Connect with us

National

EXCLUSIVE: Obama administration issues written deportation guidelines

DHS clarifies when LGBT couples are in ‘family relationships’

Published

on

The US Department of Homeland Security

New guidance from the Department of Homeland Security stipulating that gay and lesbian bi-national couples are families spells out three criteria for immigration officials who are determining whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion in potential deportation cases.

The memorandum from U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement was long sought by LGBT advocates and lawmakers seeking greater protection for bi-national same-sex couples, who may be faced with separation under the nation’s current immigration code if the immigrant in the relationship doesn’t have legal status in the United States. It was obtained exclusively Tuesday by the Washington Blade and can be downloaded here.

The guidance offers three criteria for immigration personnel as they determine whether a same-sex relationship would “rise to the level of a ‘family relationship'”:

Same-sex relationships that rise to the level of “family relationships” are long-term, same-sex relationships in which the individuals

• are each other’s sole domestic partner and intend to remain so indefinitely;

• are not in a marital or other domestic relationship with anyone else; and typically maintain a common residence

• and share financial obligations and assets.

Notably, the guidance doesn’t mandate that the couples be in a legal same-sex marriage as it lays out criteria for when they would be eligible for prosecutorial discretion.

ICE maintains that being in a family relationship is one factor that immigration officials should consider when determining whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion and other issues may trump familial status.

“Officers, agents and attorneys must consider the totality of circumstances presented in an individual case,” the guidance states. “Family relationships may be outweighed by criminal history, prior immigration violations, or other indicia that an individual meets ICE enforcement priorities.”

The guidance is dated Oct. 5 and signed by three senior officials within ICE: Executive Associate Director Gary Mead, Executive Associate Director James Dinkins and Principal Legal Director Peter Vincent. According to the heading, it was distributed to ICE field office directors, chief counsel and special agents.

Lavi Soloway, an immigration attorney and co-founder of Stop the Deportations, commended DHS for issuing the guidance, saying it marks the first time ever the Obama administration “has put in writing a policy to protect gay and lesbian couples who are threatened with deportation.”

“We are grateful that the Obama administration has finally issued written guidelines that we can take into court when we fight deportations,” Soloway said. “We continue to represent numerous same-sex couples in immigration courts around the country who are facing imminent deportation, and this document will help us finally resolve those cases so that no couple is torn apart.”

Soloway added the guidance is “evidence that the Obama administration is able to develop innovative, interim remedies” to help LGBT people. Calling the guidance a “great start,” Soloway said DHS should follow up by opening up “humanitarian parole” to reunite same-sex partners if one is living in exile and placing in abeyance marriage-based green card applications for bi-national same-sex couples to ensure they can stay together in the United States.

The memorandum follows a June 2011 memorandum from ICE that laid out criteria for when immigration officials should exercise prosecutorial discretion in cases that may be a low priority for deportation. That earlier guidance said one of the relevant factors was “the person’s ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships.” The Obama administration previously told media outlets that bi-national same-sex couples were included in this category, but LGBT inclusion wasn’t until now spelled out directly to immigration officials.

The Blade reported last week that Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano delivered a letter to Congress informing lawmakers that DHS would issue this follow-up guidance in response to a letter from 84 House Democrats requesting the update. But LGBT advocates have been pushing for updated guidance for more than a year since ICE first issued its memorandum on prosecutorial discretion in June 2011.

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

New York

Two teens shot steps from Stonewall Inn after NYC Pride parade

One of the victims remains in critical condition

Published

on

The Stonewall National Memorial in New York on June 19, 2024. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

On Sunday night, following the annual NYC Pride March, two girls were shot in Sheridan Square, feet away from the historic Stonewall Inn.

According to an NYPD report, the two girls, aged 16 and 17, were shot around 10:15 p.m. as Pride festivities began to wind down. The 16-year-old was struck in the head and, according to police sources, is said to be in critical condition, while the 17-year-old was said to be in stable condition.

The Washington Blade confirmed with the NYPD the details from the police reports and learned no arrests had been made as of noon Monday.

The shooting took place in the Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan, mere feet away from the most famous gay bar in the city — if not the world — the Stonewall Inn. Earlier that day, hundreds of thousands of people marched down Christopher Street to celebrate 55 years of LGBTQ people standing up for their rights.

In June 1969, after police raided the Stonewall Inn, members of the LGBTQ community pushed back, sparking what became known as the Stonewall riots. Over the course of two days, LGBTQ New Yorkers protested the discriminatory policing of queer spaces across the city and mobilized to speak out — and throw bottles if need be — at officers attempting to suppress their existence.

The following year, LGBTQ people returned to the Stonewall Inn and marched through the same streets where queer New Yorkers had been arrested, marking the first “Gay Pride March” in history and declaring that LGBTQ people were not going anywhere.

New York State Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, whose district includes Greenwich Village, took to social media to comment on the shooting.

“After decades of peaceful Pride celebrations — this year gun fire and two people shot near the Stonewall Inn is a reminder that gun violence is everywhere,” the lesbian lawmaker said on X. “Guns are a problem despite the NRA BS.”

Continue Reading

New York

Zohran Mamdani participates in NYC Pride parade

Mayoral candidate has detailed LGBTQ rights platform

Published

on

NYC mayoral candidate and New York State Assembly member Zohran Mamdani (Screen capture: NBC News/YouTube)

Zohran Mamdani, the candidate for mayor of New York City who pulled a surprise victory in the primary contest last week, walked in the city’s Pride parade on Sunday.

The Democratic Socialist and New York State Assembly member published photos on social media with New York Attorney General Letitia James, telling followers it was “a joy to march in NYC Pride with the people’s champ” and to “see so many friends on this gorgeous day.”

“Happy Pride NYC,” he wrote, adding a rainbow emoji.

Mamdani’s platform includes a detailed plan for LGBTQ people who “across the United States are facing an increasingly hostile political environment.”

His campaign website explains: “New York City must be a refuge for LGBTQIA+ people, but private institutions in our own city have already started capitulating to Trump’s assault on trans rights.

“Meanwhile, the cost of living crisis confronting working class people across the city hits the LGBTQIA+ community particularly hard, with higher rates of unemployment and homelessness than the rest of the city.”

“The Mamdani administration will protect LGBTQIA+ New Yorkers by expanding and protecting gender-affirming care citywide, making NYC an LGBTQIA+ sanctuary city, and creating the Office of LGBTQIA+ Affairs.”

Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court

Supreme Court upholds ACA rule that makes PrEP, other preventative care free

Liberal justices joined three conservatives in majority opinion

Published

on

The U.S. Supreme Court as composed June 30, 2022, to present. Front row, left to right: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Back row, left to right: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. (Photo Credit: Fred Schilling, the U.S. Supreme Court)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday upheld a portion of the Affordable Care Act requiring private health insurers to cover the cost of preventative care including PrEP, which significantly reduces the risk of transmitting HIV.

Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in the case, Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. He was joined by two conservatives, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, along with the three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown-Jackson.

The court’s decision rejected the plaintiffs’ challenge to the Affordable Care Act’s reliance on the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force to “unilaterally” determine which types of care and services must be covered by payors without cost-sharing.

An independent all-volunteer panel of nationally recognized experts in prevention and primary care, the 16 task force members are selected by the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to serve four-year terms.

They are responsible for evaluating the efficacy of counseling, screenings for diseases like cancer and diabetes, and preventative medicines — like Truvada for PrEP, drugs to reduce heart disease and strokes, and eye ointment for newborns to prevent infections.

Parties bringing the challenge objected especially to the mandatory coverage of PrEP, with some arguing the drugs would “encourage and facilitate homosexual behavior” against their religious beliefs.

Continue Reading

Popular