ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: CSS Settlement Approved

  1. #1
    CSS Settlement Approved

    The class action amnesty case, Catholic Social Services, Inc. v. Tom Ridge, Department of Homeland Security (Civ S-86-1343-LKK), was approved by US Federal Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on January 23, 2004. This case was the longest pending class action suit against the former INS.



    In September 2003, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reached a settlement allowing over 150,000 undocumented immigrants to apply for legal resident status under a one-time amnesty program that became law in 1986. The law allowed undocumented immigrants who had resided in the US since 1982 to obtain legal status. The class action suit challenged an INS rule that disqualified those who had briefly traveled abroad during the period of required residence for the amnesty.



    In April 1988, Judge Karlton ruled that the travel rule was illegal and extended the application period for four months for those who had been turned away. INS agreed to change the rule, but appealed the judge's decision to grant an extension. For the next fifteen years, INS repeatedly appealed federal court orders upholding the extension.



    While the appeals were pending, class members were temporarily protected from deportation and were allowed to apply for work permits.


    Under the approved settlement, immigrants who believe they qualified for the 1986 amnesty but were turned away have a one-year period beginning in May 2004 to apply to legalize their status. Class members will be allowed to work while their applications are pending. The DHS also agreed to pay the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees.

    In a separate class action case, Newman v. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law also represent the plaintiffs. The case addresses another 100,000 immigrants who were turned away by INS during the amnesty program because they too had briefly traveled abroad. However, these plaintiffs returned by improperly using non-immigrant visas such as student and visitor visas. A settlement has been reached in this case, which is pending approval by a federal court in Los Angeles.

    [This message was edited by Zeid on February 13, 2004 at 03:34 PM.]

  2. #2
    CSS Settlement Approved

    The class action amnesty case, Catholic Social Services, Inc. v. Tom Ridge, Department of Homeland Security (Civ S-86-1343-LKK), was approved by US Federal Judge Lawrence K. Karlton on January 23, 2004. This case was the longest pending class action suit against the former INS.



    In September 2003, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reached a settlement allowing over 150,000 undocumented immigrants to apply for legal resident status under a one-time amnesty program that became law in 1986. The law allowed undocumented immigrants who had resided in the US since 1982 to obtain legal status. The class action suit challenged an INS rule that disqualified those who had briefly traveled abroad during the period of required residence for the amnesty.



    In April 1988, Judge Karlton ruled that the travel rule was illegal and extended the application period for four months for those who had been turned away. INS agreed to change the rule, but appealed the judge's decision to grant an extension. For the next fifteen years, INS repeatedly appealed federal court orders upholding the extension.



    While the appeals were pending, class members were temporarily protected from deportation and were allowed to apply for work permits.


    Under the approved settlement, immigrants who believe they qualified for the 1986 amnesty but were turned away have a one-year period beginning in May 2004 to apply to legalize their status. Class members will be allowed to work while their applications are pending. The DHS also agreed to pay the plaintiffs' attorneys' fees.

    In a separate class action case, Newman v. Citizenship and Immigration Services, the Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law also represent the plaintiffs. The case addresses another 100,000 immigrants who were turned away by INS during the amnesty program because they too had briefly traveled abroad. However, these plaintiffs returned by improperly using non-immigrant visas such as student and visitor visas. A settlement has been reached in this case, which is pending approval by a federal court in Los Angeles.

    [This message was edited by Zeid on February 13, 2004 at 03:34 PM.]

  3. #3

Similar Threads

  1. CSS Summary of Settlement
    By Dixler in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-20-2006, 05:41 PM
  2. CSS/LULAC Settlement Finger Print??
    By taxreg16 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-07-2006, 03:26 PM
  3. CSS/LULAC Settlement -Important Question
    By Jorge in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-14-2005, 09:03 PM
  4. Extension of Deadline Applications to CSS/LULAC Settlement
    By Zumot in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-19-2005, 09:16 AM
  5. CSS/LULAC new settlement
    By Depika in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-29-2005, 04:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: