Press Release: RMIAN, Colorado Legal Instructors and Law Students File Joint Comment Opposing Trump Administration’s Proposed Rule Gutting Asylum Protections

Press Release: RMIAN, Colorado Legal Instructors and Law Students File Joint Comment Opposing Trump Administration’s Proposed Rule Gutting Asylum Protections

The rule would result in the return of thousands of asylum seekers annually to persecution, torture and death, and would upend our country’s tradition of providing refuge to those fleeing violence.

For Immediate Release

July 27, 2020

Denver — The Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (RMIAN), together with Colorado law instructors and law students, filed a joint comment in opposition to the Trump Administration’s notice of proposed rulemaking designed to eviscerate legal protections for asylum seekers in the United States. Over fifty-four pages, the authors methodically detail why the proposed rule, entitled “Procedures for Asylum and Withholding of Removal, Credible Fear and Reasonable Fear Review,” issued by the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Justice on June 15, 2020, is contrary to U.S. law and the public interest. The comment is available here.

The agencies’ proposed regulation attacks the asylum system from virtually every angle. Laura Lunn, Managing Attorney of the Detention Program at RMIAN, states, “The proposed rule change targets children, women, LGBTQI folks, people of color, and certain nationalities and sends a strong message that the United States is no longer a defender of human rights and equality. This unprecedented shift in policy is tantamount to a death sentence for the thousands of asylum seekers who rely on this country for refuge each year.”

Under the proposed rule, many asylum seekers, including children and survivors of torture, would be barred from obtaining asylum in the United States, resulting in their deportations to countries they fled. Ashley Harrington, Managing Attorney of the Children’s Program at RMIAN, states, “We at RMIAN felt we could not stand by in silence as the administration launched another inhumane attack against individuals, children, and families fleeing to the United States for their lives. We came together as a group to speak out against these unspeakable injustices and to lift up the voices of our clients, so many of whom will face torture and death if these changes are allowed to take effect.”

The comment includes perspectives from numerous asylees who recently won their cases with representation through RMIAN.  One client expressed, “My asylum means everything to me. I feel a tremendous relief because no one is chasing me. I am not hearing gunshots. I am not being arrested and tortured as I was in Cameroon. I feel like I have a home, and I can live to see tomorrow.”

The proposed rule is part of a Trump administration effort to push through a host of policies hostile to immigrants and asylum seekers in the last several months of the presidential term. Tania Valdez, Clinical Fellow at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, explains, “This blatant attempt to end asylum purely by regulation is part of the Trump administration’s ongoing anti-immigrant campaign. The proposed rule is an assault on decades of court rulings upholding the rights of asylum seekers and will create serious due process problems.”

The coordinated comments from RMIAN and advocates across the country are designed to convince the agencies to eliminate the rule or to delay its implementation. The agencies must respond in some form to all comments received, and if opposition to the proposed rule is exceptionally strong, the agencies may decide to make substantial modifications to it or to start the process over by publishing a new notice and opening a new comment period. Otherwise, the agencies will publish their final findings along with the rule. Megan Hall, Legal Writing Professor at the University of Colorado Law School, explains, “The agencies should listen to the thousands of experts and affected individuals who strongly oppose the proposed rule and should immediately rescind the entire rule. The rule is so sweeping and so misguided that eliminating or changing some parts of it will not be enough to protect our asylum system. If nothing else, we hope our comment, along with a multitude of others, will slow the process so that the rule cannot be finalized while Trump remains president.”

The comment was prepared with the hard work of RMIAN staff, who gathered narratives from current and former clients who benefitted from the current protections afforded by U.S. asylum law and bravely shared their stories to highlight and counteract the injustice of the proposed rule change.

The authors of the comment are: Ashley T. Harrington, Children’s Program Managing Attorney, Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network; Laura Lunn, Detention Program Managing Attorney, Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network; Megan Hall, Legal Writing Professor, University of Colorado Law School; Tania N. Valdez, Clinical Teaching Fellow, Immigration Law & Policy Clinic, University of Denver Sturm College of Law; and Carly Hamilton, Scott C. Hammersley, Lauren Y. Jones, Becca Laughlin, and Mary Snover, Law Students, University of Denver Sturm College of Law.

The Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network (RMIAN) is a nonprofit organization that provides critical immigration legal services to individuals in immigration detention, as well as to children and families throughout Colorado. Additional information on RMIAN is available here: www.rmian.org. Follow RMIAN on social media: the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network on Facebook, @RMIAN_org on Twitter.

Professor Megan Hall submits this comment in her personal capacity. Professor Hall teaches legal writing and co-teaches Refugee and Asylum Law at the University of Colorado Law School. Professor Hall became an immigration lawyer upon graduating from CU Law in 2005 and was one of the first staff members at the Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network. During 10 years of law practice both at RMIAN and at small firms, Professor Hall worked with hundreds of people seeking humanitarian relief, including unaccompanied minors and detained adults in reasonable and credible fear proceedings.

Tania Valdez, Clinical Fellow at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, submits this comment in her personal capacity. In her position in the Immigration Law & Policy Clinic at the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, and in her prior experience as an immigration attorney, Ms. Valdez has represented affirmative asylum seekers filing before the USCIS asylum office as well as individuals who are filing defensive asylum applications in immigration court. She also represents immigrant clients before the District Court for the District of Colorado, Board of Immigration Appeals, and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals. Many of Ms. Valdez’ clients have been asylum seekers, all of whom are survivors of torture or other trauma seeking protection in the United States. Ms. Valdez supervised the five Denver Law students, who also provide this comment in their personal capacities, in the research and writing of portions of this comment.