Executive Office for Immigration Review – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 101 - 150 of 157
Reorganization of Regulations on Control of Employment of Aliens
The Homeland Security Act of 2002, as amended, transferred the functions of the former Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) from the Department of Justice to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); however, it retained within the Department of Justice the functions of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), a separate agency within the Department of Justice. Because the existing regulations often intermingled the responsibilities of the former INS and EOIR, this transfer required a reorganization of title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) in February 2003, including the establishment of a new chapter V in 8 CFR pertaining to EOIR. As part of this reorganization, a number of regulations pertaining to the responsibilities of DHS intentionally were duplicated in the new chapter V because of shared responsibilities. The Department of Justice now has determined that most of the duplicated regulations in part 1274a pertain to functions that are DHS's responsibility and do not need to be reproduced in EOIR's regulations in chapter V. This interim rule, therefore, deletes unnecessary regulations in part 1274a and makes appropriate reference to the applicable DHS regulations.
Professional Conduct for Practitioners-Rules and Procedures, and Representation and Appearances
This document contains a correction to the final rule published Thursday, December 18, 2008 at 73 FR 76914, relating to the rules and procedures that govern the standards of representation and professional conduct for practitioners who appear before the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).
Professional Conduct for Practitioners-Rules and Procedures, and Representation and Appearances
This final rule adopts, in part, the proposed changes to the rules and procedures concerning the standards of representation and professional conduct for practitioners who appear before the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which includes the immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board). It also clarifies who is authorized to represent and appear on behalf of individuals in proceedings before the Board and the immigration judges. Current regulations set forth who may represent individuals in proceedings before EOIR and also set forth the rules and procedures for imposing disciplinary sanctions against practitioners who engage in criminal, unethical, or unprofessional conduct, or in frivolous behavior before EOIR. The final rule increases the number of grounds for discipline, improves the clarity and uniformity of the existing rules, and incorporates miscellaneous technical and procedural changes. The changes herein are based upon the Attorney General's initiative for improving the adjudicatory processes for the immigration judges and the Board, as well as EOIR's operational experience in administering the disciplinary program since the current process was established in 2000.
Voluntary Departure: Effect of a Motion To Reopen or Reconsider or a Petition for Review
The Department of Justice is publishing this final rule to amend the regulations regarding voluntary departure. This rule adopts, without substantial change, the proposed rule under which a grant of voluntary departure is automatically withdrawn upon the filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider with the immigration judge or the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) or a petition for review in a federal court of appeals. This final rule adopts, with some modification, the proposed rule under which an immigration judge will set a presumptive civil monetary penalty of $3,000 if the alien fails to depart within the time allowed. However, this rule adopts only in part the proposals to amend the provisions relating to the voluntary departure bond. Finally, this rule adopts the notice advisals in the proposed rule and incorporates additional notice requirements in light of public comments.
Board of Immigration Appeals: Affirmance Without Opinion, Referral for Panel Review, and Publication of Decisions as Precedents
This proposed rule would amend the Department of Justice (Department) regulations regarding the administrative review procedures of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) in three ways. First, this rule provides greater flexibility for the Board to decide, in the exercise of its discretion, whether to issue an affirmance without opinion (AWO) or any other type of decision. This rule clarifies that the criteria the Board uses in deciding to invoke its AWO authority are solely for its own internal guidance, and that the Board's decision depends on the Board's judgment regarding its resources and is not reviewable. The revision related to AWO is needed to address divergent precedent in the United States Courts of Appeals regarding the reviewability of the Board's decision to issue an AWO. Finally, this revision clarifies that when the Board issues an AWO or a short decision adopting some or all of the immigration judge's decision, the decision is generally based on issues and claims of errors raised on appeal and is not to be construed as waiving a party's obligation to raise issues and exhaust claims of error before the Board. Second, this rule expands the authority to refer cases for three-member panel review for a small class of particularly complex cases involving complex or unusual issues of law or fact. Third, this rule amends the regulations relating to precedent decisions of the Board by authorizing publication of decisions either by a majority of the panel members or by a majority of permanent Board members and clarifying the relevant considerations for designation of precedents. These revisions implement, in part, the Memorandum for Immigration Judges and Members of the Board of Immigration Appeals issued by the Attorney General on August 9, 2006.
Board of Immigration Appeals: Composition of Board and Temporary Board Members
This final rule adopts without change an interim rule with request for comments published in the Federal Register on December 7, 2006. The interim rule amended the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) regulations relating to the organization of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) by adding four Board member positions, thereby expanding the Board to 15 members. This rule also expanded the list of persons eligible to serve as temporary Board members to include senior EOIR attorneys with at least ten years of experience in the field of immigration law.
Inflation Adjustment for Civil Monetary Penalties Under Sections 274A, 274B, and 274C of the Immigration and Nationality Act
As required by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Justice are publishing these rules adjusting for inflation the civil monetary penalties assessed or enforced by those two Departments under sections 274A, 274B, and 274C of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The adjusted civil money penalties are calculated according to the specific formula laid out by law, and will be effective for violations occurring on or after the effective date of these rules.
