Casos de Visa U, VAWA y Visas T, podrían verse beneficiados por orden de un juez!

本站添加: 2026-06-07

[00:00:12]This is [music] Show with Hernandez and lawyer Ezequiel Hernandez. Join us.

[00:00:24]June 2026, June 1. We're in another episode of the Immigration Policy Show. My name is Ezequiel Hernández, Tobado Immigration. We are broadcasting the Immigration Policy Show from the Hernandez Global studios in Phoenix, Arizona. And I'm always accompanied by the great production team Maybe Hernández, and well, we started halfway through the year 2026 doing this podcast, the Immigration Policy Show, and well, I greet you. Good morning, Maven.

[00:00:58]Good morning, lawyer. How are you? Hello, everyone. How are you? It's 7 a.m. and that's right, it's June 1st, 2026.

[00:01:07]Wow, how quickly the year has gone by.

[00:01:09]The year passed, the 6 months passed and today, in today's episode, we are obviously going to talk about the news that will give us the most relevant things that happened last week regarding immigration here in the United States.

[00:01:25]And the legal issue is going to be one of the cases that were litigated and made public. The decision was made to injunction, essentially the suspension of a memorandum at the beginning of last year where people who have U visas or T visas cannot be detained and deported during the pendency of that process. That happened a few days ago in a California court. We'll talk more about that, but first we're going to get to the big production, as you know, to give you what happened, the news around this country, and if you're tuning in, tell other people, okay? Tell them, "Hey, ah, send them the link, I don't know how to do it on your mobile device, on your phone, and well, go ahead, Maiden."

[00:02:24]Well, good morning everyone. As I already told you, among the most important news, what you have probably heard right now that has resonated a lot this week, are the protests at DNA Hall, uh the ICE Detention Center in New Jersey, uh Governor Mickey Sheriel of the state of New Jersey yesterday ordered the state police to assume greater security control around the detention center. The reason is because there have been many protests, because the detainees are on hunger strike due to poor conditions, medical delays, and the false claim of a lack of progress in their immigration cases. This past week there were strong clashes between protesters who were in support of those detained inside and people from law enforcement. So, this has caught the attention of many organizations at the national level, of the media, because there are protests and this is considered one of the largest detention centers on the east coast of the United States.

[00:03:33]So it's like the biggest news story where all eyes are on right now, but it's not necessarily the most important immigration news, because the most important immigration news that affects many people, the lawyer is going to talk about it right now and it's a classy one.

[00:03:50]A federal judge blocked deportations of people in pending cases involving immigration, U visas, and T visas. This is probably the most important news of the week for the most vulnerable communities. A California judge certified the class action lawsuit nationwide and temporarily blocked an ICE policy implemented in 2025. That policy allowed the detention, arrest, and deportation of certain individuals with pending applications for VAG, U visas, and T visas.

[00:04:19]The court ordered the suspension of that policy while the litigation continues.

[00:04:24]The lawyer is going to talk about this today.

[00:04:26]Yes. And you can repeat it again because you did it very well, uh, one of the most important things, so very important that uh, one of the non-profit organizations that presented this case, right? Um, in one of the news stories I read online, they said that when they filed the lawsuit last year there was a lot of media coverage and even more news now that they won it last week, right? And you asked me why. And well, the first question that comes up about you was, well, I wouldn't want to get people too excited because there were other cases. Is it possible to appeal? And the answer is yes.

[00:05:15]The government has 60 days to appeal this decision, and what happened is that this non-profit organization sued the Trump administration. If you recall, people with pending UAGA or T visas had this protection from being detained or at least deported while their case was pending. That's how things were. Then President Trump comes along and does and undoes that practice.

[00:05:52]Ah, and that's where this organization is submitting that demand in 2025.

[00:05:59]Everything is postponed to 2025 and right now in May they are doing the organization a favor with what is called an injunction, which is the halting of the change. Elitigo is still going on and this was in, you'll see, I'll tell you the day they have the appeal or at least that it's the 60 days, it's 60 days from May 20 to June 20, I think.

[00:06:27]June 20th.

[00:06:29]So, those are based on the federal rules of procedure, and it's rule 4A1B that dictates that if the federal government is involved as one of the parties to the dispute, they give it 60 days instead of 30 days to file a complaint. And this would go to the Ninth Circuit because it's a California district court, and that goes to the Ninth Circuit where this can be appealed. What is the big impact? So, why is it important? It's because if you, for example, and we're going to do it in some cases of people who are detained, there's a man who is a T visa holder who is detained and they haven't responded to his request, and we can make an amended petition to submit the case to the court to make this injunction known so that the person can be released, not removed from the visa process, but the case can be closed and the detention stopped.

[00:07:33]So, that's the importance. The truth is also as I mentioned. Well, you did n't mention it to me, I do n't know if you want to mention it here on the program. Hey, what are the things that can be appealed? No.

[00:07:47]Yes. Well, my response to the lawyer when he told me all this, because he says, "This is the most important news." Spot. And he gave it to me last week, yes, but since last week, when we talked about it, he told me, "This is the most important thing and this morning he reiterates it to me and absolutely whatever the lawyer says."

[00:08:02]But my response was that it is not the first time that a court, especially in California, has made a decision and the government has not necessarily followed it. So I looked up exactly what those rulings or decisions of the Courts in California are, and there's one about ACE arrests in courts, the re-detention of previously released people, immigration raids in Southern California, conditions in detention centers, and the right to a bail hearing. And I think it's this one about the bail hearings, where even though a decision had been made, they weren't following the rules.

[00:08:40]Yes. And what I mentioned to you, that's where... those who weren't following that decision were the immigration court, that's why it went to the district court where the hearings are held and they have the mandate to grant those bails. Here it is the district court that is giving that same case and it is already possible to change the feces that are more reasoned just because of the issue of bail.

[00:09:10]These people don't even need bail, as long as they can prove they are on the lookout. In that case, I'm going to give you the specifics for three. Ah, he says, here are some of the Ah, I have the notes that he sent to my partner Corey this weekend and this morning.

[00:09:30]Everything is here. I understand. I have it here too, and I'm telling you, I'm not going to use what she gave me because she did a really good job on it. And it says, "Essentially, the Court identified three certified classes.

[00:09:46]You have to remember that classes, or classes of action, are classes, that is, the groups that sue, right?

[00:09:59]Because the Supreme Court last year ruled that if a federal judge makes a decision, it doesn't impact the entire nation, unless it's a class action. Well, they identify or form three classes of people who would be protected under this if the injunction stands. One, the first class is all individuals with pending derivative and principal T visa, VAGA, and also those who filed Self Petitions and were detained or who are requesting or were civilly detained by immigration, right? Through ICE and U visas.

[00:10:51]U, T, and Bagua, as mentioned.

[00:10:54]Now, the second is everyone to whom the US has granted deferral action based on a UT visa or for whom, during the period of diffusion, ICE agents were detained and removed without giving them a chance to have a hearing or a revocation of their deferral action. I mean, I think even people who were removed from the United States who had, for example, this deferral action— when you're specifically given a U visa, you receive a deferral action letter, right?—these are the other people who are protected, the first class, and it's very specific, not just that it's pending, but also people who had the action with it. And it mentions, the Court also says, the Court ordered the return of three of the people who were suing, who were the leaders of this class who had been deported in 2025. Oh, wow.

[00:12:02]Also, the strike is against the 2025 memorandum that President Trump put in place, which involves the policy of what's called de facto revocation, meaning that when you have the deferral action, it was revoked de facto. In effect, it's like, well, I'll do it right now, right? Oh, there's a process to revoke it. The constitutional basis for this was the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which is called due process, and also the APA, which was the process for how to activate processes in the States and policies in the United States under the Constitution. Anyway, these three classes and the reasoning or the basis are given. It says that the Court, and I mentioned it here more or less, finds that the policies are violations of the APA and the Fifth Amendment. And they are all in favor of the injunction, meaning that they can stop the practice of President Trump's administration. They have 60 days to sue starting May 20, and that's what came out last week.

[00:13:20]Okay, attorney. So, this would affect people, the people who are listening to us, to begin with, who among you are or know people who have a visa, a U visa, or a T visa, who are already Submitted, right? And that's one, two people who have that and who already received that letter of deferred action or the letter of good faith determination, right? And that they have deferred action, and ah, people who were deported, I mean, detained and deported, and who had during that period that deferred action and who are detained. Ah, or people who have a pending Bagua or a pending U visa and who are afraid of being detained. That would be one of those defenses.

[00:14:13]Well, up until now, as you said, they have 60 days to appeal. The Ninth Circuit has to make a decision on it. Ah, but the Ninth Circuit can choose to say, look, while we decide on the injunction, on the stay, ah, uh, well, this stay continues, right?

[00:14:34]So, ah, we'll see how the court reacts, but at least for the next 60 days, it can be sent, especially I'm thinking of people who They have the heavyweights, and this can be sent as a corrected heavyweight, or these cases can be added together so that the district courts feel they have more heavyweights based on a rule that can be mentioned, right?

[00:14:58]Well, then it's good news. It's good news, and of course, look at the USAS memorandum, which, by the way, USAS sent out afterward saying, well, this was just a memorandum reminding our officers what they could do, right? Yes, yes. And what I explained to the clients who are adjusting their status, and the people who are, you're going to have to fight this situation as far as it goes, right? Because, well, that's the design of this whole process. So, quick fixes, magic pill solutions don't exist.

