Immigration Clinic: Amicus Briefs

The Immigration Clinic has submitted amicus (“friend of the court”) briefs in a wide range of federal and state litigation, including cases about eligibility for asylum, Arizona-style legislation, and deportation and crimes.

You can download a copy of the briefs below.

• Pankajkumar Patel, et al v. Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argues that the jurisdictional bar at 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(B)(i) must be read to preserve judicial review of all threshold statutory eligibility determinations for the enumerated forms of immigration relief.
  Read the brief

• Hollingsworth v. Zuchowski et al, 2019 WL 4670669 (S.D. Fla. 2019)

  Filed on behalf of Asista Immigration Assistance and other national groups. This brief argues that survivors of intimate partner violence can self-petition for immigration status based on the status of the abuser even if the spouses did not reside together after marriage.
  Read the brief

• Carlos Castillo-Perez, 27 I&N Dec. 664 (A.G. 2019)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argued against the U.S. Attorney General adopting a rule that multiple DUIs automatically prevent a person from showing good moral character, as that phrase is defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  Read the brief

• Pankajkumar Patel, et al v. U.S. Attorney General, 917 F.3d 1319 (11th Cir. 2019), cert. granted.

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief to the En Banc Eleventh Circuit argued that jurisdictional restrictions in the Immigration and Nationality Act do not apply to eligibility determinations for discretionary relief, including findings of fact.
  Read the brief

• Montoya-Aguilar v. U.S. Atty Gen., 714 Fed.Appx. 116 (3d Cir. 2018)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argued that Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s decision to reinstate a prior removal order against a person does not deprive the person of the right to apply for asylum.
  Read the brief

• B.R.C.M., a Juvenile v. Fla. Dept. of Children & Families, 215 So.3d 1219 (Fla. 2017)

  Filed by University of Miami School of Law Children & Youth Clinic, Health Rights Clinic and Immigration Clinic to the Supreme Court of Florida. This amicus brief illustrates the impact that a restrictive interpretation of Florida’s dependency law would have on noncitizen children seeking protection in the United States.
  Read the brief

• Delgadillo-Ramos v. State of Florida, 229 So. 3d 1234 (Fla. 3d Dist. App. 2017)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, South Florida Chapter, and National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild. This brief argued that undocumented noncitizens can be prejudiced for the purpose of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim if their defense counsel fails to advise them of the immigration consequences of their plea agreement.
  Read the brief

• Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, 137 S.Ct. 1562 (2017)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argues that statutory rape convictions involving young people close in age should not be considered aggravated felonies under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  Read the brief

• Garcia v. U.S. Attorney General, 859 F.3d 406 (7th Cir. 2017)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This “stories” brief illustrates the devastating impact on bona fide asylum seekers that interpreting the Immigration and Nationality Act to eliminate access to asylum for people subject to reinstatement of removal.
  Read the brief

• Martinez Cazun v. U.S. Atty Gen., 856 F.3d 249 (3rd Cir. 2017)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. Same as above.
  Read the brief

• Jimenez-Morales v. U.S. Atty. Gen., 821 F.3d 1307 (11th Cir. 2016)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. Same as above.
  Read the brief

• Khoury v. Asher, 667 Fed.Appx. 966 (9th Cir. 2016)

  Filed on behalf of 72 law professors. This brief argues that mandatory detention statute is limited to those individuals who were taken into custody directly “when . . . released” from such custody.
  Read the brief

• Matter of Silva-Trevino, 26 I.&N. Dec. 826 (BIA 2016)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, Immigrant Defense Project, and the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild. This brief argues that the categorical approach, which focus on the elements of an offense rather than the underlying facts, governs whether a crime involves moral turpitude under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  Read the brief

• Sopo v. U.S. Atty Gen., 825 F.3d 1199 (11th Cir. 2016)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association and other organizations . This “stories” brief illustrates how noncitizens with meritorious claims are subject to unnecessary and prolonged detention under the government’s interpretation of a mandatory detention provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  Read the brief

• Ramirez-Mejia. U.S. Atty Gen., 794 F.3d 485 (5th Cir. 2015)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argues that asylum remains available to individuals who have been previously deported.
  Read the brief

• U.S. v. Rodriguez-Vega, 797 F.3d 781 (9th Cir. 2015)

  Filed on behalf of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, National Association for Public Defense, Immigrant Defense Project, Immigrant Legal Resource Center, National Immigration Project. This brief argues that the Sixth Amendment requires defense attorney advise their noncitizen clients taking pleas that will trigger deportation of the virtually certain possibility of their deportation, as opposed to the mere possibility of deportation.
  Read the brief

• Yanez v. State of Florida, 170 So.3d 9 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2015)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, South and Central Florida Chapters. This brief argues that the judicial warning that deportation is possible does not cure prejudice stemming from the failure of defense counsel to advise noncitizen clients that their plea agreements will result in virtually certain deportation.
  Read the brief

• Galarza v. County of Lehigh, 745 F.3d 634 (3rd Cir. 2014)

  Filed on behalf of 60 law professors. This brief argued that local jails are liable for making unlawful arrests when they hold people for Immigration and Customs Enforcement pursuant to detainers.
  Read the brief

• Matter of Dominguez-Rodriguez, 26 I.&N. Dec. 408 (BIA 2014)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argues that the categorical approach to analyzing the immigration consequences of crimes should govern the inquiry into whether a person has “a single offense involving possession for one's own use of thirty grams or less of marijuana” within the meaning of section 237(a)(2)(B)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
  Read the brief

• Chaidez v. United States, 133 S.Ct. 1103 (2013)

  Filed as counsel for American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argues that the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Padilla v. Kentucky announced a retroactive rule under Teague v. Lane. Chaidez sought to rely upon Padilla in federal post-conviction proceedings to vacate her pre-Padilla criminal plea for mail fraud.
  Read the brief

• Hernandez v. State of Florida, 124 So.3d 757 (Fla. 2013)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, South and Central Chapters. This brief argues that the judicial warning that deportation is possible does not cure prejudice stemming from the failure of defense counsel to advise noncitizen clients that their plea agreements will result in virtually certain deportation.
  Read the brief

• Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights, et al. v. Governor of Georgia, 691 F.3d 1250 (11th Cir. 2012)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association. This brief argues against Georgia’s anti-immigrant law and in support of finding the law preempted by federal immigration law.
  Read the brief

• Diaz v. State, 65 So. 3d 1079 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, South and Central Florida Chapters. This brief argues that the judicial warning that deportation is possible does not cure prejudice stemming from the failure of defense counsel to advise noncitizen clients that their plea agreements will result in virtually certain deportation.
  Read the brief

• Hernandez v. State, 61 So. 3d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, South and Central Florida Chapters. Same as above.
  Read the brief

• Flores v. State, 57 So. 3d 218 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)

  Filed on behalf of American Immigration Lawyers Association, South and Central Florida Chapters, support of rehearing. Same as above.
  Read the brief