For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, taught Sir Isaac Newton; a concept that states a law of physics that probably does not mean as much as we think in non-physics situations. In immigration law, often actions prompt wild, usually-futile reactions. A recent example is reactions to the Pereira case, discussed here and its progenitee, Niz Chavez, here. Pereira, readers may recall from here, is the Supreme Court decision about the stop-time provision of Cancellation of Removal…

  There’s so much activity around “stop-time,” you’d think it affected a lot of people. Well, it does and it doesn’t. I’ve written about it before, like here  and here. To refresh, for certain types of relief from removal, Cancellation for Certain Permanent Residents and Cancellation of Removal for Certain Nonpermanent Residents, there are time of residence and physical presence requirements. The stop-time rules are found at 8 USC § 1229b(d): (1) Termination of continuous period. For purposes of this…

With the United States reeling from a military defeat, a flooded East, and infected South, a parched and burning West, and a rogue judiciary, let’s get into the nitty gritty of naturalization, acquiring United States citizenship. To naturalize, except for exceptions, a person must have held permanent residence for the requisite period (five years or three if married and living with a United States citizen,8 USC § 1430), have resided in the United States for this period (and after applying),…

Republican legislatures around the United States are passing laws to restrict voting by the poor and minorities that are more likely to vote against Republicans. An example of how untruthful these people are – they are largely acolytes of a former president lied far more than he told the truth  – and based on his big lie, they mask their disenfranchisement movement as a way to protect election integrity and to make it easy to vote. A major component of…