The Deportation of Kilmar Ábrego García — A Breach of Due Process and International Law

2025.04.29

The recent deportation of Salvadoran national Kilmar Ábrego García from the United States, despite a court order explicitly prohibiting his removal, represents a flagrant violation of international law and due process rights. His forced return to El Salvador, where he was imprisoned in the notorious CECOT (Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo) — a facility known for widespread human rights abuses — is not merely an administrative error. It is a serious legal infraction that undermines both U.S. domestic law and its international obligations.

🛑 Violation of the Principle of Non-Refoulement

The principle of non-refoulement, enshrined in Article 33 of the 1951 Refugee Convention, prohibits states from expelling or returning individuals to a country where their life or freedom would be threatened. This obligation is further reinforced by Article 3 of the United Nations Convention Against Torture, which reads:

“No State Party shall expel, return (‘refouler’) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.”

The United States is a party to both treaties. In Ábrego’s case, there was credible evidence that he faced persecution and life-threatening violence from gangs in El Salvador. His deportation, in direct contradiction to those protections, constitutes a clear breach of binding international obligations.

⚖️ Violation of Due Process

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which the U.S. ratified in 1992, guarantees in Article 13:

“An alien lawfully in the territory of a State Party may be expelled only in pursuance of a decision reached in accordance with law and shall be allowed to submit the reasons against his expulsion.”

Ábrego had a valid judicial stay of removal. Ignoring that judicial order and proceeding with deportation reflects a severe denial of due process and contempt for the rule of law.

The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution also states that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” This protection extends to any person under U.S. jurisdiction, including undocumented immigrants.

🧱 Undermining Institutional Integrity

This was not an isolated mistake. Rather, it is part of a disturbing trend where immigration enforcement overrides legal safeguards. The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) requires that deportations be conducted lawfully and with access to judicial review. Ábrego’s removal violated this foundational legislation.

Disregarding court orders not only erodes public confidence in the legal system, it also signals to the international community that the U.S. may no longer be a reliable guardian of human rights — especially in matters of asylum and humanitarian protection.

🚨 A Call for Accountability

Kilmar Ábrego García remains imprisoned in El Salvador, reportedly traumatized and in deteriorating conditions. Despite legal obligations and mounting pressure from advocacy organizations, U.S. immigration authorities have yet to rectify the situation or ensure his safe return.

To restore integrity and credibility, the United States must:

Acknowledge the violation of law,
Facilitate Ábrego’s return,
Hold those responsible accountable, and
Reform procedural safeguards to ensure such failures do not recur.

Respect for international law is not optional. It is a cornerstone of democratic legitimacy. When a country that claims leadership in human rights begins to dismiss legal orders and deport vulnerable people to torture and imprisonment, the consequences ripple far beyond its borders.

The Death of Brayan Rayo-Garzón and the Moral Collapse of U.S. Immigration Policy

2025.04.25

On April 8, 2025, Brayan Rayo-Garzón, a 31-year-old Colombian migrant, died while in the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) at the Phelps County Jail in Missouri. He had been detained only weeks earlier, in late March, after entering the United States without authorization.

His death, now confirmed by ICE, is not just a tragic event — it is a damning indictment of a system that criminalizes human movement and erodes the dignity of those who seek safety or opportunity.

Brayan's death is part of a broader, systemic failure. The United States is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which in Article 10 affirms that “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.”

It is also bound by the Convention Against Torture, which under Article 16 prohibits cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment under any circumstances. Yet what we continue to see in ICE detention centers are conditions that violate both the letter and spirit of these international commitments.

Even more troubling is the fact that migrants, many of whom have fled poverty, violence, or political instability, are now being subjected to civil penalties and financial ruin simply for remaining in the U.S. beyond their permitted stay. In 2023, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) resumed the practice of issuing civil fines of up to $799 per day to undocumented immigrants who fail to comply with deportation orders.

These fines are not only punitive — they are inhumane. They target some of the most vulnerable populations, including asylum seekers, families with children, and those with no realistic ability to pay.