[00:15:43]Obviously, this comes out, it's good news, I understand that's the point. The district court is doing its job. In this case, the litigation has to continue, but that's why they put it. In that way. The Ninth Circuit is a good circuit, and there's a good basis for arguing that the detention, at least of this group, of this class, should be protected, and the vast majority of people who have this... well, they have their work permits, they were... they're victims of a crime, they were victims of abuse, they were victims of trafficking, and so on. For the people who are listening, for the people who listen to this podcast, can you remind us what the Ninth Circuit is and what the implications are of a decision by a federal judge of that type?

[00:16:33]Yes. Well, first of all, the federal courts in that system are not the federal immigration courts, which are handled by the Department of Justice. The Immigration Court is completely separate from the federal court infrastructure that is handling this case. The District Court is the first instance, the first institution that takes those qualifying complaints.

[00:17:09]And when there's a decision, as in this case in the District of California, that decision is made. In any of the parties that are suing, whether they win or lose, usually those who lose have the ability to appeal to the court that essentially reviews those decisions in the geographical area where that district court is located. In this case, California is in the Ninth Circuit, and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has to make that decision. So, in the next 60 days, before June 20, the government has the option to file that appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which is composed of judges—it's plural, not immigration judges. Here, they are looking at the legality of the actions, the application, or the performance of the immigration law and policies being reviewed in this case, the suspension of protection for these individuals, and their treatment, especially regarding the federal discretion that was granted during the pendency of these cases.

[00:18:19]Okay. So, the impact is for people nationwide, wherever they are. You do n't have to be just in that district.

[00:18:26]Right. And the The reason, I'll repeat it, is because, as mentioned earlier on this show, the Supreme Court last year said that a federal judge's decision won't affect the entire nation unless it's a class action. And this isn't just a class action, but three classes of people were identified who are covered by this possible relief that may exist during these 60 days.

[00:19:10]Bagua visas, U visas, and T visas.

[00:19:12]Yes, the principals and dependents of those people. So, there are many people who have U visas.

[00:19:18]Can you remind us of that, attorney? Who are the people who have U visas? Those with Bagua visas and T visas.

[00:19:25]Yes, those with U visas are victims of crime, and those specifically are taking a very long time to be adjudicated. They've been waiting, I don't know, 30 years, no, 308 years, well, I think they 're taking time now to be adjudicated. Approve a U visa. Okay.

[00:19:42]So, those people definitely already, for example, we're seeing cases from 2017, February, March, that are just now being decided, that is, people who submitted their cases in 2017, they're just now getting a response in terms of the decision.

[00:20:02]They've already received their work permit, they've already had their Writ of Action, and that's what this court is referring to. Listen, these people are waiting for that process, they have a work permit, you gave them Writ of Action, and you end up detaining them. Uh, and well, uh, those were the ones who would be protected, who are victims of a crime and their dependents. The Bagua cases are those people who have a petition, either for a Vagua or for Vagua and adjustment of status in terms of the emotional abuse of a spouse, citizen or resident, or of a child over 21 years of age, uh, uh, who abuses them, and that abuse was used to manipulate, regulate, or control the parent-child relationship. of a wife or husband here in the United States.

[00:21:00]Those people submit their applications and would also be protected, so they could avoid detention or deportation before their cases are decided. Oh, be warned, it's a little more difficult to obtain in my opinion, but it is, I mean, yes, there were many people who applied for a T visa. And obviously, there are abuses that are seen.

[00:21:28]But this is for people who are trafficked, victims of that type of issue. And they would also be protected as principals or dependents in this type of case.

[00:21:41]Well, I just remember here on this show, while we've been doing it, all the people who send us comments, there are a lot of people who send us comments about U visas.

[00:21:52]The C14 permit.

[00:21:54]Exactly. So, who has a C14 permit? Let's see, who has it?

[00:21:57]Let's see how many. But there are always a lot of people, we receive a lot of questions about U visas and Regarding Bagua, then, uh, perhaps this could affect them positively, right? They could benefit, but as you say, we have to wait and see how it unfolds.

[00:22:12]Yes, we'll see how it unfolds, but the point is to give the news of the decision that's made, right? Just like bad decisions, decisions that are part of the challenge of this, right? The challenge of being able to change the issue of detention, which I think was one of the bases of the practice, or rather, the tactic of this administration, which yesterday in a conversation with visitors here wasn't known, right? And it's happening, and that's what I understood, and I think what a family member said, is that we receive different news, right?