Voluntary Departure: Effect of a Motion To Reopen or Reconsider or a Petition for Review
The immigration laws provide that an alien may request and receive a grant of voluntary departure in certain cases; such a grant allows an alien to depart voluntarily during a specified period of time after the order is issued, in lieu of being removed under an order of removal. Voluntary departure is an agreed upon exchange of benefits between the alien and the government that provides tangible benefits for aliens who do depart during the time allowed. There are severe statutory penalties, however, for aliens who voluntarily fail to depart during the time allowed for voluntary departure. This proposed rule would amend the Department of Justice (Department) regulations regarding voluntary departure to allow an alien to elect to file a motion to reopen or reconsider, but also to provide that the alien's filing of a motion to reopen or reconsider prior to the expiration of the voluntary departure period will have the effect of automatically terminating the grant of voluntary departure. Similarly, the rule also provides that the alien's filing of a petition for judicial review shall automatically terminate the grant of voluntary departure. In other words, the rule would afford the alien the option either to abide by the terms of the grant of voluntary departure, in lieu of an order of removal, or to forgo the benefits of voluntary departure and instead challenge the final order on the merits in a motion to reopen or reconsider or a petition for review. If the alien elects to seek further review and forgo voluntary departure, the alien will be subject to the alternate order of removal that was issued in conjunction with the grant of voluntary departure, similar to other aliens who were found to be removable. But this approach also means he or she will not be subject to the penalties for failure to depart voluntarily. The rule also amends the bond provisions for voluntary departure to make clear that an alien's failure to post a voluntary departure bond as required will not have the effect of exempting the alien from the penalties for failure to depart under the grant of voluntary departure. Aliens who are required to post a voluntary departure bond remain liable for the amount of the voluntary departure bond if they do not depart as they had agreed. However, the rule clarifies the circumstances in which aliens will be able to get a refund of the bond amount upon proof that they are physically outside of the United States. In addition, the rule provides that, at the time the immigration judge issues a grant of voluntary departure, the immigration judge will also set a specific dollar amount of not less than $3,000 as a civil money penalty if the alien voluntarily fails to depart within the time allowed.
Codes of Conduct for the Immigration Judges and Board Members
The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) is proposing newly formulated Codes of Conduct for the immigration judges of the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge and for the Board members of the Board of Immigration Appeals. EOIR is seeking public comment on the codes before final publication.
Jurisdiction and Venue in Removal Proceedings
This proposed rule would amend the Department of Justice (Department) regulations addressing jurisdiction and venue in removal proceedings. The amendment is necessary due to the increasing number of removal hearings being conducted by telephone and video conference. The proposed rule establishes that venue shall lie at the place of the hearing as identified on the charging document or initial hearing notice, unless an immigration judge has granted a change of venue to a different location. The hearing location is the same whether or not the immigration judge or a party to the proceeding appears at the hearing location in person or participates in the hearing by telephone or video conference. The proposed rule also establishes that removal proceedings shall be deemed to be completed at the location of the final hearing, regardless of whether all parties are physically present at that location. The Department also proposes to amend the regulations to state expressly that, when the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) files a charging document, jurisdiction vests with the Office of the Chief Immigration Judge (OCIJ) within the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR).
Board of Immigration Appeals: Composition of Board and Temporary Board Members
This interim rule amends the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) regulations relating to the organization of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) by adding four Board member positions, thereby expanding the Board to 15 members. This rule also expands the list of persons eligible to serve as temporary Board members to include senior EOIR attorneys with at least ten years of experience in the field of immigration law.
Revised General Practice Regarding First Briefing Deadline Extension Request for Detained Aliens
This notice updates an earlier advisal of a revised general practice to be followed by the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding briefing deadlines for cases before the Board in which the alien is detained. The former notice stated that the additional time period granted for a first briefing extension will generally be reduced from 21 days to 15 days, and the number of extension requests granted will generally be reduced from one per party to one per case. After further consideration, the 21 day briefing schedule will be retained. The number of extension requests granted per case, however, will still be generally reduced to one.
Revised General Practice Regarding First Briefing Deadline Extension Request for Detained Aliens
This notice advises of a revised general practice to be followed by the Board of Immigration Appeals regarding briefing deadlines for cases before the Board in which the alien is detained. The additional time period granted for a first briefing extension will generally be reduced from 21 days to 15 days, and the number of extension requests granted will generally be reduced from one per party to one per case.
Affidavits of Support on Behalf of Immigrants
This final rule adopts, with specified changes, an interim rule published by the former Immigration and Naturalization Service on October 20, 1997. This final rule clarifies several issues raised under the interim rule regarding who needs an affidavit of support, how sponsors qualify, what information and documentation they must present, and when the income of other persons may be used to support an intending immigrant's application for permanent residence. These changes are intended to make the affidavit of support process clearer and less intimidating and time-consuming for sponsors, while continuing to ensure that sponsors will have sufficient means available to support new immigrants when necessary. The final rule also makes clear that, when an alien applies for adjustment of status in removal proceedings, the immigration judge's jurisdiction to adjudicate the adjustment application includes authority to adjudicate the sufficiency of the affidavit of support.
Eligibility of Arriving Aliens in Removal Proceedings To Apply for Adjustment of Status and Jurisdiction To Adjudicate Applications for Adjustment of Status
The Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General are amending their respective agencies' regulations governing applications for adjustment of status filed by paroled arriving aliens seeking to become lawful permanent residents. The Secretary and the Attorney General are also amending the regulations to clarify when United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, or the immigration judges and the Board of Immigration Appeals of the Executive Office for Immigration Review, have jurisdiction to adjudicate applications for adjustment of status by such aliens. In addition, the Secretary and the Attorney General are requesting comments on the possibility of adopting further proposals in the future to structure the exercise of discretion in adjudicating these applications for adjustment of status.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.