I am no Terrorist, any advice?

Thanks

HBA said:
Please check this web and let us know if that can be helpful!

http://immigrantjustice.org/sites/immigrantjustice.org/files/FOIA letter - September 1 2011.pdf
Click to expand...

thanks for the update HBA I was advised by my attorney to write to
United Nations High Commissions for Refugees
Case Postale 2500
CH-1211 Geneve 2 Depot
Suisse

I have already informed them of my misery through a letter, I believe if more people will write, it will certainly get their attention, besides it is good to put this in record and I don't see any harm if more of us will write there, the rest is up to individual thoughts.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Material support news

Senator Leahy Expresses Concerns About Refugees, Asylees Under Material Support For Terrorism Laws

November 9, 2011

On November 9, Senator Leahy sent a letter to Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, expressing concerns about the implementation of current law on material support for terrorism in the refugee and asylee context.

November 09, 2011

The Honorable Janet Napolitano

Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security

U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Washington, D.C. 20528

Dear Madam Secretary:

I write on a topic I raised in the October 19, 2011, hearing of the Committee on the Judiciary on Oversight of the Department of Homeland Security. I remain very concerned about implementation of current law on material support for terrorism in the refugee and asylee context.

Medical Care Exemption

You mentioned in the October 19, 2011, hearing that you recently signed an exemption to the material support statute for the provision of certain types of medical care. I was pleased to learn of that exemption, which I requested in a letter to you dated March 17, 2009. However, it has been three weeks since that hearing took place and I have yet to see formal notice of the exemption in Federal Register. Is this new policy currently in force, and is it being applied to cases? When will the new policy be made public?

Legal Interpretation of “Material” and “Routine Commercial Transactions”

Our immigration law contains a very broad definition of material support for terrorism.

As a result, refugees can be barred from gaining protection in the United States, even if their actions were so minimal that no rational person would consider them supporters of terrorist activities or organizations.

We have seen cases in which a refugee who sold flowers or gave a bowl of rice to a member of a terrorist organization was barred from protection. I have always thought that we could resolve a large number of these cases by adopting a common-sense interpretation of the term “material.” A person who donates hundreds or thousands of dollars has clearly made a material contribution to an organization. Such donations may or may not qualify for other exemptions. But a person who hands over spare change cannot reasonably be considered to have made a material contribution.

Moreover, a person who sells flowers to a terrorist is not providing support to the terrorist, but is actually taking money out of the pocket of the terrorist, money that they might otherwise put toward planning or executing an attack. And yet, commercial transactions of that sort have been classified as material support for terrorism.

The Honorable Janet Napolitano

November 9, 2011

Page 2 of 2

Will you revise the interpretation of the term “material” such that truly insignificant actions – actions that are immaterial -- are not deemed to be material support? Will you also issue policy guidance on the scope of “routine commercial transactions” that may trigger material support concerns?



Group-By-Group Exemption Process



Congress gave the Department authority to exempt deserving applicants from the so-called Tier III bar to admission in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, in language that I crafted with Senator Kyl. While not mandated by that law, under both the Bush and Obama Administrations, the Department has engaged in a group-by-group process of reviewing Tier III terrorist organizations to determine whether they may be exempted from the material support bar. On January 26, 2009, Acting Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Legislative Affairs, Jim Howe, wrote in a response to an October 3, 2008, letter from myself and Senator Jon Kyl, that “DHS is also examining possible alternatives to group-by-group exemptions.”

That was nearly three years ago, but I was recently told, informally, that the Department has not progressed from this position and is still considering alternatives to the group-by-group process. As a result, over 4,500 cases remain on hold. I strongly urge you to promptly adopt alternatives to following only a group-by-group determination process.

For example, one possibility would be to consider exemptions for those who were granted asylee or refugee status years ago, and who now seek to adjust their status to lawful permanent residence. If no derogatory information has come to the attention of DHS in the intervening period, such persons’ immigration cases could be given a presumption of admissibility. Similarly, if the group to which they purportedly provided material support either shared the goals of the United States at the time of the purported support, or if the group never expressed any intention or desire to harm the United States, that person could be given a presumption of admissibility. Alternatively, groups might be considered for exemptions on a regional basis rather than a group-by-group basis. Any number of possibilities can be explored. Again, I urge you to consider these and other alternatives so that the thousands of cases still on hold can be adjudicated.

Thank you for your prompt attention to these issues. I look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

PATRICK LEAHY

Chairman
 
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 219 (Monday, November 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 70463-70464]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-29316]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Office of the Secretary


Exercise of Authority Under the Immigration and Nationality Act

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of determination.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(3)(B)(i).