[00:22:56]We're not aware, and to the point that people couldn't believe that something like this was happening. It's happening every day, and people in general here are feeling that fear. To a certain extent, I questioned whether it was only my circle that was... Feeling, well, I don't know, the presence of that tactic, but we 're not... it's a deliberately calculated wave of... managing the immigration issue with the detention of people.

[00:23:39]And removing the resources to obtain freedom from a civil matter that has to do with criminality, but it has been the criminalization of delinquency. That has been the story from day one, and what's more, if you go back to the first administration, what was the message? I remember I was on the radio, watching on TV, and on TV it said, "All Mexicans are drug traffickers, they're this or that," and everyone was stuck on that from then on, boom, how many years ago?

[00:24:11]So it's always been that, right? The black mark on the person who is an immigrant, and the world is full of immigrants.

[00:24:18]Once again, Ezequiel Hernández, your immigration deadline is June 1, 2026.

[00:24:23]We start this June hitting hard with the Immigration Policy Show. It's Monday, the first Monday of this month, and we're here with Ezequiel Hernández, Migration.

[00:24:33]I'm with the great production team, and we're bringing you the most relevant news about immigration policy in the United States. If you're listening right now, you're dropping the kids off for the last few days of school, because many are already out, right? They're already on vacation.

[00:24:49]Yes. Or if you're going to work, well, some people tell me, "I listen to you when we're on our way to work." Put us on your phone, tell your husband or wife to send them the link so they can listen to us live on YouTube and also on Facebook. Big shout-out to our colleague Jorge Ramos, who won an EMI for doing the news on YouTube. We'll check that out too, and hopefully you'll vote for us when we're nominated for best immigration podcast in the United States.

[00:25:19]So, tell us where you live, what your question is, if you have a U visa, if you think this will go So, if you applied for the Bagua visa, how many years has your application been pending? And well, the topic is relevant, and also, many people on U visas haven't wanted to travel, haven't wanted to fly because they've been detained at the airport. Even though they're working and haven't committed any crimes, even though they're shown their work permits. I'm talking about people who possibly—well, I'm not saying they do n't have deportation orders—so this would be one of the very good things for people who have deportation orders and are protected by a pending visa. Let's remind those of you joining us now what we were talking about: a federal judge in California certified a ruling and temporarily blocked an ICE policy implemented in 2025. That policy allowed the detention and deportation of certain people with pending Bagua, U visa, and T visa applications who are victims of domestic violence, victims of certain crimes (which is what the U and T visas are for), and victims of human trafficking. The court ordered that policy suspended while the litigation continues. The lawyer says that June 20th or 21st would be the deadline the government has to... Well, that would be 60 days, right? So it would be, but in June it would be 30, so it would be July.

[00:27:02]July. July.

[00:27:03]Okay. So, well, we're just reminding that of the people who are connecting right now and listening to us. That's kind of the main news of the day. And also, the lawyer wanted us to remind everyone again about the USCIS memo, because it's not law, but it sparked a lot of controversy in the streets about status adjustments.

[00:27:27]People have said a lot.

[00:27:30]We talked about this on the last show, but this is something that also happened recently, and for everyone who follows us and didn't listen to last week's show, there was a USCIS memo about status adjustments, and after that, people started saying that status adjustments were over, that I don't know what. The lawyer said it, this isn't a change in the law.

[00:27:50]Can you tell us... Another one? Yes, no, it wasn't a change in the law, but I'll tell you that I called people who already had the package ready, it was going to be released, and I explained to them why, I did it proactively, and I met with a person, I think it was on Thursday, and she arrived with her wife, the husband, a citizen, arrived and was crying. She was crying, she was super scared, and she told me, "I'm going to have to go out and all that, right?" So, that's the cost and the damage [clears throat] the mental damage of what someone has to go through, right? After hearing this, and I think again, it's by design, and it's the timely information about your case, about what's happening, right? And there was her husband, obviously, she and I were talking about this, right? So, when your mind has all that fear that was injected by this news, right? It's very difficult, or it takes time to talk to you about it, to tell you what it is What's happening is seeing you talk about what 's true, what's not, what's possible, what's probable, and making the decision to submit for adjustment of status, which was done after that hour we talked about. So, that's what I want to talk about, right? That's what I want to talk about, because the memorandum comes out and mentions a lot that people have to leave the United States to go through the process, that there it wouldn't be an adjustment, there it would be a consular process, but that's what they think, the establishment of what they believe, right? And it wasn't even an executive order, a change of rules, but simply a memorandum to immigration officers, reminding them that they had to take this variant or variable of the case into account regarding the decision on an adjustment of status. And I had to go to some adjustment of status interviews. And yes, and an officer said, "Okay, now we have to ask these three questions." And she asked me... The client had a DACA who made an advance payment with Visa, right?

