immigration law

December 10, 2019

Gym Coach May Lose Citizenship if Convicted of Sex Crime

by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.

Jose Vilchis is facing charges that he sexually abused one of his students at I&M Gymnastics Academy. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice is suing to revoke his citizenship. Vilchis is a naturalized U.S. citizen, meaning that he came to this country on a green card and then applied to become a full citizen of the United States. Even though the crimes for which Vilchis are charged are heinous, the government does not have the authority to revoke citizenship unless they can prove that a naturalized citizen committed some subversive act, joined an enemy of the state, or committed fraud in order to get citizenship. So even though Vilchis is charged with a sex crime, that alone is not enough to strip a naturalized citizen of citizenship.

Did Vilchis Lie on His Application for Citizenship?

The U.S. Department of Justice is claiming that he did. They say that Vilchis unlawfully concealed three other instances of sexual abuse of minor girls beginning in 1985 when he was a green card holder. However, Vilchis was never arrested or convicted of these crimes. Nonetheless, U.S. immigration asks those who are petitioning to become full citizens if they ever committed a crime for which they were not convicted. Vilchis, apparently answered ‘no.’

March 16, 2018

Foreign Born Felons Facing Deportation in Chicago

by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.

After being elected, President Trump vowed to deport illegal immigrants with criminal records. A series of executive actions taken by him in his inaugural year suggest that the president will widen the net to all immigrants, regardless of whether or not they have a criminal history. President Trump’s plans have led to huge uncertainty for thousands of undocumented people living in the US.

While a few of them may be facing criminal charges, it is likely that many fear that they could be deported from the country they call home. Let’s discuss the plight of such undocumented US residents in detail.

Afghanistan Veteran Faces Deportation Over Drug Conviction

February 7, 2018

DACA Laws and Rules in Chicago

by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.

The Deferred Action for Children Arrivals, or DACA, refers to a program that was introduced in 2012 by the Obama administration. The program provides undocumented immigrants who meet specific conditions a chance to seek temporary protection against deportation. This applies even to individuals with a deferred case, as they are eligible to request employment authorization.

Under DACA, an individual has to show that he or she is an economic necessity for employment. The employment authorization applies for the period of deferred action.

In 2014, the government announced DACA to cover individuals above 31 years and included deferred action for American parents. These programs have since been suspended in Chicago and across the U.S. by the Trump administration. However, the programs may still apply to individuals who meet some set eligibility guidelines, as they are not affected by the court order.

July 28, 2017

Will Chicago Ever be a Sanctuary City? Immigration Law in Practice

by Law Offices of David L. Freidberg, P.C.

The law on sanctuary cities has been at the heart of Chicago politics for some time now. Sanctuary cities are hated by conservative government officials precisely because they threaten one of the cornerstones of federal immigration policy. For example, if the federal government enacts a tough stance on illegal immigrants by denying them certain services, the sanctuary city will find a public interest in offering those services of their own volition. As a consequence, the sanctuary cities have sometimes been accused of breaking the law or alternatively encouraging others to break the law. The new Trump administration has issued an executive order that is designed to pressurize sanctuary cities into fully complying with federal law on immigration matters.

The Immigration Advocates Join the Fray

Now that the positions have been set and are diametrically opposed, the only thing for it is conflict. That conflict will take the form of penalties on cities that refuse to enforce the order. At the same time, immigration attorneys will be at the forefront of defending the rights of those that are inadvertent victims of the current strictures. Whereas, the federal government may strip funding from sanctuary cities; the localities can respond by cutting essential services and afterwards, causing a public outcry.