Banner

Banner

Thursday, January 22, 2015

Immigration Judge Finds Theft of Food and Livestock Does Not Trigger Material Support Bar


 

 

In a case that had been pending almost twenty-five years, Arlington Immigration Judge Paul W. Schmidt found that the theft of food and livestock by the FMLN (Farabundo Marti Nation Liberation Front) from the Respondent’s home did not constitute material support of terrorism.  The ruling paved the way for an El Salvadoran man, who had escaped his country’s civil war, to receive permanent residency in the United States.

The Respondent, who fled El Salvador in 1988 when he found a bomb in front of his house, had been attempting to obtain some form of immigration relief since 1990, when he filed his first asylum application.  His most recent attempt was through an application through the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (known as NACARA), which permits, among other things, certain Central Americans who have been present in the United States since the early 1990s to adjust to permanent residency, provided they can show good moral character and extreme hardship if returned to their home country.

Eligibility for immigration relief, however, is often not enough.  Rather, those who meet the eligibility requirements must still show that they are admissible under U.S. Immigration law.  One ground of inadmissibility applies to those who have provided material support to a terrorist organization.  This is called the material support bar.

U.S. courts have upheld a broad interpretation of the material support bar made by the Board of Immigration Appeals.  The material support bar can be triggered, for example, merely by providing food and directions to a group that the U.S. Government labels as a terrorist organization.  The text of the statute itself provides for no exception to the material support bar even if the support was given under duress.  Thus, a credible threat of immediate death may not excuse someone who has given food to a group labeled as terrorist.

In the Respondent’s case, he testified that twice the FMLN came to his home and took food and livestock.  The first time, they took about twenty tortillas.  The second time, they took one of his animals.  The Respondent did not stop the FMLN because he feared that he would be killed.  Because the U.S. Government labeled the FMLN a terrorist organization, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement argued that this triggered the material support bar in the Respondent’s case.

In a written opinion, Judge Schmidt ruled that it did not.  Citing an unpublished Board of Immigration Appeals case, the Immigration Judge found that in order to be material the support has to be active.  The fact that the FMLN stole food and livestock from the Respondent, therefore, did not constitute material support.  The Judge granted the Respondent his NACARA application, paving the way for him and his minor daughter to become permanent residents.

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
Call now for an appointment:
(703) 837-8832
(571) 551-6069 (ESP)
wkovatch@kovatchlegalservices.com

7 comments:

  1. Another helpful post. This is a very nice blog that I will definitively come back to several more times this year!
    Exclusion Reviews

    ReplyDelete
  2. Can you please provide more information on this subject? BTW your blog is great. Cheers.
    Immigration lawyer Los Angeles

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post.
    orientations kuwait

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really love your weblog, Its great to find not absolutely everyone is just posting a ton of rubbish these days!
    Immigration lawyer Los Angeles

    ReplyDelete
  5. Its wonderful, looking at the time and effort you put into your weblog and detailed information you provide. I'll bookmark your weblog and visit it weekly for your new posts.
    Matter of Malatesta

    ReplyDelete
  6. Great blog you have a nice information about the migration and Hopefully things will begin picking back up.
    migrate sharepoint 2013 to 2016

    ReplyDelete
  7. Wow!super blog and very interesting information about the Law i really like it.
    New York Appellate Division

    ReplyDelete