attempt to end asylum in the United States.”

The new regulation says that any asylum seekers coming through a third country will be barred from applying for asylum in the United States. That means only Mexicans, Canadians, and people arriving in small boats or swimming to our shores would be allowed to apply for asylum.

This regulation makes a mockery of U.S. asylum law, which says that time spent in a third country only bars people passing through a designated “safe third country” or having “firmly resettled” in a third country. Neither Mexico nor any Central American country is designated as a “safe third country” for the very good reason that none of these countries is safe.

Despite the dangers asylum-seekers face, this administration’s inhumane and illegal “Remain in Mexico” policy already sends them back to danger in Mexico. According to Doctors Without Borders, “more than 45 percent of 378 patients treated by MSF in Nuevo Laredo [between January and May] have suffered at least one episode of violence in the city, as they waited to cross into the US.” U.S. immigration authorities send vulnerable refugee families to Tamaulipas, despite U.S. State Department warnings of crime and kidnappings there. The State Department warnings advise against all travel in Tamaulipas, placing the state at the same risk level as Syria and Afghanistan.

“Neither this appalling new regulation nor the inhumane ‘Remain in Mexico’ policy can stand,” Millibergity said. “The courts must act, and swiftly, to protect not only asylum seekers but also the rule of law in the United States.”

Summer Transitions

Two full-time staff members transitioned into new positions at ILCM this spring and in June we welcomed 15 summer interns.  

Jennifer Stohl Powell by Mon Non for ILCM

Jennifer Stohl Powell began working as ILCM’s legal director in June. Jennifer is an experienced immigration attorney and has handled cases at ILCM for refugees and domestic violence and crime victims for the last two years. Before ILCM, she worked at Southern Minnesota Regional Legal Services (SMRLS) for over 20 years and supervised SMRLS’ immigration and farm worker unit for 13 years. She is a graduate of Carleton College, the University of Minnesota Law School, and she holds a master of arts degree in nonprofit management from Hamline University. Jennifer states that ”she is thrilled to serve ILCM staff and clients in this new role.”  

In May, Griselda Gurrola transitioned into the full-time position of volunteer coordinator. Griselda has worked at ILCM since October 2017 as a receptionist. Previously, she worked for more than two years with two private attorneys. She is also currently enrolled in the Paralegal Program at Inver Hills Community College. 

Along with these staff changes, ILCM welcomes 15 summer interns. Among them:  

Photo provided by Ana Delgado

Ana Delgado joined ILCM as a law clerk under interim executive director Lenore Millibergity. She is currently studying law at the University of Minnesota. An immigrant herself, Ana is passionate about ILCM’s mission and looks forward to working one-on-one clients. 

Amalia Chiapperino is one of the five interns assisting with Detainee Legal Assistance calls. A senior at Macalester, Amalia is finishing her bachelor’s in international studies with an Arabic minor. After graduation she is interested in pursuing law school to work in human rights or immigration law. She joined ILCM with the hopes of learning new skills and serving the Minnesota immigrant community.  

ILCM also said goodbye to Margaret Martin and to Sandra Portilla who graduated from the University of Minnesota and is beginning a new career path in family and social services.  

Listen to the Children

As part of a legal action to force a change in conditions under which children are held, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law filed transcripts of some of the attorneys’ interview with children. Here are some of the children’s stories:

The following are excerpts from declarations filed in connection with the request for Temporary Restraining Order in Flores v. Barr

About unsafe / unsanitary conditions

We are in a metal cage with 20 other teenagers with babies and young children. We have one mat we need to share with each other. It is very cold. We each got a mylar blanket, but it is not enough to warm up. There are benches but we cannot sleep there. Sometimes it is so crowded we cannot find a place to sleep, so they allow a few of us to sleep outside the fenced area. The lights are all of the time. (Age 16, female)

I’m hungry here at Clint all the time. I’m so hungry that I have woken up in the middle of the night with hunger. Sometimes I wake up from hunger at 4 a.m., sometimes at other hours. I’m too scared to ask the officials here for any more food, even though there is not enough food here for me. (Age 12, male)

We slept on mats on the floor and gave us aluminum blankets. They took our baby’s diapers, baby formula, and all of our belongings. Our clothes were still wet and we were very cold, so we got sick… I’ve been in the US for six days and I have never been offered a shower or been able to brush my teeth. There is no soap and our clothes are dirty. They have never been washed. (Age 16, female,)