[00:30:15]Then he said to her, "Well, why do you think you deserve to have an adjustment?" Why did n't you go out? No, uh, why don't you go through a consular process? Why didn't you go out? Ah, those were the questions he mentioned. And how would that affect your case, right? So, if you don't have a favorable decision. Then she answers.

[00:30:37]Well, he says, "Well, uh, one, I think it looks like the law lets me make an adjustment. I had the advance all, why did you leave?" No, I went to visit my grandmother who was sick, I came back, they gave me the legal entry stamp and uh two, why me, I mean, why don't you do it outside? And she said, "Because I've been here all my life, I don't know Mexico and it's a dangerous place and as a woman in Ciudad Juárez I don't feel safe." That was one of the answers. And finally, why is this warranted? And well, she says, she said, "I've been here my whole life, I've contributed, I've had a work permit, I've paid my taxes, all my children are from here. There would be a family imbalance if I had to leave, and okay, they don't tell you anymore, 'I'm not going to give you the recommendation to become a resident.' Simply put, I have everything, and if there's a change, well, we'll let you know in two weeks."

[00:31:36]So, but they haven't received the decision yet, right? Two weeks. This was a few days ago, right?

[00:31:39]Last week.

[00:31:40]So, that's what happened. Oh, and well, all these changes, like I said, the ones that scare people, we can also tell you about the Immigration Court, sorry, the district court, which rules that people who are covered by the Bagua, by the U visa, by the T visa, have class protection, and we can also tell you that the government has 60 days to appeal, but you'd rather I did n't tell you, or not, and well, yes, they do have it.

[00:32:12]What can I say, we have to talk about it. Because the real information that affects you—that's why we talk about it here on the Immigration Policy Show—is the space where you can see what's real, right? Hey, this is really being talked about. Oh, what is it? Oh, because on social media, and we're on social media, right? There's a lot of it, and people are looking for a source they can trust, and that's what we are for thousands of people who listen to our podcast. And we want to keep inviting you to, well, to keep following your moral compass, your... Yesterday we were talking about character, values, and discipline, right? In terms of... but none of that matters if you don't have a focus, if you don't have... what you want in terms of... and I'm talking about your goals. And if your goal, if your... well, I do n't know... your life and your decision is to be here, to stay here, then the Immigration Policy Show will give you the training... to distinguish what's real from what isn't. This case did come up, so... Does it work? When can you appeal? Oh, and what might happen, right? We can also tell you what a law doesn't do, what a policy doesn't do, what isn't a law, what an executive order is, what an internal memorandum from the Department of Homeland Security is. And well, we listen to your questions, we give general information, because I remind you that the Immigration Policy Show is not a source of legal advice.

[00:34:06]For that, you have to select your immigration attorney to review your case. But you have a little compass here to see where this is headed. When I heard about this case, I spoke to a friend who has a U visa, who is waiting and needs to travel, and I let him know, and I was very happy about it, right? Because they are living with fear and risk, right? Obviously [sighs] these people are going out every day to face these issues, but it was something that softens the situation, knowing that they are litigating for this power Helping people get out of detention.

[00:34:51]That's right. And the lawyer mentioned something. This week, uh, what happened? We recorded a show at Expansion Lab about discipline, responsibility. Yes.

[00:35:04]Uh, it was supposed to be about the habits of a successful person and the lawyer's life, right? What got him to where he is today, but it had so much content, right? And, I mean, it was a really good show.

[00:35:18]I mean, the topic... I didn't say, well, I'm going to do this, I mean, about what happened to me and what I learned from many people and from life, right? That many of us apply as immigrants, and that's what we should also talk about, right? There is discipline. Ah, there is, despite the difficulties of being undocumented, or being in a bad situation, or not having money, not having a car, not having documentation, not having an identity, not being able to prove your identity on paper, and still getting up, doing jobs, having, and being... Success in those fields, right?

[00:36:05]The conversation was good, and I mean, we always sit down to talk about immigration when we've done the shows, but it's rarely been with this kind of background, right? It's more like the life behind everything you see here, and it's interesting. It's coming out today, it's not published yet, and well, when it comes out we'll share it with you so you can follow it on Expansion Lab. Ah, lawyer, what do you say we go to the immigration questions? It's 7:37 in the morning here on the West Coast. We're in Phoenix, Arizona, at the Hernández Globo Studios.

[00:36:40]Broadcasting live from Phoenix, Arizona, the Immigration Policy Show. And we're going to do that, we're going to the questions. We're going to go into June, June 2026.

[00:36:52]Another thing I was told, and I'm going to put this here, do you feel the atmosphere, the feeling, ah, of soccer? Do you feel that World Cup fervor coming?

[00:37:07]We were at the wedding of... Ah, a greeting to... Look, that We were at two weddings in May.

[00:37:14]Yes.

[00:37:14]One one weekend, the other the following weekend. This past weekend was Fer's wedding, Fernando Sosa. Those of you who listened to us on other shows, Fer got married, and it was super cool because we all got together again, all of us who did radio together, and it was lovely.

[00:37:31]Lolita was there, Carliopi, Fernando, and other guests we've had on at some point, and it was really cool, really refreshing.

[00:37:39]Yes, yes. So, well, that's the story.

[00:37:42]A shout-out to everyone who got married.

[00:37:44]Okay, raise your hand, tell us when you got married. Did you get married this month?

[00:37:49]Hey, why do people get married in May?

[00:37:51]And for everyone who got divorced too, give me a shout-out to those of you who graduated from life with a divorce. This May, we have to be fair to everyone. Anyway, let's move on to the immigration questions. Send us yours, tell us where you're from, where you listen to us from. Send us a greeting for the immigration segment here on the Immigration Policy Show. Um, I'm already being contacted to do an interview here on one of the TV stations, specifically about this case that just came out. So, we can... you're hearing it first. Um, well, you heard it first on the Migration Pro Show analysis. I also want to be fair. I heard it from a lawyer last week when it came out, but obviously we have the show on Monday, and I wanted to give a good analysis of this and share this part with you. Let's go to the news. We're not putting on the music, the flag, or anything like that anymore. We gave the news when... I mean, the questions.

[00:38:53]The questions, and we're off.

[00:38:54]Ask Ezequiel.

[00:38:56]Okay. Lawyer. Good morning, this is Eli de León. Good morning. How long is the 42B taking? The judge granted me this relief. I've been waiting for 3 years and 5 months. How much longer will it take?

[00:39:07]Yes, No, you see, you're within the range, but it does last. They ca n't deport you. Technically, you earned your residency; they haven't given it to you because the numbers change every year, but it's roughly those four years. Next question.

[00:39:23]Omar Varona, good morning, Omar. How are you? Greetings from Texas.

[00:39:28]Always grateful for your information.

[00:39:29]Texas, Texas, Texas. A greeting to the state of Texas.

[00:39:33]We're watching our show—we won't say which one—that was in Montana, and now it's in Texas.

[00:39:39]We love that show. Oh, it's great.

[00:39:41]To all the people of Texas, over there in Dallas, over there in San Antonio, in Austin, Texas too, a lot of people, uh, I really like Austin. Oh, and in all the ranches, people live very well in Texas, over there in their ranches. Uh, the food is delicious too, a fantastic culture here in the United States with many people who already lived here in the United States and who, excuse me. In Texas, which later became part of the United States. There are many Mexican people there, many roots there, and a culture, subculture, and identity, right?, of the state of Texas. Let's continue.

[00:40:24]Okay, let's see. Lourdes Navarro, hello. A person who entered in 1999, posing as a minor with their cousin, obtained TPS, traveled, and now wants to adjust their status through their citizen daughter. Will they have any problems?

[00:40:42]Well, yes, you have to investigate that issue. No, it's not a question of whether they will have a problem, you have to analyze it. Technically, you had a legal entry; there's an issue with age, but we have to see how that affects things and if it could be considered what's called misrepresentation, which is a lie that would require a waiver. So, this brings up the importance of having an immigration attorney to help you navigate this process in order to apply, because now there's much more scrutiny, and there should be.

[00:41:19]Ah, against fraud here in the immigration issue. Now, I agree with that. Nobody wants fraud, but what does fraud even mean? Right? And what avenues are left for a person to apply for immigration? And that's a good example of the cases that need to be analyzed by an immigration lawyer and followed up after a decision has been made in order to file your petition.

[00:41:46]Okay. Good morning to both of you from New York, says Munir Mus.

[00:41:50]New York. New York, like Bad Bunny said there, right?

[00:41:55]Who revolutionized Spain right now, right?

[00:41:58]Bad Bunny is singing there. Ah, well, let's see, as we mentioned, let's see if he does n't appear on his show one of these days and say, "A shout-out to Claudia Palacios." Good morning, Mr. Hernandez. The 601A cases are slower. "Thank you." No, look, they're progressing, well, I don't want to get you too excited, but we have seen some cases of two years, or rather, two and a half years, that have been approved. They were approaching three years then, and they were at six months, so the situation has improved, but I'm not going to say it's better than before, right?

[00:42:35]So, yes, they are making progress, and the 601A waivers are being granted.