These financial penalties are out of step with basic human rights principles and international best practices. As the UN Human Rights Committee has clarified, immigration detention and enforcement measures must be “reasonable, necessary, and proportionate.” Imposing crushing fines on people who are already marginalized only deepens cycles of fear, poverty, and exploitation.

Let us be clear: immigration is not a crime. Seeking refuge, fleeing hardship, or pursuing a better life is not an offense against humanity — it is an expression of it. The case of Brayan Rayo-Garzón should force a national reckoning. Why do we detain, punish, and in some cases allow to die those whose only "crime" is to cross a border?

From this editorial desk, we demand reform. We demand accountability. And we demand a shift in policy that places human dignity above political convenience. Brayan’s story cannot end with silence — it must mark the beginning of change.

Image of the Phelps county jail, en Rolla, Missouri.

-Taken from Google Maps

Laken Riley Act: A New Era of State Control Over Immigration Enforcement

2025.04.03

On January 29, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the Laken Riley Act, a sweeping immigration enforcement law that expands the power of state attorneys general to challenge federal immigration policies and mandates the detention of certain undocumented immigrants. Named after Laken Riley, a college student whose tragic death was allegedly caused by an undocumented immigrant, the act is a direct response to rising concerns over crime and immigration enforcement failures.

Summary: S.5 — 119th Congress (2025-2026)

Shown Here:
Introduced in Senate (01/06/2025)

Laken Riley Act

This bill requires the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to detain certain non-U.S. nationals (aliens under federal law) who have been arrested for burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting. The bill also authorizes states to sue the federal government for decisions or alleged failures related to immigration enforcement.

Under this bill, DHS must detain an individual who (1) is unlawfully present in the United States or did not possess the necessary documents when applying for admission; and (2) has been charged with, arrested for, convicted of, or admits to having committed acts that constitute the essential elements of burglary, theft, larceny, or shoplifting.

The bill also authorizes state governments to sue for injunctive relief over certain immigration-related decisions or alleged failures by the federal government if the decision or failure caused the state or its residents harm, including financial harm of more than $100. Specifically, the state government may sue the federal government over a

Decision to release a non-U.S. national from custody;
Failure to fulfill requirements relating to inspecting individuals seeking admission into the United States, including requirements related to asylum interviews;
Failure to fulfill a requirement to stop issuing visas to nationals of a country that unreasonably denies or delays acceptance of nationals of that country;
violation of limitations on immigration parole, such as the requirement that parole be granted only on a case-by-case basis; or
Failure to detain an individual who has been ordered removed from the United States.

What the Law Changes

The Laken Riley Act introduces two major changes to U.S. immigration law:

Mandatory Detention for Certain Crimes
Any undocumented foreign national who is arrested for, convicted of, or admits to committing burglary, theft, larceny, shoplifting, or assaulting a law enforcement officer must be detained. The law also applies to any crime that results in serious bodily injury or death to another person. This provision effectively ensures that individuals fitting these criteria remain in detention rather than being released on bail.
State Attorneys General Can Sue the Federal Government
The act allows state attorneys general to take legal action against the federal government if they believe immigration laws are not being properly enforced. This includes the ability to sue the federal government if:
- Immigration authorities fail to detain and deport undocumented individuals who have committed specific crimes.
- The federal government continues issuing visas to nationals of countries that refuse or delay accepting deported individuals from the U.S.

The Impact on Immigration and International Relations

One of the most controversial aspects of the law is its impact on visa issuance. Under the act, states can seek injunctive relief to halt the issuance of visas to nationals from countries that refuse to accept their deported citizens. The Trump administration has already applied this policy, suspending visa issuance for Colombia after it failed to comply with repatriation requests

Additionally, the act classifies certain countries as "recalcitrant" for refusing to accept deported migrants. These countries may face visa restrictions, which could affect thousands of legally present foreign nationals in the U.S. Some of the identified countries include China, India, Russia, Iran, and Pakistan

Legal and Ethical Concerns

Critics argue that the law undermines federal authority over immigration by allowing states to dictate enforcement priorities. Immigration policy has traditionally been the domain of the federal government, and legal challenges are expected on the grounds that the act may violate federal supremacy in immigration matters.

Furthermore, immigrant rights groups warn that mandatory detention for theft-related offenses, such as shoplifting, could disproportionately impact low-income individuals and lead to overcrowding in detention centers. Some also worry that this law may discourage victims and witnesses of crimes from cooperating with law enforcement due to fear of detention.

Conclusion: A Test for the Courts and the States

The Laken Riley Act represents one of the most significant shifts in U.S. immigration policy in recent years. It empowers states to play a larger role in enforcement while also creating new diplomatic tensions with countries reluctant to accept deported nationals. As lawsuits and challenges mount, the future of the act will likely be decided in the courts. In the meantime, its implementation will serve as a key test for the balance of power between federal and state governments in shaping immigration policy.

The Future of Immigration in the U.S.: Restrictions, Mass Deportations, and Legal Reforms on the Horizon

2025.04.01

U.S. immigration policy is a constantly evolving battlefield, and 2025 will be no exception. With the return of Donald Trump to the White House and the implementation of the controversial Project 2025, the landscape for undocumented immigrants and those with precarious legal status could become even more hostile. From reinstating mass deportation policies to stricter residency requirements, uncertainty dominates the debate.

Mass Deportations and the Expansion of ICE’s Power

During his previous administration, Trump tightened immigration enforcement through workplace and community raids and expanded deportation priorities. In 2025, these measures could intensify with an even more aggressive approach. We can expect an increase in operations by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and harsher penalties for visa or immigration status violations.

While the Biden administration eased some restrictions and created humanitarian programs like Parole, these initiatives could be eliminated or altered under a new Republican administration. There is also a strong possibility of reviving the public charge rule, which limits residency for immigrants deemed likely to rely on government benefits.

Asylum System Reforms and Travel Restrictions

The asylum system has been a contentious issue between Democratic and Republican administrations. During his tenure, Trump drastically reduced refugee admissions and made it more difficult for those fleeing persecution to seek protection in the U.S. In 2025, we may see the return of these measures, further limiting options for asylum seekers

Additionally, there is speculation about the reinstatement of travel restrictions similar to the previous Muslim-majority country bans. Such policies would not only affect immigrants but also families seeking reunification in the U.S.

The Legal Debate: What Does the Law Say?

From a legal standpoint, implementing these measures faces challenges in the courts. The Supreme Court has already intervened multiple times in immigration policies, including blocking the family separation policy and partially striking down asylum restrictions. However, with a more conservative composition, the court may now favor stricter immigration policies.

Legislatively, Congress will play a crucial role. States with large immigrant populations, such as California and New York, have already voiced their opposition to these measures. Some jurisdictions have passed local laws limiting cooperation with ICE, which will likely lead to a political and legal battle over the federal government's power in immigration enforcement.

Conclusion: An Uncertain Future for the Immigrant Community

The future of U.S. immigration in 2025 is marked by uncertainty and political polarization. While Trump’s proposed measures aim to strengthen border security and reduce illegal immigration, they have also been criticized for their humanitarian and economic consequences.

For immigrants in the U.S., preparation will be key. Seeking legal counsel, staying informed about policy changes, and knowing their rights will be essential tools in navigating this new landscape

A New Era for Immigration: Talent, Growth, and Opportunity

*

A New Era for Immigration: Talent, Growth, and Opportunity *

2025.03.27

For decades, immigration has been one of the pillars of the United States’ economic and cultural success. The country has thrived by welcoming people from around the world who contribute to its industries, innovation, and diversity. In an unexpected turn, recent immigration reform proposals for 2025 present a new vision that, despite political controversy, includes measures that could significantly benefit the U.S. economy and its global standing.

Among the most promising initiatives is the automatic granting of Green Cards to international students who complete their studies at U.S. universities. This policy represents a groundbreaking shift in the way the country manages skilled immigration. By offering permanent residency to those who have already integrated into the education system and are ready to contribute to the workforce, the U.S. eliminates bureaucratic barriers and prevents the loss of valuable talent to competing nations. Countries like Canada and Australia have long implemented similar strategies to attract global talent, and with this reform, the U.S. could position itself as the premier destination for international students and professionals.

Furthermore, proposed changes to the H-1B visa system would prioritize applicants based on merit, favoring highly skilled professionals in key sectors such as technology, engineering, and healthcare. This adjustment aligns with the growing demand for expertise in fields that drive economic and technological progress. By moving away from the current lottery system and focusing on qualifications, the reform ensures that the best and brightest minds have a clear path to contributing to American innovation.

Another positive development is the continuation of the EB-5 program, which grants residency to foreign investors who create jobs in the U.S. economy. This program has long been a catalyst for economic growth, particularly in areas with high unemployment rates. By maintaining and potentially expanding EB-5 opportunities, the U.S. reinforces its commitment to economic development driven by global investment.

These measures reflect an important shift in the immigration narrative—one that views immigrants not as a burden but as a source of strength and progress. While political debates around immigration often focus on border security and enforcement, it is crucial to recognize the invaluable role that skilled immigrants, entrepreneurs, and students play in the country's prosperity. The new policies acknowledge this reality and open doors for those who can help drive economic growth, technological advancement, and job creation.

However, challenges remain. The administration’s simultaneous emphasis on deportations and restrictions on birthright citizenship casts a shadow over the positive aspects of these reforms. A balanced approach is necessary—one that combines security concerns with a recognition of the immense contributions that immigrants make to society. A truly effective immigration policy must not only attract talent but also foster inclusion and opportunity for those who have already built their lives in the U.S.

Despite these complexities, the new proposals signal a step in the right direction for skilled immigrants and international students. By prioritizing education, expertise, and investment, the U.S. can reaffirm its role as a global leader in innovation and economic development. Immigration, when managed strategically, is not just a political issue—it is an engine of prosperity, progress, and opportunity.

The future of U.S. immigration will ultimately depend on the country’s ability to embrace change and recognize the power of diversity. A system that welcomes skilled workers, fosters talent, and supports economic growth will ensure that America remains a land of opportunity—not just for immigrants, but for everyone who calls it home.

A Step Towards Inclusion: The U.S. Citizenship Exam Reform

*

A Step Towards Inclusion: The U.S. Citizenship Exam Reform *

2025.03.22

Immigration has historically been one of the pillars of growth and development in the United States. Contributions in key sectors such as construction, technology, healthcare, and education have demonstrated that immigrants are essential to the dynamism of the American economy and culture. However, the naturalization process has posed a challenge for thousands of immigrants aspiring to become U.S. citizens. In an effort to make this process more accessible and equitable, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced significant changes to the citizenship exam on March 21, 2025. This reform not only represents progress in terms of inclusion but also reaffirms the importance of immigrant integration into American society.

A Necessary Change for an Evolving Society

The citizenship exam is a crucial component of the naturalization process, designed to assess applicants’ knowledge of the country’s history, government, and fundamental principles, as well as their proficiency in the English language. However, in its current format, many individuals have encountered difficulties due to the complexity of the questions and the language barrier. According to USCIS data, approximately 40% of applicants taking the test in English find it challenging, raising concerns about the fairness of the process.

Aware of this situation, authorities have decided to modernize the exam to make it more accessible without compromising its educational purpose. Starting on July 1, 2025, the history and government section will transition to a multiple-choice format, facilitating the evaluation of applicants’ civic knowledge. Additionally, the English test will focus more on oral comprehension, including exercises that involve describing images and answering questions about everyday situations. These changes aim to better reflect the practical skills needed for daily life in the United States, ensuring that new citizens are prepared to actively participate in society.

This change is implemented under the authority of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), specifically Section 312, which establishes the requirements for English proficiency and civic education for naturalization. The reform is also aligned with the provisions of Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations (8 CFR), which governs naturalization procedures and citizenship tests. Furthermore, it addresses the need to update the exam format, which had not undergone significant changes since October 1, 2008, when the last major revision was introduced.

A Benefit for Immigrant Integration

The citizenship exam reform is not just an administrative modification; it is an opportunity to strengthen immigrant inclusion in the country. By providing a more accessible and relevant evaluation, the transition to citizenship becomes smoother. This is especially significant for Latinos, who represent a substantial portion of the immigrant population in the United States and, in many cases, have faced challenges with the language and structure of the previous exam.

With these modifications, more immigrants are expected to successfully complete the naturalization process and, consequently, obtain the rights and benefits of citizenship. Additionally, this measure reinforces the message that the United States remains a land of opportunity, where diversity and inclusion are fundamental values for progress. It also positively impacts civic participation rates, as more naturalized citizens will be able to vote and contribute actively to their communities.

It is important to highlight that these changes were approved within the framework of Executive Order 14012, issued on February 2, 2021, which urges government agencies to improve immigration and naturalization processes, facilitating access to citizenship for underserved communities. USCIS’s Office of Citizenship and Education Programs has worked closely with immigrant support organizations to ensure that the reform has a positive and effective impact.

According to studies conducted by the Migration Policy Institute, more accessible naturalization leads to economic benefits for both immigrants and society at large, as naturalized citizens tend to access better jobs, earn higher incomes, and contribute more to the economy through taxes and consumption. This reform not only addresses a need for fairness but also generates positive impacts on the country’s economic development.

Conclusion: A Reform with a Positive Impact

USCIS’s decision to update the citizenship exam is a significant step in the right direction. By making the process more accessible and relevant for applicants, immigrant integration is fostered, and the nation’s commitment to diversity and equity is reinforced. While naturalization remains a challenge requiring preparation and effort, these changes represent progress toward a fairer system that reflects the reality of those seeking to become part of the American nation.

Moreover, this reform is part of a broader modernization effort within USCIS, aimed at reducing processing times for immigration procedures, digitizing applications, and improving immigrant services. These initiatives, combined with the new citizenship exam, are expected to strengthen immigrants’ confidence in the system and facilitate their path to citizenship.

At a time when the immigration debate remains prominent, this reform sends a clear message: The United States recognizes and values the contributions of immigrants and is willing to evolve to ensure that more people can attain citizenship in a fair and equitable manner. Undoubtedly, this is a positive step toward a more inclusive and hopeful future for millions of immigrants who dream of calling this country their home. The modernization of the citizenship exam is just one part of the effort to ensure that the United States continues to be a beacon of opportunity for those seeking a better future.

2023. 08.07 - President Joe Biden's new regulation restricting asylum access at the U.S.-Mexico border can remain in effect for now, a U.S. appeals court said on Thursday. The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals put on hold a district judge's July 25 ruling that found the regulation violated U.S. law by cutting off asylum for some migrants caught crossing the border illegally.

The rule, known as Circumvention of Lawful Pathways, which became effective May 11, 2023, stats that the U.S. government "generally presumes certain individuals who irregularly enter the United States through its southwest land border or adjacent coastal borders are ineligible for asylum, unless they can demonstrate an exception to the rule or rebut the presumption. Unaccompanied children are exempted from this presumption. Individuals are encouraged to use lawful, safe, and orderly pathways to come to the United States." USCIS.

What does this mean for your family members?

If you know someone who is seeking or planning on seeking Asylum at the US-Mexico border, you need to know that it is of utmost importance that they submit their information via the USCIS website in order to wait their turn for an interview before entering the United States. Failure to do this may result in forfeiting their opportunity to seek asylum in the United States. There are ways to circumvent these strict regulations, but we always recommend speaking to an attorney as every asylum case is unique.

On July 31st 2023, Attorney Andrea Soto was inducted as President-Elect of the Hudson Valley Hispanic Bar Association, one of the emerging and vastly growing bar associations in the state. Attorney Dora LaSalle was inducted as President, Attorney Jonathan Alvarez as Vice President, and Attorney Livia Rodriguez Brundage as Treasurer.

We were honored to have presiding Justice of the Appellate Division of the second Department, Justice Hector LaSalle, and the administrative judge for the 9th Judicial District of New York, The Honorable Anne E Minihan.

Justice Walter Rivera, of the Court of Claims of New York let the ceremony of induction, and we received a new Board of Governors, including Justice Maria Vasquez-Doles, Attorney Alexandra Bisesi, Attorney Michele Indzonka, Attorney Alejandra Gil, and Attorney Eric Santos.

We were also joined by various attorneys from all over the Hudson Valley. We look forward to a strong term with our new executive committee.