Three days ago my baby soiled his clothes. I had no place to wash the clothes so I could not put them back on my baby because when he went to the bathroom his poop came out of his diaper and all over his clothing. Since then, my baby of only three months has only been wearing a small little jacket made of t-shirt material. I have nothing else for my son to wear…. I have been told they do not have any clothes here at this place. I just want my baby to be warm nough. I am having to make sure I carry my baby super close to me to keep his little body warm. (Age 17, female)

They told us that we could only have one layer of clothing, and they threw away the rest of our clothes in the garbage. (Age 16, male)

My baby got wet and I had to take his pants off two days ago and I have not been able to get any pants for him. (Age 18, female)

The day we arrived, my baby became sick. She could not open her eyes and had a fever which got much worse during the day. I asked the guard for help and he told me to “just deal with it.” I asked for help again, and was ignored. The third time I asked, I was crying because she was so much worse I was very worried for her. After two days, they took her to the doctor.” (Age unknown, female)

We have only bathed once since being detained. On June 4th, we were taken to an area with about 28 showers. We bathed and brushed our teeth. Since then, however, we have been able to bathe. I have not been able to wash and clean my baby since June 4th. We do not have toothbrushes or toothpaste or towels in the cages. My daughter’s onesie is very dirty. I have not been able to wash it since June 4th. (Age 17, female)

The day after we arrived here, my baby began vomiting and having diarrhea. I asked to see a doctor and they did not take us. I asked again the next day and the guard said “She doesn’t have the face of a sick baby. She doesn’t need to see a doctor.” My baby daughter has not had medicine since we first arrived. She has a very bad cough, fever and continues to vomit and have diarrhea. (Age 16, female)

At Ursula, we have not been able to shower. The toilet is out in the open in the cage, there is no door for any privacy. There is water but no soap to wash our hands. There are no paper towels to dry our hands. We have not been given a toothbrush or toothpaste to brush our teeth. (Age 17, male)

I was given a blanket and a mattress, but then, at 3:00 a.m., the guards took the blanket and mattress. My baby was left sleeping on the floor. In fact, almost every night, the guards wake us at 3:00 a.m. and take away our sleeping mattresses and blankets. They leave babies, even little babies of two or three months, sleeping on the cold floor. For me, because I am so pregnant, sleeping on the floor is very painful for my back and hips. I think the guards act this way to punish us. (Age 17, female)

Once, I needed clean clothes for my baby because she threw up but when I asked for them I was told they didn’t have any available. She is still in the same dirty clothes. (Age 17, female)

Children Taking Care of Children

I started taking care of xxx (age 5) in the Ice Box after they separated her from her father. I did not know either of them before that. She was very upset. The workers did nothing to try to comfort her. I tried to comfort her and she has been with me ever since. XXX sleeps on a mat with me on the concrete floor. We spend all day every day in that room. There are no activities, only crying. (Age 15, female)

There are little kids here who have no one to take care of them, not even a big brother or sister. Some kids are only two or three years old and they have no one to take care of them. (Age 11, male)

I am in a room with dozens of other boys. Some have been as young as 3 or 4 years old. Some cry. Right now, there is a 12 year old who cries a lot. Others try to comfort him. One of the officers makes fun of those who cry. (Age 17, male)

Family Separation

I was apprehended with my father. The immigration agents separated me from my father right away. I was very frightened and scared. I cried. I have not seen my father again… I have had a cold and cough for several days. I have not seen a doctor and I have not been given any medicine. (Age 5, male)

They took us away from our grandmother and now we are all alone. They have not given us to our mother. We have been here for a long time. I have to take care of my little sister. She is very sad because she misses our mother and grandmother very much… We sleep on a cement bench. There are two mats in the room, but the big kids sleep on the mats so we have to sleep on the cement bench. (Age 8, male)

At 3 AM the next day the officers told us that our grandmother would be taken away. My grandmother tried to show the officers a paper signed by my parents saying that my grandmother had been entrusted to take care of us. The officers rejected the paperwork saying that it had to signed by a judge. Then the officers took my dear grandmother away. We have not seen her since that moment. (Age 12, female)