... and muddies the water even more.
Here, straight from the horses mouth, is the Fact Sheet for "Traveling Outside the United States as an Asylum Applicant, an Asylee, or a Lawful Permanent Resident Who Obtained Such Status Based on Asylum Status Asylum applicants, asylees, and lawful permanent residents who obtained such status based on their asylum"
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AsylumTravel122706FS.pdf
DAMN! But prepare to be confused some more. From an Algerian forum: (BOLDs are mine)
My conclusions: Changed political conditions seem like a pretty straight forward case, at least for permanent residents. Family emergency should also be fine. you can go, but prepare to be questioned and defend your trip. And question to the group: can we quote Mr. Bently when questioned?
Here, straight from the horses mouth, is the Fact Sheet for "Traveling Outside the United States as an Asylum Applicant, an Asylee, or a Lawful Permanent Resident Who Obtained Such Status Based on Asylum Status Asylum applicants, asylees, and lawful permanent residents who obtained such status based on their asylum"
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AsylumTravel122706FS.pdf
Possible Consequences of Returning to the Country of Claimed Persecution
Section 208.8(b) of Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations provides that an asylum applicant who leaves the United States pursuant to advance parole and returns to the country of claimed persecution shall be presumed to have abandoned his or her asylum application, unless the applicant is able to establish compelling reasons for the return. Therefore, if an asylum applicant returns to his or her country of claimed persecution pursuant to advance parole, he or she should be prepared to explain the reason for the return.
Asylum status may be terminated for specific reasons as listed in INA § 208(c)(2). An individual’s underlying asylum status may be terminated even if the individual has already become a lawful permanent resident.
Section 208.8(b) of Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations provides that an asylum applicant who leaves the United States pursuant to advance parole and returns to the country of claimed persecution shall be presumed to have abandoned his or her asylum application, unless the applicant is able to establish compelling reasons for the return. Therefore, if an asylum applicant returns to his or her country of claimed persecution pursuant to advance parole, he or she should be prepared to explain the reason for the return.
Asylum status may be terminated for specific reasons as listed in INA § 208(c)(2). An individual’s underlying asylum status may be terminated even if the individual has already become a lawful permanent resident.
DAMN! But prepare to be confused some more. From an Algerian forum: (BOLDs are mine)
Chris Bentley, a spokesman in Washington for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said people with asylum claims who return home for a family emergency have nothing to worry about. The warning is designed to catch those who abuse the system and return home frequently for reasons that may raise suspicions of fraud.
"We are not talking about people who are traveling out of the country to visit an ill or dying relative," Bentley told The Miami Herald on Friday. "What we're talking about here is an individual who travels back and forth multiple times. That person would be subject to these types of conditions."
A trip home under changed political conditions in that country also would not trigger scrutiny under the laws and regulations cited in the fact sheet, Bentley said.
Bentley added it was the first time his agency had published an asylum travel fact sheet "along these lines," but noted it was based on long-standing laws and regulations.
He said the agency posted the warning because of questions from the public "to clarify the travel conditions on these certain classes of individuals."
Immigration attorneys said they were concerned because the fact sheet did not include specific exemptions for family emergencies or changed political conditions for asylum-based green card holders.
"People are going to read it and not know that," said Cheryl Little, executive director of Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center. "They're just going to think, `better safe than sorry.'"
Ira Kurzban, a national authority on immigration law, said immigration officials may scrutinize more aggressively the trips of people who have won asylum grants and those with asylum-based green cards.
Officials, he said, could argue that since a person does not fear persecution in his home country, the original asylum claim is not valid and the green card was obtained fraudulently. As a result, deportation proceedings could be instituted.
The notice says asylum could be revoked "due to fraud in the asylum application" and adds that return to the country of "feared persecution" could be "evidence that the asylee's alleged fear of persecution is not genuine."
Albert Perez, an immigration attorney at Miami-based Colombian American Service Association, said several immigrants with asylum-based green cards have recently been questioned more closely by immigration officers after returning from trips abroad - but none has been detained or given notice that his or her asylum is in jeopardy.
"We are not talking about people who are traveling out of the country to visit an ill or dying relative," Bentley told The Miami Herald on Friday. "What we're talking about here is an individual who travels back and forth multiple times. That person would be subject to these types of conditions."
A trip home under changed political conditions in that country also would not trigger scrutiny under the laws and regulations cited in the fact sheet, Bentley said.
Bentley added it was the first time his agency had published an asylum travel fact sheet "along these lines," but noted it was based on long-standing laws and regulations.
He said the agency posted the warning because of questions from the public "to clarify the travel conditions on these certain classes of individuals."
Immigration attorneys said they were concerned because the fact sheet did not include specific exemptions for family emergencies or changed political conditions for asylum-based green card holders.
"People are going to read it and not know that," said Cheryl Little, executive director of Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center. "They're just going to think, `better safe than sorry.'"
Ira Kurzban, a national authority on immigration law, said immigration officials may scrutinize more aggressively the trips of people who have won asylum grants and those with asylum-based green cards.
Officials, he said, could argue that since a person does not fear persecution in his home country, the original asylum claim is not valid and the green card was obtained fraudulently. As a result, deportation proceedings could be instituted.
The notice says asylum could be revoked "due to fraud in the asylum application" and adds that return to the country of "feared persecution" could be "evidence that the asylee's alleged fear of persecution is not genuine."
Albert Perez, an immigration attorney at Miami-based Colombian American Service Association, said several immigrants with asylum-based green cards have recently been questioned more closely by immigration officers after returning from trips abroad - but none has been detained or given notice that his or her asylum is in jeopardy.
My conclusions: Changed political conditions seem like a pretty straight forward case, at least for permanent residents. Family emergency should also be fine. you can go, but prepare to be questioned and defend your trip. And question to the group: can we quote Mr. Bently when questioned?
Last edited by a moderator: