Massachusetts Immigration Lawyer Blog

Boston Deportation Defense Attorney

Can you be deported for a nolle prosequi criminal disposition?

As an immigration lawyer based in Boston, Massachusetts with expertise in deportation defense in Immigration Court, I often meet with immigrants who are  confused as to the immigration consequences of their criminal dispositions. One of the frequent questions I get is related to a nolle prosequi disposition.

Immigration laws take a unique view of the definition of conviction.  Consequently, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) or an Immigration Judge might consider your criminal case to be a conviction even though, when you went to District Court, the judge told you that your criminal case would be dismissed.

What is a nolle prosequi disposition under Massachusetts criminal law

Under Massachusetts Criminal Procedure, a prosecuting lawyer may request a nolle prosequi disposition at any time before sentencing. If granted, the nolle prosequi disposition means that criminal charges are, in effect, dropped or dismissed.

Why nolle prosequi is not considered a conviction for immigration purposes

A Massachusetts nolle prosequi disposition is not a conviction for immigration purpose because in order for a disposition to be considered a conviction, it must contain both (1) a finding of guilt, a plea of guilt of the equivalent; and (2) a penalty, punishment or restraint on liberty. With nolle prosequi, no sentence is imposed and so it is a criminal disposition that wouldn't be classified as a conviction under US immigration law.

A nolle prosequi disposition must be disclosed on all immigration and visa applications even though it isn't a conviction

It is important to remember that even though a nolle prosequi disposition is not viewed as a conviction for immigration purposes, you must still disclose this disposition on all I-485, N-400 and other immigration applications, as well as on all visa applications. 

Many immigrants mistakenly believe that because their criminal case was dismissed that it is "off their record, " and they have no duty to disclose it.  But this is not so.  Again, you absolutely MUST disclose all criminal matters regardless of whether a conviction occurred.  But by disclosing that you have a dismissed criminal case, you certainly aren't admitting that you did something wrong.  You are just providing an accurate and honest answer to questions on an immigration application.  

After disclosing your nolle prosequi disposition, you have one last requirement:  And you must provide USCIS or the U.S. Consulate with a court-certified, final criminal disposition to show that the case was indeed resolved with a nolle prosequi entry.

I hope this clarifies the meaning of a nolle prosequi disposition for immigration applicants.  If you need further help or representation by an immigration lawyer based in Boston with expertise on deportation and immigration consequences of criminal matters, please call me at 617-722-0005. 

Boston Deportation Lawyer

Immigration and deportation defense lawyers now have a way to find the location of persons detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement by using ICE's new online detention locator system.  If this online tool actually works as intended, this is an extremely useful development, which is long overdue. 

Until now, the location of a ICE immigration detainee was a mystery to everyone--even immigration lawyers.  After being arrested and detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement or ICE Office of Detention and Removal, the detained immigrant would be placed into a jail, the location of which remained unknown.  Tracking down a detained immigrant involved guesswork and intuition.  The only way I knew to find someone detained by ICE was simply by calling around to the records departments for South Bay (Suffolk County House of Correction), Bristol, Plymouth and the other immigration detention facilities in the Boston area.  So let's hope and pray that this online system works as planned.

Meanwhile, if you have a friend or family member who has been arrested by Immigration, please contact me.  I'd been happy to help you win their release on an immigration bond and to come up with a strategy to help them solve their immigration problem.

Boston Immigration Lawyer News

Immigration Judge Francis L. Cramer has announced his retirement from Boston Immigration Court.  As an immigration lawyer who appeared frequently before Immigration Judge Cramer, I can say that he will be sorely missed.  He had a reputation for deciding deportation cases fairly and impartially.  And he always treated the immigration lawyers and parties with great respect, at times, a lighthearted humor.  His departure leaves a vacancy in the Boston Immigration Court bench that will be hard to fill.

As an Boston immigration lawyer and expert on the marriage-based green card process, I was quoted in today's Boston Globe article discussing marriage fraud and earlier in a Boston Herald article.  I also appeared on The Boston Channel, WCVB Channel 5 news discussing deportation and sham marriages.  You can watch the news video here.  And you can read my blog on marriage fraud and green cards here.

The Boston Globe article looks at the immigration problems of 3 Pakistanis whom the Department of Homeland Security has detained in connection with the Times Square bombing.  According to media reports, they are facing the prospect of deportation or removal from the United States and are appearing in Boston Immigration Court before Immigration Judge Robin Feder.  Each are married to U.S. citizens.  But attorneys from Immigration and Customs Enforcement allege that the marriages are fraudulent. 

Can you avoid deportation by marrying a U.S. citizen?  The answer is yes . . . and no.  Let me explain.

First, if you get married after the government has initiated deportation proceedings, you will have to overcome the presumption that your marriage is sham and that the only reason you got married was to avoid being deported.  Before you can even apply for your green card, you'll have to prove by "clear and convincing" evidence that your relationship was entered into in good faith.

Many people get green cards through marriage.  But the process for getting a green card through marriage while facing deportation is totally different.  You'll have to file a stand-only I-130 visa petition and specifically request, IN WRITING, an exemption based on a good-faith marriage.  And you can file your I-485 if, and only if, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) approves your I-130. 

Finally, even if USCIS grants your I-130, you are not out of the woods.  You'll have to have an adjustment of status interview before an Immigration Judge who will independently review whether your relationship is a sham.  This hearing will be adversarial and the Department of Homeland Security is represented by experienced trial attorneys who will rip you to shreds on cross-examination if your marriage is sham.

USCIS doesn't take marriage fraud lightly.  If caught, you'll be barred from future visa petitions and face criminal fines of up to $250,000 and five years imprisonment.

Bottom-line:  if you are required to appear in Immigration Court and considering marriage as a way to avoid deportation, you should consult with an immigration lawyer with considerable experience in courtroom advocacy.  Call me at 617-722-0005 to discuss your immigration case.

As an immigration lawyer in Boston, this case must be one of my most unusual. I appeared on Boston's Channel 5 news in connection with a bizarre incident that happened to one of my former clients. Click on this link here to read the story and watch the video.

Sure the story is strange.  But my former immigration client--who I helped get U.S. citizenship--did the right thing.  He remained calm.  And he called 9-11.  Fortunately, surveillance cameras captured everything.

All in all, I was happy to step in and help my former immigration client.

Deportation Defense Tips for Boston Immigration Court

As a deportation defense lawyer who frequently appears in Immigration Court in Boston, here are some tips that should improve your experience at your immigration hearing:

1. Attend all hearing in Immigration Court (and all other courts). If you don't go to Immigration Court for your hearing, the Immigration Judge will give you an order of removal or deportation "in absentia" and a warrant will be issued for your arrest.
   
   
2. Arrive one hour before the time of your scheduled hearing. In Boston Immigration Court, for all master calendar hearings, a sign-in sheet is placed in the waiting room. I tell my immigration clients to arrive and sign in one hour before the scheduled time of the hearing. The sooner you sign in, the sooner your immigration case will be heard by the Immigration Judge. Plus, showing up early helps ensure that you will be in Immigration Court on time. Be careful: if you are late for your immigration hearing, you could be given an order of removal or deportation.
   
   
3. Dress appropriately. Boston Immigration Court is a serious place and you want to show the Immigration Judge and the Trial Attorney that you take the proceedings seriously. Don't wear a hat inside the courtroom. Take off your jacket. Wear what you would wear to a job interview or to a wedding. Inappropriate attire includes t-shirts with questionable slogans, spandex, stiletto heels, mini skirts, do-rags, shorts--you get the idea.
   
   
4. Be respectful to the Immigration Judge and to the Trial Attorney.  Maintain a calm, polite demeanor in Immigration Court--even if things don't go your way.  Think of it this way:  deportation is bad but deportation plus being arrested and held in contempt of court is worse.
   
   
5. Do NOT bring small children to Boston Immigration Court in the hopes that it will make the Immigration Judge more sympathetic to your immigration case. Keep in mind that hearings in Immigration Court take a long time and often require lots of waiting around. Combine the boredom of waiting with the stress of the immigration hearing and you have a not-so-great environment for young children.
   
   
6. Make sure the Immigration Court has your correct address on file If you change your address, notify the Immigration Judge immediately by filing Form EOIR-33 with the appropriate proof of service.
   
   
7. Turn off your cellphone in Boston Immigration Court. Off means completely off. Don't send text messages or put your cellphone on the vibrate or silent mode.
   
   
8. If you case is based on a pending I-130 immigrant petition based on marriage to a U.S. citizen, make sure that your U.S. citizen spouse comes with you to Immigration Court for all of your master calendar hearings.
   
   
9. Do not bring a non-lawyer to Immigration Court to speak on your behalf.  In Immigration Court in Boston at master calendar hearings, I sometimes see people attempt to have their U.S. citizen spouse or family member speak on their behalf.  The Immigration Judge will not permit this.  Only lawyers licensed to practice law in the United States are authorized to appear in Immigration Court as your representative.
   
   
10. Hire the best immigration attorney you can find. In Boston Immigration Court, the Department of Homeland Security will be seeking to deport you from the US. This immigration agency will be represented by lawyers who handle countless deportation cases each week. Unlike criminal proceedings, federal immigration laws don't provide you with the right to a free lawyer. But you do have the right to be represented at your own expense by the lawyer of your choosing. In Immigration Court, you are not required to be represented by an attorney. But, in my experience, I have rarely seen anyone successful represent himself or herself in Immigration Court. You need a lawyer with substantial experience in complicated immigration issues and deportation proceedings, preferably an attorney who practices immigration law exclusively. Meet with an immigration lawyer well before your hearing to come up with a strategy to protect you from deportation.

If you have questions about Immigration Court, please call my Boston immigration law firm at 617-722-0005.  We are ready to help you come up with a strategy to help protect you from deportation.