[00:42:40]Remember that the 601A waivers are those waivers that only forgive undocumented immigration status, which apply here in the United States, and you have to qualify. Only your citizen or resident parents or your citizen or resident spouse can grant it. Greetings to all the soccer fans, to all the Club América fans. Well, yes, we also have to send greetings to the Cruz Azul fans.

[00:43:02]Um, we're talking about the Mexican league, but also to all the Real Madrid fans. Yesterday I got to talk to one, have a little whiskey with him. He was wearing his Real Madrid cap. Madrid. And continue, since I interrupted this with them, let's move on to the next question.

[00:43:20]Yes, Munira, who greeted us from New York, says, "I entered the country with someone else's passport, not an American passport." I entered through the airport and never left, and I have a deportation cancellation case. My daughter, who is in the military, qualified for military leave. Since you are in deportation proceedings, you didn't have to leave, that is, you didn't have to be in the deportation process, the immigration court process. Uh, since you're in that jurisdiction, your daughter can't ask for that military pro unless she ends up in that case. That's the difficulty in that case.

[00:43:55]Oh, oh, oh. Well, Omar Varona, let's see, in my case, well, my U visa application was denied after 6 years of applying.

[00:44:05]We appealed and won 5 years ago and I still haven't received anything, not even a work permit. Quite the opposite. I was cited for deportation twice during the 5 years I have been waiting and my defense was that I have an open U visa case and a citizen child. My question is, how likely is it that I can file a federal lawsuit and perhaps obtain citizenship? Okay, first we're going to look at two things there and I'm not very clear, but I think so, right? Uh, you were denied a visa, then you sued and said you won, you won to reopen it or you won to get the U visa approved, right? Okay, that's one, two, and they approved your U visa and the Y visa and you have the paperwork that follows the approval, right? They reopened because it was wrong to deny you and they had to do another adjudication, but you won the U visa, right?

[00:45:06]And the USA gives it to you and then they referred you to the deportation process because it happened, and in court, if you got to immigration court and they haven't finished your case there because you have U visa status, because you couldn't be in deportation proceedings because you already proved that, but if they didn't give you the U visa and only reopened the case because there's a pending case, that's where she says that and it confuses me, or him. So that's why they haven't finished your case in the deportation process, because the U visa adjudication is still pending. I do n't know. Now, could you sue for the delay that exists, yes, technically, uh, and well, get citizenship, I don't know, I don't know which one they're telling you about, why the citizenship. Ah, because after the U visa you would have to be a resident and subsequently apply for your citizenship. Ah, but uh, yes, I would fight that case because that's where it is and that's where we get to the pressures that exist from politics with the logistical machinery that exists between two jurisdictions, USAS and the deportation court. That's where you have to fight that case, because if you don't, nobody else will, right? And yes, it takes time, it takes money, and yes, it takes a lot of... that's what we were talking about in this podcast that Maybe mentioned about the expansion lab and the commitment to what you want, right? And you have to have the resources to do it, the motivation, I don't know, what you have inside to be able to, but in his case he didn't have the resources and it's simply that he had the conviction that what he had, that's the resource, that's what I mean, that's your resource and when you don't have it, and that's what makes it purer, right? And apart from that, when you have the resources, then you work; the resources are for that. That's why goals are good, because if you don't have a goal and you just have, uh, well, this and that, you don't channel your energy, your vision, and your resources towards what you want, and you never finish because you never have anything in mind.

[00:47:32]So, in this case I was going to tell you, all your strength has to go towards resolving that if you tell me that the court, I mean, the appeal, already gave you the visa. Now, if he opened it up for them to award contracts, that's another matter. Move on to the next question.

[00:47:47]Okay. Amada Flores, good morning. I always listen to them, especially those of us who are in pending processes like deportation proceedings, fighting a case for more than 10 years.

[00:47:58]Thank you. You feel accompanied by his program. Oh my God, what a great comment, huh, because we are indeed accompanying thousands and thousands of millions, I'm going to say, millions of people who listen to us, not only because we are immigrants, because we have the same experience, because we speak the same language, because we feel the same things, because we eat the same things, because we see the same things, but also because many of our relatives or we ourselves have been in the deportation process or we have someone who is going through that anguish or our friends or our sisters, brothers. And we live with that sorrow, we live with the folklore of our culture, but also with much sorrow and misfortune from policies and governments. governments that, for one reason or another, forced our absence from our native country, or, as they say, because of life, right? We 're not in that country anymore. And then there are the, I do n't know, the rulers of the current countries we have where they can't manage. The issue of immigration, undocumented migration, legal migration, etc., and the pressures that exist on extremist agendas is a difficult one.

