The Immigrationista

The Immigrationista Law Offices of Anna Danielian is a boutique immigration law firm specializing in asylum, employment, VAWA and family petitions.

Please text your inquiry to +1-323-377-6208/Reception: 818-827-7141

08/03/2026

Forbes reports that the Trump Administration is considering a $100,000 fee for Optional Practical Training (OPT), which could effectively limit international students’ ability to obtain post-graduation work authorization in the United States. Immigration attorneys and industry stakeholders have questioned the proposal’s legal authority and warned that restricting OPT and STEM OPT could negatively impact U.S. employers, universities, and innovation.
For a policy sold as America-first: the research says OPT students boost employment and innovation, they don't crowd out American workers. So the real-world outcome won't be graduates staying and sitting idle. It'll be graduates leaving, taking the R&D and the tuition checks with them, while Canada and the UK roll out the welcome mat. Protectionism that protects nothing except the administration's appetite for another headline

07/21/2026

USCIS Final Rule on the Public Charge Ground of Inadmissibility.

[Russian below/Русский текст внизу]

USCIS tirelessly adds, amends, and refines its regulatory frameworks, culminating in the upcoming policy shift effective September 18, 2026, which formally rescinds the 2022 public charge regulations and restores a broader discretionary evaluation standard. From this date forward, officers will utilize an expanded totality-of-the-circumstances standard for public charge determinations.

Consider an applicant who previously utilized non-cash government support such as federally funded housing assistance or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits while applying for adjustment of status.

Under the 2022 framework, adjudicating officers were strictly prohibited from considering non-cash benefits like housing vouchers or food assistance in the public charge determination. The evaluation was largely restricted to whether the applicant received cash assistance for income maintenance or long-term institutionalization at government expense. Consequently, the use of supplemental food or housing programs did not negatively impact the adjudication.

Under the new policy taking effect September 18, 2026, officers operate under the restored totality-of-the-circumstances standard. The same applicant utilizing housing or food support now faces a broader inquiry into their overall self-sufficiency. Adjudicating officers may examine any past or current receipt of public assistance alongside traditional mandatory factors including age, health, family status, financial resources, education, and skills. The assessment grants officers wider discretion to weigh these supplemental forms of assistance when determining whether the individual is likely to become primarily dependent on the government.
*************
**Окончательное правило иммиграционной службы в отношении основания недопущения в страну в связи с несостоятельностью (Public Charge)**

Иммиграционные службы неустанно добавляют, вносят поправки и совершенствуют свои нормативно-правовые базы, что завершается предстоящим изменением политики, вступающим в силу 18 сентября 2026 года, которое официально отменяет правила в отношении неимущих лиц 2022 года и восстанавливает более широкий стандарт дискреционной оценки. Начиная с этой даты иммиграционные службы будут применять расширенный стандарт оценки всей совокупности обстоятельств при определении статуса неимущего лица.

Рассмотрим заявителя, который ранее пользовался неденежной государственной поддержкой, такой как жилищная помощь за счет федеральных средств или льготы по Программе дополнительной помощи в обеспечении продуктами питания, при подаче заявления на изменение статуса.

В рамках системы 2022 года уполномоченным сотрудникам строго запрещалось учитывать неденежные льготы, такие как жилищные ваучеры или продовольственная помощь, при определении статуса неимущего лица. Оценка в основном ограничивалась тем, получал ли заявитель денежную помощь для поддержания дохода или длительного помещения в учреждение за государственный счет. Следовательно, использование дополнительных программ обеспечения продовольствием или жильем не оказывало негативного влияния на рассмотрение дела.

В соответствии с новой политикой, вступающей в силу 18 сентября 2026 года, сотрудники действуют в рамках восстановленного стандарта оценки всей совокупности обстоятельств. Тот же заявитель, пользующийся гос. поддержкой в виде субсидированного жилья или продовольствия, теперь сталкивается с более широким расследованием его общей финансовой самостоятельности. Уполномоченные сотрудники могут изучать любое прошлое или текущее получение государственной помощи наряду с традиционными обязательными факторами, включая возраст, состояние здоровья, семейное положение, финансовые ресурсы, образование и навыки. Данная оценка предоставляет сотрудникам более широкие полномочия по взвешиванию этих дополнительных видов помощи при определении того, станет ли данное лицо преимущественно зависеть от государства.

03/11/2026

Why Your First Filing Matters More Than Ever.

I have seen it happen more times than I can count: a case lands on my desk that is already in deep trouble.

Often, these are filings where someone tried to go it alone, perhaps relying on AI to generate a petition from scratch. Other times, the paperwork comes from another attorney. The red flags are usually obvious the moment I open the file. I see employment petitions backed by generic, AI-generated evidence, marriage cases with almost no proof of a real relationship, or applications where essential documents are just missing. On paper, the case exists, but the substance is incredibly thin.

