Practice resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
ASISTA Practice Alert: 2026 Updates to USCIS Signature Policy (September 3, 2026) from ASISTA.
ASISTA Practice Advisory: Screening Victims of Notario Fraud and Unscrupulous Representation for U Visa Qualifying Crimes (July 2026) from ASISTA.
ASISTA Practice Advisory: Nunc Pro Tunc Extensions of U or T Status on Form I-539 (May 28, 2026) from ASISTA.
ASISTA and its partners create extensive practice advisories about policies and procedures related to VAWAs, U and T visas and more. Please see below.
ASISTA Practice Pointer Hot Tips for Contacting USCIS About Pending Survivor-Based Cases (March 24, 2026).docx.pdf - Google Drive Loading… Sign in
ASISTA Practice Alert: What Just Happened in Matter of Ibarra-Vega? (March 11, 2026) from ASISTA.
On August 26, 2025, the Tenth Circuit issued a published decision, O.C.V. v. Bondi , vacating the Board of Immigration Appeals presidential decision Matter of M-R-M-S- , which had wrongfully held that if a persecutor had any motivation other than animus toward the family group, an asylum seeker could not prevail on a family-based asylum claim. The Tenth Circuit rejected this narrowed definition of nexus. The case was litigated in federal court by the Center for Gender and Refugee Studies and the
%PDF-1.4 %���� 1 0 obj <> endobj 3 0 obj <> endobj 4 0 obj <> endobj 9 0 obj <> stream x�}��J�`� kA�A� \��h���X\[�V�4M�؟�������&.ހ�e(��%���o$����{x�/�@$�*�N�s˥�Q� S�L��eZ}����K�}^�'7��v���!y�.�'��V��>�����s<���^�(���F�>���7�V�=���f���WtV�%J��-�جS�#LQ�"��'IB� EN��Py�zfISP�Y��H)����� ���@� &/C�~�{ �e�6�����1]shE�H� ��0W��'�9�]�Y�?����bM��4 �?��K� endstream endobj 8 0 obj <> stream �����JFIF���������C� $.' ",# (7),01444 '9=82<.342���C 2! !2
%PDF-1.6 %���� 255 0 obj <> endobj 280 0 obj <>/Filter/FlateDecode/ID[ ]/Index[255 63]/Info 254 0 R/Length 116/Prev 247387/Root 256 0 R/Size 318/Type/XRef/W[1 3 1]>>stream h�bbd```b``N��}`r"�d� "���$;�d�������v����� �����I9�D2���C^�H�:��"���6 �Ԩ*��o�� ;201B�� V�F����3�� endstream endobj startxref 0 %%EOF 317 0 obj <>stream h�b```�� � � �@��(�����I�e�8�� 6�P�T�k ���vKr�~��t�_����>Kf��?|���n��o;;�;:]2:�L!���:P�[�̱H��X$�A�і͓I�q3� � �X��d��� L���*q �Π��
%PDF-1.7 %���� 1 0 obj <>/Metadata 141 0 R/ViewerPreferences 142 0 R>> endobj 2 0 obj <> endobj 3 0 obj <>/ExtGState<>/XObject<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageB/ImageC/ImageI] >>/Annots[ 16 0 R 22 0 R 28 0 R 29 0 R 30 0 R] /MediaBox[ 0 0 612 792] /Contents 4 0 R/Group<>/Tabs/S/StructParents 0>> endobj 4 0 obj <> stream x��]K������=|70h4;A�H�rX���x�=��l&������*[-�2⃥�����z~,R�÷���yx�����> ��� >�|���/���p �Nÿ^�b#��f.6��4�ᗏ�_�����ׯ ߿~������ _���"6�Aj3����4���]�o��ӿ��O�/�����W߽~����w�_}��
In Department of State v. Muñoz , 602 U.S. 899 (2024), the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that a U.S. citizen and her noncitizen spouse had no access to judicial review of a consular officer’s denial of an immigrant visa. The Court held that a U.S. citizen has no “fundamental liberty interest” i n her spouse’s admission to the United States. This practice advisory, by the American Immigration Council, the International Refugee Assistance Project, and the Consular Accountability Project, is intende
%PDF-1.4 %���� 1 0 obj <> endobj 3 0 obj <> endobj 4 0 obj <> endobj 11 0 obj <> endobj 13 0 obj <> stream x�}��J�`� kA�A� \��h���X\[�V�4M�؟�������&.ހ�e(��%���o$����{x�/�@$�*�N�s˥�Q� S�L��eZ}����K�}^�'7��v���!y�.�'��V��>�����s<���^�(���F�>���7�V�=���f���WtV�%J��-�جS�#LQ�"��'IB� EN��Py�zfISP�Y��H)����� ���@� &/C�~�{ �e�6�����1]shE�H� ��0W��'�9�]�Y�?����bM��4 �?��K� endstream endobj 12 0 obj <> stream x�콇{S��.�/|�}�=��_�U]H/'9i����$W5IB��E�+=@ ��{/Ү�\hl �w[�|3