[00:49:22]That's what we were talking about, neither the one way over there nor the one way over here, because nobody, very few people live in that one and not all of us are at those extremes. Once again, Ezequila Hernández, Migration from the Immigration Policy Show accompanied by the great production. This podcast analyzes the topic of immigration, and we just received a message saying, "Thank you for joining us on this journey, this path of undocumented status and the deportation process, and for listening to us. It's great that you're joining us, and we hope you'll listen to us again next week. Let's move on to the next question.

[00:49:55]Fidel Guzmán. Oh, good morning. I'm watching from Salinas, California. I really like your program. I try to watch every Monday. I just submitted my application for military parole. Let's see how it goes.

[00:50:07]Greetings, Fidel. Thank you very much. That's great. Salinas. Greetings to Salinas, California.

[00:50:13]To Sergio Zamora. Sergio, how are you?

[00:50:16]Hello, good morning. Greetings from South Falls, Dacora. Blessings, and keep up the live stream, as it's very educational. Sergio had an application; I don't remember what happened with it, but I think he said hello. Very good. Very good.

[00:50:33]Arturo López, good morning. Listening from San Marcos, California, waiting for my 601 waiver approval.

[00:50:41]Okay, he's waiting for his waiver to begin his consular process. Greetings to everyone in California. That's where that decision came from the district court in California. We're in the Ninth Circuit there in California.

[00:50:54]Wait, we're not finished yet.

[00:50:56]Oh, sorry. [laughs] Attorney. One thing. Oh, I saw that the processing time went down to two. Here we go again. Good morning. Listening to you from San Marcos, California, waiting for my 601A waiver approval. I saw that the processing time went down to 24.5 these 5 months. What can you tell me about that? Why was it longer before?

[00:51:20]Yes, before, I no longer trust that timeline. The problem is that even they themselves say, "You know what?" Sometimes, in some of the processes, they even have a system below that no longer provides processing times because they no longer have the ability to make that forecast. So, be patient with it. Ah, that's the problem, not just yours. There was another person who had the same problem. If you already won, that's great. If he gets that court paper, right? And well, it's a matter of waiting.

[00:51:55]Okay. Araceli says, "Good morning, attorney. The new California court ruling also protects U visa holders with C14 visas who re-enter after deportation. That's what I was referring to a little while ago. The correct answer is yes, but remember we said the government has 60 days, meaning by July 20th, to respond.

[00:52:21]Ah, so, yes. Okay. Munira Musino, attorney, if I have a cancellation of removal case, do I need a waiver for entry with another passport, and what waiver number do I need? I have a 20-year-old citizen daughter.

[00:52:37]No, cancellation of removal only requires 10 years in the United States, good moral character, and a relative under 21. The thing is, you have to prove that this relative will suffer extreme, great, unique hardship beyond what is suffered in a normal deportation.

[00:52:53]And that's where that requirement is almost relentless; you have to have a person, that minor, that wife, that dad, that mom, that husband, citizen, resident, they're super, well, sick or with a very strange condition. So, it's not legal entry. Now, if you have legal entry, then it wouldn't be a cancellation of removal, it would be an adjustment of status before the court, but you have to prove that legal entry. Anyway, she's the one who was greeting us from New York, the one who asked the first question.

[00:53:22]New York, that, well, I'll remind you again. She says, "I entered the country with someone else's passport, a non-American passport." "I entered through the airport and never left." But what they're saying is a passport, not an American one. So, you didn't enter with a—I mean, it was a visa, because a lot of people say passport or it was a passport, for example, if you weren't Mexican but had a Honduran one, then that wasn't a legal entry. Yes. So, if you enter the United States legally, it doesn't matter if they let you in, if they waved in, or if you entered with someone else's visa, and you call that a passport, right?

[00:54:03]And they let you in, technically it's a legal entry, and you would have to argue that in court, you would have to prove it. They've already put on the music.

[00:54:11]That means, okay, the Immigration Policy Show is over.

[00:54:15]To make an appointment with the attorney, call 602-31412. Again, 602-314102.

[00:54:23]Or email us at [email protected].

[00:54:29]To make your appointment. Listen to Expansion Lab Podcast. This week we're going to talk about this gentleman here, about what you don't know and don't hear here or on the radio or on television, but what's the real story behind this lawyer?

[00:54:44]That's right, we're off.

[00:54:46]Be good, do a lot of work, be productive, enjoy yourself, enjoy yourself a little, take some time for yourself, eat something nice, eh. Tell us what you ate, what they made you eat that isn't tuna, hey, no, no, don't let them just make you tuna with chips, that's what I make the lawyer [laughs] every day every time I see him.

[00:55:09]Happy day, perseverance and discipline, that's what gives me chips and tuna.

[00:55:14]Well, and lots of love. Well, see you later.

[00:55:17]Happy week. Bye bye. See you. M.