In those moments, my advice is often the same: withdraw the case. Stop the clock before things get worse. I tell people to take a breath, regroup, and gather the real documents that should have been there from day one. It is better to rebuild a filing carefully and honestly so it actually reflects the facts of your life.

For a long time, many people believed that withdrawing a petition simply closed the book on a problematic filing. However, a recent decision from the Administrative Appeals Office shows that the reality is a bit more complicated.

In Matter of Texperts, Inc., 29 I&N Dec. 491 (AAO 2026), the AAO looked at what USCIS is allowed to do after a case is withdrawn. The good news is that once you withdraw, USCIS cannot deny the case on its merits. Since the case is no longer pending, they can’t keep adjudicating it as if it were still active.

But here is the catch: your record does not necessarily vanish just because you withdrew the application. The AAO explained that officers can still make findings about what they believe happened in that case. This includes findings of fraud or willful misrepresentation. Those conclusions stay in your file and can cast a long shadow over any future immigration filings you make.

In the Texperts case, USCIS tried to make a fraud finding but failed to explain it properly. They mentioned fraud in their notice but didn't actually walk through the legal elements or connect the evidence to those elements. Because they skipped that analysis, the AAO pushed back and sent the case back to the agency to do the work properly if they still believe fraud occurred.

There is a vital lesson here for all of us.

The second you file a case, it becomes a permanent part of your record. Everything you submit—every claim and every piece of evidence—can be examined in ways you might never expect. While withdrawing might stop an immediate denial, it doesn't always erase what was put into the file.

This is why the most important part of your journey is the very first step: preparing that initial filing. Your first submission needs to be handled with extreme care, supported by real evidence, and grounded in facts that can stand up to a microscope. When a case is built on generic language or rushed materials, those problems don't just go away because you hit the exit button later.

In immigration law, the first version of the story the government hears is usually the one that follows you for years. Once certain notes appear in your record, they are very difficult to remove. It is always better to get it right the first time.

02/03/2026

⚠️ URGENT WARNING TO OUR COMMUNITY ⚠️

Please stay extremely vigilant. It’s not only federal enforcement that preys on immigrants—scammers with no scruples do too.

A colleague recently shared a disturbing case:

"A woman contacted our office to understand her case. She said she was represented by an “attorney” named Alexander Taylor and was told to pay a $1,050 fee that the “judge” supposedly required.

She believed she had court in January. She appeared by video, with her “attorney” acting as her interpreter. She says the judge spoke both English and Spanish.

None of this was real.

When we checked the EOIR automated case system, it showed her case as pending. But after contacting the court directly, we confirmed the truth:
She already has an in-absentia removal order.

She attended a fake court hearing, paid over $3,000, and missed her real immigration court date."

This is a sophisticated scam. Fake judges. Fake hearings. Fake fees. Real consequences.

Important reminders:
Immigration judges do not ask for money directly.
Court interpreters are provided by the court, not your attorney.
EOIR hearings can always be independently verified.
If something feels off, pause and verify before paying or appearing.

Please share this warning. One missed real hearing can change a life.

Stay alert. Protect each other.

"This processing suspension further exacerbates the delays these green card applicants are already facing. USCIS data sh...
04/28/2025

"This processing suspension further exacerbates the delays these green card applicants are already facing. USCIS data shows that it received 92,424 green card applications in January 2025 alone. Of those, 12,394 applications were filed by individuals granted asylum or refugee status. Case processing times show that USCIS took between 14 and 15 ½ months to approve 80% of applications filed by asylees and refugees. Suspension in the processing of these tens of thousands of applications will undoubtedly increase the backlog of submissions that USCIS will need to review when the suspension is lifted, and the delays could be staggering."

A FOIA request seeks to find out why the Trump administration stopped processing green card applications from asylum seekers and refugees.

04/07/2025

Judge orders the Trump administration to return man who was mistakenly deported.

"This was an illegal act," U.S. Federal District Judge Paula Xinis told Justice Department lawyers at a federal court hearing in Greenbelt, Maryland about the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who lived in the U.S. legally and had a work permit."

Stumbled upon this lovely group of people right on the steps of Los Angeles field office downtown LA. Apparently, they g...
04/05/2025

Stumbled upon this lovely group of people right on the steps of Los Angeles field office downtown LA. Apparently, they gather there every Friday from 1:00 to 2:00 and will continue their vigil through Lent. I am full of admiration for these people using their privilege of race and citizenship to protect the downtrodden and spread a message of love and compassion. May your courage and determination never leave you.

Address

Los Angeles, CA

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when The Immigrationista posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to The Immigrationista:

Shortcuts

Share