Practice resources
Search immigration practice advisories, sample filings, manuals, brief banks, and government guidance from trusted practitioner sources.
3rd Circuit PRECEDENTIAL OPINION Cardenas v Attorney General (March 31, 2026) [pdf] Published March 31, 2026 Topics: Amicus Briefs , VAWA Self-Petition
NIWAP was lead amicus joined by Legal Momentum and the Tahirih Justice Center on a brief submitted to the Third Circuit prepared by the law firm Haynes and Boone. Under VAWA and U.S.C. § 1367, the amici argued that abused immigrant children and stepchildren are entitled to protections regardless of when their abuser obtained lawful permanent residency status. The Amicus Brief urged the 3rd Circuit to reject the Board of Immigration Appeals’ reliance on the Matter of L-L-P, which imposed a timing
This supplemental letter requested by the 3rd Circuit from the parties addressed the following issues: 1) An applicant for cancellation of removal need not show continuing abuse at the time of the application under 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(2)(A)(i)(II) and (2) The Court can, but should not, consider this issue without remand.
Nvart Idinyan (formerly Nvart Huckfeldt) (August 9 2005) Board of Immigration Appeals. The National Network to End Violence Against Immigrant Women, represented by Crowell and Moring, filed this amicus in support of the immigration judge’s finding that plaintiff qualified for cancellation of removal under VAWA and refuting DHS assertion that once a victim reached a “safe house” she should no longer have access to VAWA provisions. (Crowell and Moring, Pro Bono)
Perales-Cumpean, A76 386 969, Board of Immigration Appeals (2001), U.S. Court of Appeals 10th Circuit (2003). Amicus brief discussing the any credible evidence standard and the definition of battery or extreme cruelty in an immigrant rape and domestic violence victim’s Violence Against Women Act suspension of deportation case (National immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild, BIA, Arnold and Porter, Pro Bono 10th Circuit)
Aylaliya Assefa Birru v. Barr (January 11 2021) 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. NIWAP, represented by Baker McKenzie, is lead amicus in a brief on behalf of an immigrant domestic violence victim who is seeking relief under the Violence Against Women Act’s domestic violence victim waiver in her VAWA cancellation of removal case. The Board of Immigration Appeals and the immigration judge denied her the ability to present evidence of waiver eligibility.
Chart-based comparison of VAWA self-petitions and VAWA special-rule cancellation of removal, with eligibility and strategy differences called out side by side.
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
In a case brought in Federal District Court in Rhode Island an abused spouse whose VAWA self-petition had been approved challenged USCIS’s revocation of her approved petition. The self-petitioner was divorced from her abuser and remarried after filing the self-petition but before the self-petition had been approved. The court’s ruling allows the self-petitioner to fully litigate her challenge the USCIS’s revocation of her self-petition due to remarriage in Federal District Court. The court’s rul
NIWAP participated in an amicus brief on writ of certiorari to the US Court of Appeals of the Third Circuit to ensure that courts review BIA hardship determinations for immigrant victims of domestic violence seeking cancellation of removal under VAWA. SCOTUS ruled in favor of Wilkinson, holding that the application of the exceptional and extremely unusual hardship standard to an established set of facts is a mixed question of law and fact that is reviewable under 1252(a)(2)(D). This ruling gives
The National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) represents Jennifer Arguijo, who was 11 years old when her mother married her stepfather, who turned out to be abusive. Applying BIA case law from other contexts, VSC held that a stepchild-stepfather relationship ends after the biological parent divorces the stepparent, unless there is a “continuing relationship” between the stepchild and stepfather. NIJC sought reconsideration, and appealed to the AAO. The AAO affirmed the VSC’s decision to deny the
Nvart decision (January 20 2006) [pdf] Published November 1, 2023