Following consultations with the Secretary of State and the
Attorney General, I hereby conclude, as a matter of discretion in
accordance with the authority granted to me by section 212(d)(3)(B)(i)
of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), 8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(3)(B)(i), as amended, as well as the foreign policy and
national security interests deemed relevant in these consultations,
that subsections 212(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI)(bb), (cc), and (dd) of the INA, 8
U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B)(iv)(VI)(bb), (cc), and (dd), shall not apply with
respect to the provision of medical care by an alien, provided that the
alien satisfies the relevant agency authority that the alien:
(a) Is seeking a benefit or protection under the INA and has been
determined to be otherwise eligible for the benefit or protection;
(b) Has undergone and passed all relevant background and security
checks;
(c) Has fully disclosed, to the best of his or her knowledge, in
all relevant applications and interviews with U.S. government
representatives and agents, the nature and circumstances of any medical
care provided and any other activity or association falling within the
scope of section 212(a)(3)(B) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(3)(B);

[[Page 70464]]

(d) Has not voluntarily and knowingly provided medical care on
behalf of a designated terrorist organization, as described in INA
section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(I) or (II);
(e) Has not voluntarily and knowingly provided medical care with
the intent of furthering the terrorist or otherwise violent activities
of an organization or individual;
(f) Poses no danger to the safety and security of the United
States; and
(g) Warrants an exemption from the relevant inadmissibility
provision in the totality of the circumstances.
Implementation of this determination will be made by U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), in consultation with U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), or by U.S. consular
officers, as applicable, who shall ascertain, to their satisfaction,
and in their discretion, that the particular applicant meets each of
the criteria set forth above.
When considering the totality of the circumstances, factors to be
considered may include, among others: The purpose, extent, frequency,
and nature of the medical care provided; the circumstances under which
it was provided; the alien's involvement with the terrorist
organization, including past or present membership and role in the
organization; the nature of the activities committed by the terrorist
organization; the alien's awareness of those activities; and the
alien's conduct since providing the medical care.
This exercise of authority may be revoked as a matter of discretion
and without notice at any time with respect to any and all persons
subject to it. Any determination made under this exercise of authority
as set out above can inform but shall not control a decision regarding
any subsequent benefit or protection applications, unless such exercise
of authority has been revoked.
This exercise of authority shall not be construed to prejudice, in
any way, the ability of the U.S. government to commence subsequent
criminal or civil proceedings in accordance with U.S. law involving any
beneficiary of this exercise of authority (or any other person). This
exercise of authority creates no substantive or procedural right or
benefit that is legally enforceable by any party against the United
States or its agencies or officers or any other person.
In accordance with section 212(d)(3)(B)(ii) of the INA, 8 U.S.C.
1182(d)(3)(B)(ii), a report on the aliens to whom this exercise of
authority is applied, on the basis of case-by-case decisions by the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security or by the U.S. Department of
State, shall be provided to the specified congressional committees not
later than 90 days after the end of the fiscal year.
This determination is based on an assessment related to the
national security and foreign policy interests of the United States as
they apply to the particular persons described herein and shall not
have any application with respect to other persons or to other
provisions of U.S. law.

Dated: October 13, 2011.
Janet Napolitano,
Secretary of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. 2011-29316 Filed 11-10-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-09-P
 
Sen Leahy was aware of the action in progress and is also aware of how the gov't grinds along at its own pace. He was grandstanding for political posturing reasons.

Napolitano signed off Oct 13th, Leahy made his noise just days before it was due to be published just so he could later point to how he was so instrumental in getting this done even though he was irrelevant. I don't blame him, he's merely a politician afterall. He does get my support for his stance on EB-5 Regional Centers being made permanent but that is for another thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[Question for BigJoe5,
You seem to be politically savvy and knowledgeable./
Do you really think that the 4,500 remaining pending cases will be adjudicated by end of 2011?
or all the remaining of Tier-III groups will benefit of exemption?]
Again just want to pick your brain!!!
Let me know.
 
Deep Trigger said:
[Question for BigJoe5,
You seem to be politically savvy and knowledgeable./
Do you really think that the 4,500 remaining pending cases will be adjudicated by end of 2011?
or all the remaining of Tier-III groups will benefit of exemption?]
Again just want to pick your brain!!!
Let me know.
Click to expand...

These cases are decided on an individual basis, I can make no realistic predictions.

When considering what's really happening, remember that a federal FY runs from October 1st through September 30th. That delegation was signed Oct 13th at the beginning of the FY. A report is due 90 days after the end of the fiscal year which is towards the end of January for the PRIOR fiscal year. So, Jan 2012's report will tell about what happened between 10/01/2010 - 9/30/2011. We won't know about the status of results from this delegation for well over a year from now in Jan 2013.
 
