Our ILRC Texas team continues to stand alongside Texans to oppose the harmful and unconstitutional Operation Lone Star (OLS). This sign-on letter, drafted by the ILRC and signed by nearly 80 local, state, and national organizations, urges Texas officials to say “no” to two harmful bills, HB 7 and HB 20. These bills would codify OLS, promote racial profiling, and fuel anti-immigrant rhetoric that threatens our communities. The ILRC and the nearly 80 organizations that signed this letter support Texans who are demanding protection from these dangerous bills and from Operation Lone Star.
On March 27, 2023, the ILRC submitted comments on the Biden Administration’s proposed rule that would impose a rebuttable presumption against eligibility for asylum for those who transited through a third country before arriving in the United States. The ILRC detailed concerns with how this rule will essentially ban a large number of asylum-seekers from relief and how the rule impermissibly restricts the due process rights of asylum-seekers at the U.S.-Mexico border.
On March 22, 2023, the ILRC sent a letter to USCIS acknowledging the implementation of biometrics flexibilities for domestic benefits applicants who live in remote areas. The ILRC commended the agency on its provision of flexibilities to ensure that all domestic applicants could continue with their benefits applications regardless of physical location in the United States. The ILRC further urged USCIS to expand these flexibilities to applicants abroad and highlighted the negative effects that consulate closures abroad have had on U and T visa applicants attempting to complete their biometrics abroad.
On March 8, ILRC responded to a request for input from the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) on how to broaden public engagement with the public in the federal regulatory process. ILRC suggested that OIRA partner with community organizations to ensure that information is shared in the most effective way possible, including written materials and trainings. ILRC also made several process suggestions that OIRA can implement to reduce barriers to public participation.
On March 8, ILRC provided comments on the USCIS proposed fee rule. In the comment, ILRC commended agency actions codifying fee exemptions. Additionally, ILRC requested that USCIS codify fee waiver eligibility standards and raise the income threshold for fee waivers. We also requested that fee increases be reduced for applications for lawful permanent residence, work authorization and family petitions, among others. Finally, the comment provides requested changes to various USCIS forms that are open for comment in conjunction with the proposed fee rule.
On February 2, 2023, USCIS announced changes to the Policy Manual guidance on the one-year physical presence requirement for asylee/refugee adjustment. In a comment letter on February 16, 2023, ILRC commended USCIS on the changes. We believe they will increase fair and consistent adjudications for asylees and refugees seeking adjustment.
On December 19, 2022, USCIS published updates to its Policy Manual on how adjudicators should assess applications under the Public Charge ground of inadmissibility. This guidance accompanies the new final rule on Public Charge which took effect on December 23, 2023. The guidance is mostly positive, solidifying and strengthening longstanding public charge policy. However, the ILRC provided suggestions to clarify implementation of the new rule and help USCIS achieve their goals of ensuring that the public charge ground of inadmissibility is applied clearly, consistently, and fairly.
On October 19, 2022, USCIS published major revisions to their Policy Manual on the English and/or Civics disability waiver for naturalization applicants. Overall, these changes were a welcome improvement in access to the disability waiver. However, we opposed the sections in the revised Policy Manual and N-648 that add a question about understanding the oath of allegiance.
On October 19, 2022, USCIS published major revisions to their Policy Manual on the English and/or Civics disability waiver for naturalization applicants. Overall, these changes were a welcome improvement in access to the disability waiver. However, we opposed the sections in the revised Policy Manual and N-648 that add a question about understanding the oath of allegiance. The oath waiver and the English/civics disability waiver derive from separate sections of the law and have different eligibility standards.
