for people who applied asylum during 2015 - 2017 and still did not get interview. what should we do? The last come first out policy is really unfair for us, we won't get interview forever based on the efficiency of the USCIS, and it should change back to first come first out, why we need to wait so many years to get an interview. Its really not fair. How can we tell USCIS this?
2015-2017 ASYLUM SEEKERS who are still waiting for interview
- Thread starter Mikejoe
- Start date
-
- Tags
- asylum asylum interview
"
LIFO vs. FIFO: Another issue related to scheduling is The Great LIFO-FIFO Debate--whether cases should be interviewed in the order received (first-in, first-out or FIFO) or whether the newest cases should receive priority (last-in, first-out or LIFO). All Asylum Offices are currently operating under the LIFO system. The logic is that interviewing new cases first will deter fraudulent asylum seekers, since they won't be guaranteed a years-long wait for their interview (during which time they can live and work in the U.S.). The Asylum Division believes LIFO is working, as there was a 30% drop in new filings after it was implemented. However, I hope they will revisit this finding. My sense is that any decrease in filings was unrelated to the LIFO policy and instead came about for other reasons, such as fewer people arriving in the U.S. due to stricter visa requirements.
Also, from the perspective of asylum seekers, LIFO is very unfair. Old cases are given the lowest priority, meaning many people will (seemingly) never get to the front of the line. These applicants are facing severe hardships, including separation from family and endless uncertainty. At a minimum, a certain percentage of officers should be assigned to work on backlog cases, starting with the oldest. Better yet, we should return to FIFO and the Asylum Office Scheduling Bulletin, so we will have a more orderly and predictable process for scheduling interviews."
LIFO vs. FIFO: Another issue related to scheduling is The Great LIFO-FIFO Debate--whether cases should be interviewed in the order received (first-in, first-out or FIFO) or whether the newest cases should receive priority (last-in, first-out or LIFO). All Asylum Offices are currently operating under the LIFO system. The logic is that interviewing new cases first will deter fraudulent asylum seekers, since they won't be guaranteed a years-long wait for their interview (during which time they can live and work in the U.S.). The Asylum Division believes LIFO is working, as there was a 30% drop in new filings after it was implemented. However, I hope they will revisit this finding. My sense is that any decrease in filings was unrelated to the LIFO policy and instead came about for other reasons, such as fewer people arriving in the U.S. due to stricter visa requirements.
Also, from the perspective of asylum seekers, LIFO is very unfair. Old cases are given the lowest priority, meaning many people will (seemingly) never get to the front of the line. These applicants are facing severe hardships, including separation from family and endless uncertainty. At a minimum, a certain percentage of officers should be assigned to work on backlog cases, starting with the oldest. Better yet, we should return to FIFO and the Asylum Office Scheduling Bulletin, so we will have a more orderly and predictable process for scheduling interviews."
absolutely spot on , i suggest we use social media to get the attention of the new DHS secretary who himself is not only an immigrant but someone who spent years as an insider at DHS.
msv5450
Active Member
It's impossible that the USCIS would revert back to the old FIFO policy because it will encourage literally anyone who arrives at the US with a tourist visa to apply for asylum, legally work for 6+ years, and earn money in valuable US dollars. The LIFO proved to be effective because it reduced the number of asylum applications by 30% ever since it was enforced three years ago.
The US asylum system experienced the same scale of backlog in the early 1990s as the result of thousands of eastern Europeans applying for asylum. The INS decided to institute the LIFO system in 1994 to address the problem. It eventually worked and the backlog cleared after 10 years. The USCIS maintained the LIFO system for 20 years (until 2014) and once they switched back to FIFO, they faced a huge backlog again and they had to follow LIFO once again.
I just can't imagine USCIS dropping LIFO any time soon because asylum will be subject of abuse for thousands of people who would apply based on frivolous claims. Besides, you guys are a minority group who are complaining about being stuck in the backlog. The majority of those who applied in 2015-2017 are actually very happy that they have been allowed to live and work in the US for several years and don't want the system to change.
My advice to you is to request to be put on the interview short list, just like I did. It has its own consequences, like being called for an interview with a pretty short notice, but at least it's better than being in limbo for several more years to come.
The US asylum system experienced the same scale of backlog in the early 1990s as the result of thousands of eastern Europeans applying for asylum. The INS decided to institute the LIFO system in 1994 to address the problem. It eventually worked and the backlog cleared after 10 years. The USCIS maintained the LIFO system for 20 years (until 2014) and once they switched back to FIFO, they faced a huge backlog again and they had to follow LIFO once again.
I just can't imagine USCIS dropping LIFO any time soon because asylum will be subject of abuse for thousands of people who would apply based on frivolous claims. Besides, you guys are a minority group who are complaining about being stuck in the backlog. The majority of those who applied in 2015-2017 are actually very happy that they have been allowed to live and work in the US for several years and don't want the system to change.
My advice to you is to request to be put on the interview short list, just like I did. It has its own consequences, like being called for an interview with a pretty short notice, but at least it's better than being in limbo for several more years to come.
which office are u in, I am live in the Los Angeles, don't know if the short list gonna work or not
I'm also in LA and I heard that there are no short list at this moment, and I have to wait till they reopen the requests. wonder if its true ?
did you hear this from your lawyer
actually yes thats what he told me
msv5450
Active Member
I am in Chicago. I requested for short list in early Dec 2020 and my request was approved this week. You need to write a letter to the office
thank you, did then send the approve letter to you by mail?
msv5450
Active Member
ok thank you
D
drvb165
Guest
Hi all, Can somebody help me for the expedition of the interview. My questions are can I email to the USCIS without informing my attorney. And is it mandatory to provide some documentation for the expedition?
Thank you.
Thank you.
The way i see it, who needs it more ? you or the lawyer ? As long as you present factual material that cannot contradict or hurt your case, how old is your app and what reasons are you giving.
D
drvb165
Guest
I have applied in June 2020 my attorney doesn’t wants to expedite. I don’t know the process. I am going through some personal problems.
may I ask location which asylum office?
D
drvb165
Guest
Hi it’s in SFO.
Yes it works, try to reach out by email.
I emailed them and got an response less than a month, few weeks later my attorney called me and told me to get prepare and read carefully the declaration because the interview schedule will be due anytime soon.
Usually they will expedite as long as you have strong reason and evidence.