[Fair enough.....
But I was actually referring to the remaining pending AOS different from Medical / MATERIAL SUPPORT exemption, those which did not benefit from any exemption yet; Because the TRIG WORKING GROUP announced earlier this year that they would adjudicate all remaining cases by end 2011, but that would be pure speculative assumption from youe end, Understyand! but stick around and thanks BigJoe5 ]
 
"Material Support" related New Policy from USCIS as of November 20, 2011

Hello,

I have found this new Policy from USCIS instructing all its employees to pretty much start denying Material Support related TIER III cases. It is another bureaucratically messed up and corrupt policy... This policy is as vague as it gets. Now, after reading this, I am not sure who will be denied their Asylum, Refugee, or AOS applications that have been on hold due to material support, specifically those who fall under TIER III undesignated Terror groups....

Please see the following:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Department of Homeland Security
Citizenship and Immigration Services Office of the Director (MS-2000)
Washington, DC 20529-2000


November 20, 2011 PM-602-0051


Policy Memorandum


SUBJECT: Revised Guidance on the Adjudication of Cases Involving Terrorism-Related
Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG) and Further Amendment to the Hold Policy for
Such Cases


Purpose

This Policy Memorandum (PM) provides updated instruction to all U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) offices in adjudicating cases in which an applicant is inadmissible under one or more of the terrorism-related inadmissibility grounds (TRIG) set forth in Section 212(a)(3)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). This PM modifies existing hold guidance for cases involving TRIG to allow for the denial of some cases currently on hold in which a TRIG exemption would not be granted to the individual applicant even if an exemption were available.


Scope
Unless specifically exempted herein, this PM applies to and binds all USCIS employees.


Authority
Section 212(d)(3)(B)(i) of the INA


Background


On February 13, 2009, Acting Deputy Director Michael Aytes issued a memorandum amending the hold policy for cases involving certain categories of applicants ineligible for the benefits sought due to TRIG.1 Per that memorandum, these hold categories pertain to:



1. Applicants who are inadmissible under the terrorism-related provisions of the INA based on any activity or association that was not under duress relating to any undesignated terrorist organization defined under INA Section 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(III) (“Tier III”), other than those for which an exemption currently exists;


This change was occasioned when the former Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, authorized USCIS, in consultation with ICE, to exercise his exemption authority with regard to material support provided to designated terrorist organizations under INA Sections 212(a)(3)(B)(vi)(I) and (II) under duress whether or not an intelligence community assessment had been prepared for the group in question, as previously had been required.



Page 2



2. Applicants who are inadmissible under the terrorism-related provisions of the INA, other than material support, based on any activity or association related to a designated (Tier I or Tier II) or undesignated (Tier III) terrorist organization where the activity or association was under duress;

3. Applicants who voluntarily provided medical care to designated or undesignated terrorist organizations (Tier I, II, or III), to members of terrorist organizations, or to individuals who have engaged in terrorist activity; and

4. Applicants who are inadmissible under INA Section 212(a)(3)(B)(i)(IX) as the spouses or children of aliens described above, whether or not the spouse or parent has applied for an immigration benefit.


Since the February 13, 2009 memo was issued, two other activities have received exemptions in addition to material support: military-type training and solicitation of funds or solicitation of individuals for membership on behalf of a terrorist organization.


Policy

The current hold policy mandates holding all cases in the above categories, even if it is clear that, in the totality of the circumstances, USCIS would not grant the applicant a discretionary exemption if one were available. The revision to the current hold policy only applies to Category 1 and 2 cases described above and allows for denial of such cases if the adjudicator and subsequent reviewers determine that the applicant does not warrant a favorable exercise of discretion, even if a discretionary exemption should be authorized at a future date.


1. Category 1 example: An applicant who voluntarily used bombs on behalf of a Tier III organization to target Coalition Forces in Afghanistan would currently fall under hold Category 1 above, as would a banker who voluntarily assisted in funneling large sums of money to a Tier III undesignated terrorist organization. However, given the totality of the circumstances, it is clear that USCIS would not grant an exemption to such individuals even if an exemption that would apply to the individual in question were to be authorized in the future.


2. Category 2 example: An applicant was a Columbian banker who was threatened with harm if he did not turn over a list of wealthy depositors to the FARC. He turned over the list, which FARC used to target the individuals on it for kidnapping and extortion. Some of the targeted individuals and their kidnapped family members were tortured and killed for resisting the FARC’s demands.


Although USCIS does not anticipate many cases will rise to this level, applying a mandatory hold policy to them creates unnecessary delay and needlessly adds to the number of cases on hold.



Page 3




Implementation


Pursuant to existing guidance, adjudicators must document the nature of the applicant’s activities or association with the terrorist organization, the identity and nature of the organization, and the factors that warrant a denial of an exemption in the exercise of discretion.

Use of the 212(a)(3)(B) Exemption Worksheet continues to be required, using appropriate USCIS and component guidance to determine the requisite level/s of review. The Exemption Worksheet has been modified to take into consideration adjudication of exemption denials in cases that otherwise would be subject to the hold policy. Please see the attached amended 212(a)(3)(B) Exemption Worksheet. Page 2 of this document now contains the following choice which adjudicators should select when recommending a discretionary denial in such a case:
The case may be denied as no exemption is currently available and the applicant does not warrant a favorable exercise of discretion based on the totality of the circumstances should any future existing discretionary exemption become available.
In addition to existing component guidance regarding review and approval of recommended exemption decisions, every recommended discretionary denial of a case that would otherwise be subject to a hold category will receive component HQ review and concurrence. Furthermore, such cases are required to be tracked at the HQ component level and reported no less than quarterly to the USCIS TRIG Working Group. Finally, all recommended discretionary denials under the new policy must be submitted to the USCIS TRIG Working Group for review and concurrence until the Working Group determines that discretionary denials may be reviewed solely by the HQ components for concurrence.


Use
This PM is intended solely for the guidance of USCIS personnel in the performance of their official duties. It is not intended to, does not, and may not be relied upon to create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or by any individual or other party in removal proceedings, in litigation with the United States, or in any other form or manner.
Contact Information
Questions should be directed through the component chain of command to the component USCIS TRIG Working Group point of contact.
Attachments
1. 212(a)(3)(B) Exemption Worksheet (Rev. 9/21/2011)
2. Memorandum of February 13, 2009, “Revised Guidance on the Adjudication of Cases involving Terrorist-Related Inadmissibility Grounds and Amendment to the Hold Policy for such Cases”
3. Memorandum of March 26, 2008, “Withholding Adjudication and Review of Prior Denials of Certain Categories of Cases Involving Association with, or Provision of Material Support to, Certain Terrorist Organizations or Other Groups”

========================================================

Work Sheet process form for USCIS employees.


212(a)(3)(B) EXEMPTION WORKSHEET (Rev. 9/21/2011) I. Alien and Case Information
Full Name: DOB: COC:
Case or A #: Benefit/Form Type: I-485 I-589 I-590 I-730 Other:
II. Threshold Eligibility
Alien is otherwise eligible for the benefit sought, except for a finding(s) of inadmissibility under INA §212(a)(3)(B). Alien has passed all required background and security checks. Alien has fully disclosed the nature and circumstances of each activity or association within the scope of INA § 212(a)(3)(B). Alien poses no danger to the safety or security of the United States. If alien does not meet one or more of the threshold requirements, explain:
III. Facts of the Case
Describe the actions or associations that make the alien inadmissible. (For example, if an alien is inadmissible for providing material support to a terrorist organization, describe the type of support provided as well as to whom, when, and how often the support was provided.) List the specific INA § 212(a)(3)(B) ground(s) under which the alien is inadmissible.
IV. Exemption
GROUP-BASED EXEMPTION. Group name: _____________________________ INDIVIDUAL EXEMPTION AUTHORIZED. File contains copy of signed Exercise of Authority SITUATIONAL EXEMPTION. Material Support under Duress; Receipt of Military-Type Training under Duress; Solicitation of Funds / Other Things of Value under Duress; Solicitation of Individuals under Duress; Medical Care; Other, Explain: Relevant organization: Tier I Tier II Tier III Organization name (insert “unnamed” as applicable): _____________________________________________ Description: In this space, briefly describe (1) any relevant duress factors; (2) if no duress, why duress was not present; (3) activities that qualify an unnamed group as a terrorist organization; and (4) any other relevant factors.
=================================================================

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Link for the above information is : http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Laws/Memoranda/Static_Files_Memoranda/TRI- Hold-pm-602-0051.pdf

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Thanks,

Free-Life
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bad news

I would still consider to pressure and find a way to claim our FICA to be returned, DHS can not be trusted for fair action, it has already proven its action by destroying the families and holding people on asylum for over many many years and proved its self for in-humanitarian action by separating families which is totally against American philosophy.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deep Trigger said:
[This is a good piece of information, thanks Hecate
though I don't understand the loophole]
Click to expand...


