Siskind Susser

Green Card LotteryABCs of ImmigrationHiring A LawyerHealth Care Info CenterImmigration SitesFashion, Arts & / Sports Newsletter

Siskind Immigration Bulletin Request Consultation Ask Visalaw Client Login
About the Firm
Our Offices
Our Team
In the News
Practice Areas and Services
Scheduling a Consultation
ABCs of Immigration
Requests For Proposals
Press Room


Immigration Forms
Government Processing Times
State Department Visa Bulletin
Siskind's Immigration Professional
Working in America
Washington Updates
Publications
The Visalaw Blog

MEMBER OF THE
AMERICAN
IMMIGRATION
LAWYERS
ASSOCIATION


LAUNCH CHAT

< back

 

CSS Settlement Approved

The class action amnesty case, Catholic Social Services, Inc. v. Tom Ridge, Department of Homeland Security (Civ S-86-1343-LKK), was approved by US Federal Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on January 23, 2004.  This case was the longest pending class action suit against the former INS.

 

In September 2003, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reached a settlement allowing over 150,000 undocumented immigrants to apply for legal resident status under a one-time amnesty program that became law in 1986.  The law allowed undocumented immigrants who had resided in the US since 1982 to obtain legal status.  The class action suit challenged an INS rule that disqualified those who had briefly traveled abroad during the period of required residence for the amnesty.

 

In April 1988, Judge Karlton ruled that the travel rule was illegal and extended the application period for four months for those who had been turned away.  INS agreed to change the rule, but appealed the judge’s decision to grant an extension.  For the next fifteen years, INS repeatedly appealed federal court orders upholding the extension.

 

While the appeals were pending, class members were temporarily protected from deportation and were allowed to apply for work permits.

 

Under the approved settlement, immigrants who believe they qualified for the 1986 amnesty but were turned away have a one-year period beginning in May 2004 to apply to legalize their status.  Class members will be allowed to work while their applications are pending.  The DHS also agreed to pay the plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees.

 

The terms of the settlement are available at www.centerforhumanrights.org.

 

In a separate class action case, Newman v. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law also represent the plaintiffs.  The case addresses another 100,000 immigrants who were turned away by INS during the amnesty program because they too had briefly traveled abroad.  However, these plaintiffs returned by improperly using non-immigrant visas such as student and visitor visas.  A settlement has been reached in this case, which is pending approval by a federal court in Los Angeles.

 

< BackIndex | Next >

 

Print This Page

Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.

Siskind Susser Bland
1028 Oakhaven Rd.
Memphis, TN 38119
T. 800-343-4890 or 901-682-6455
F. 901-682-6394
Email: info@visalaw.com

Home | Immigration Bulletin | Green Card Lottery Center | ABCs of Immigration | Hiring A Lawyer
Hot Topics | Health Care Info Center | Immigration Sites | Search



This is an advertisement. Certification as an Immigration Specialist is not currently available in Tennessee. Siskind Susser Bland limits its practice strictly to immigration law, a Federal practice area, and we do not claim expertise in the laws of states other than where our attorneys are licensed. Siskind Susser Bland does not retain clients on the strength of advertising materials alone but only after following our own engagement procedures (e.g. interviews, conflict checks, retainer agreements). The information contained on this site is intended to educate members of the public generally and is not intended to provide solutions to individual problems. Readers are cautioned not to attempt to solve individual problems on the basis of information contained herein and are strongly advised to seek competent legal counsel before relying on information on this site. Siskind Susser Bland and its advertisers are independent of each other and advertisers on this site are not being endorsed by Siskind Susser Bland by virtue of the fact that they appear on this page. Site is maintained by Siskind Susser Bland's Memphis, TN office and overseen by Gregory Siskind. Copyright © 2003-2006 Siskind Susser Bland. All rights reserved.