I found the information online search from USCIS links on Wednesday or Thursday. It was published right around / after the time when USCIS-DHS announced of exemptions to those who provided medical care. The problem (loophole) is that so far, as well all know USCIS-DHS has been stating that they will take care-off all the cases by or before the end of 2011. So this is another way or taking care off the cases. It doesn't even make any sense after going through this Official latest Policy Memo from USCIS, how will (if any) cases will be adjudicated from now on that have been pending due to Material Support. Remember, most of the cases (over 95% cases) have been placed on hold for Material Support; Especially all the Tier III cases. So unless, as mentioned earlier (this year 2011) by USCIS-DHS, all the 16 or 18 political parties / groups from all around the world has been properly and completely exempted by USCIS-DHS before the end of this year(2011), its all going to be a guessing game. This Memo gives USCIS-DHS to start denying applications based on the totality of the nature of those cases that are on hold due to "Material Support". After reading examples, I couldn't distinguish who will or who will not be denied. Simply because its too vague and vast. Examples are given on page two.

So in other words, just to ease the pressure from all political, public, private, legal and judicial governing bodies, USCIS-DHS is going to use this memo as an excuse to start denying application randomly and show all the above mentioned stakeholders their incompetence has been changed to their efficiency. And ultimately, as promised by USCIS-DHS (if not all) most of the pending cases been resolved or processed one way or another. It is a classical way of government especially (USCIS-DHS) handling things their corrupt way. They give one release just to show off and throw two more obstacles along with it. As soon as they released the exemption for medical care, they soon released this memo to make sure no one gets away so easy

That is what it is all about. Although, I am still not hopeless and keeping my fingers crossed, but at the same time i am worried about people wrongfully getting applications denied because of this latest bureaucratically corrupt policy.

Thanks,
free-life
 
I got this via e-mail on 11/25/2011:

USCIS has cleared the following final policy memoranda for distribution:

PM-602-0051 (Nov. 20, 2011) Revised Guidance on the Adjudication of Cases Involving Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG) and Further Amendment to the Hold Policy for Such Cases

PM-602-0052 (Nov. 20, 2011) Implementation of New Exemption Under INA Section 212(d)(3)(B)(i) for the Provision of Material Support in the Form of Medical Care

Final policy memoranda are official USCIS policy documents and effective the date the memos are approved.

NOTE: If you are unable to access the memoranda through the links provided above, please do the following:



1. Go to www.uscis.gov

2. Select the “laws” tab at the top of the page

3. Select “policy memoranda” on the left side of the page
 
BigJoe5 said:
I got this via e-mail on 11/25/2011:

USCIS has cleared the following final policy memoranda for distribution:

PM-602-0051 (Nov. 20, 2011) Revised Guidance on the Adjudication of Cases Involving Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG) and Further Amendment to the Hold Policy for Such Cases

PM-602-0052 (Nov. 20, 2011) Implementation of New Exemption Under INA Section 212(d)(3)(B)(i) for the Provision of Material Support in the Form of Medical Care

Final policy memoranda are official USCIS policy documents and effective the date the memos are approved.

NOTE: If you are unable to access the memoranda through the links provided above, please do the following:



1. Go to www.uscis.gov

2. Select the “laws” tab at the top of the page

3. Select “policy memoranda” on the left side of the page
Click to expand...


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You are right with the Memo numbers. 0051 and 0052. 0051 being the memo that I shared and 0052 being the Medical Exemption memo. For some reason, they are in reverse order under the website link shared. Nonetheless, they both have same release date that is: November 20, 2011. But anyway, I hope for the sake of justice, that USCIS will not start implementing crazy policies and start denying people's application because they were placed on hold for material support to begin with. I think at this stage, by reading both memos, the majority of population that are being on hold is non Medical related..... And after reading the memo that is 0051, it seems like it will have adverse impact to majority than the healing or curing affect the Medical Exemption memo might have.

Again, I am still optimistic that USCIS will apply exemptions to most (if not each and everyone), and not to deny applications based on some crazy and Adverse Legal policy that they have come up with. If you read through the memo on the link that I have shared it pretty much amends / negates the original exemption relief that was issued back in February 13, 2009.. so in other words making things harsher not easier. But may GOD help us all and give us the relief that we all truly deserve that is overly due as well.

Thanks,
Free-life.
 
[I meant free-life,
Thanks much, good research, excellent look out, let us wait and see how this is going to be implemented.
Because I am SO confused as to the meaning of the Memo.
Are they going to adjudicate all pending cases???, by Approval or Denial / OR does this Memo imply = denying those AOS put on hold and should have been denied;
Which one is it?

Please Respond, free-life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top