As most people in Boston's Haitian community know by now, Haitian nationals who are now in the U.S. may apply for Temporary Protective Status or TPS to avoid deportation from the U.S. and to obtain a work permit, i.e., employment authorization. Applications for TPS are filed on Form I-821 and must be received by the cut-off deadline of July 20, 2010.

TPS is a generous benefit. Consider the following:

• A final order of deportation or removal will not disqualify you for TPS as a Haitian;
• As a Haitian, you may qualify for TPS even if you are out of status or have overstayed your visa; and
• If you entered the U.S. without inspection, you may still apply for TPS as a Haitian.

I'm often asked by people who are out of status or who have been in deportation proceedings, whether it makes sense to apply for TPS.  The risk is clear.  TPS is, of course, temporary; it is not a green card and doesn't lead to permanent residency, i.e., a green card.  TPS merely provides immigration status and work authorization for a temporary, 18-month period. 

So, if someone has been deported or is out of status, TPS provides only a temporary reprieve for 18 months.  What then will become of countless Haitians with TPS who have orders of removal or who are out of status?  In short, the question that is usually put to me:  "Won't Immigration just come and arrest me after the 18 months are over?"

This is a valid concern.  But I still recommend applying and here's why.  Although TPS for Haitians is designated for 18 months, I suspect that TPS will be around for many years to come.  Consider the example of El Salvador, which was granted TPS after an earthquake in 2001 and since then has been extended for a series of 18-month periods.  And it remains in effect today nearly a decade later.  Based on this and other TPS programs, I don't see Congress taking away TPS for Haiti anytime soon.

And Haitian considering TPS should take another lesson from the experience of El Salvador:  apply before the deadline or you will miss out.  For Haitian seeking TPS the deadline is July 20, 2010.  After that date, your application will be late.

In summary, I generally recommend that all eligible Haitians consider apply for TPS.  If you need immigration help or advice on this or other issues, please call my Boston immigration law office at 617-722-0005 and schedule an immigration consultation with one of our attorneys today.

Since I'm an immigration attorney, I'm often asked for my opinion on the immigration consequences of criminal convictions and activities. Yesterday, a criminal defense attorney in Boston asked me whether, in Massachusetts, a non-citizen youth who breaks the law and who is found delinquent by a juvenile court could end up being deported as a result of the juvenile delinquency finding.

The short answer is no. According to the Board of Immigration Appeals, a juvenile adjudication isn't considered a criminal conviction for immigration purposes. The logic behind this rule is that juvenile proceedings are not criminal. So a delinquency finding on a deportable offense will not cause a juvenile to be deported.

But beware: juvenile adjudications can trigger other adverse immigration consequences. They can be used to bar a finding of "good moral character", which is a requirement for naturalization and other forms of relief from deportation such as cancellation of removal. Also, as a discretionary matter, Immigration Judges can view juvenile activities as a negative factor when considering any application for relief from deportation.

And some immigration provisions don't require the existence of a conviction and can be based on an admission of guilt or merely a perceived "reason to believe" that the person has been involved in criminal activity. For instance, a person can be denied adjustment of status to permanent residency or entry into the United States based on an Immigration Judge's "reason to believe" that the person has been involved in drug trafficking or money laundering. The "reason to believe" could be based on non-criminal juvenile proceedings.

To summarize my advice, a youthful offender conviction or a juvenile delinquency finding is not considered a "conviction" for immigration purposes and, therefore, can't be the basis for deportation. But such adjudications should be avoided because they could affect a person's immigration status in other ways.

Two final points:

1. Massachusetts Youthful Offender Law: This statute permits children between the ages of 14 and 17 to be prosecuted as adults when charged with serious felony crimes. It is possible that at some point, immigration authorities could make a legal argument that youthful offender convictions should carry the same immigration consequences as adult convictions. But from my research, no federal cases, published Board of Immigration Appeals decisions or other legal authority support this position.

2. Juvenile dispositions must be disclosed:  Appearances in juvenile court, although not criminal, must be disclosed on immigration forms such as applications for adjustment of status to permanent residency (I-485), and applications for naturalization (N-400).

If you have further questions about the deportation, juvenile proceedings, or possible immigration consequences, feel free to call me at (617) 722-0005. Schedule an consultation with me in my Boston immigration offices. I'd be happy to help you.

In 2007, Immigration and Customs Enforcement--the agency, which handles immigration bonds and is in charge of deportation--moved its offices from the centrally-located JFK Federal Building in downtown Boston to a remote office park way out in the boonies of Burlington, Massachusetts.

In my years of experience as an immigration lawyer specializing in deportation cases, I've noticed that many of my clients don't have cars and rely on public transportation. My clients need to travel from Boston area to the Burlington, MA immigration office to post immigration bonds or to report in for orders of supervision or orders of recognizance. My immigration clients often ask me how to get to ICE's Burlington office from Boston using public transportation.

The answer is quite simple. Take the MBTA Red Line to Alewife Station. From there, take the 350 Bus to the Burlington Mall, which is located adjacent to the office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The schedule for the 350 Bus can be found here.

The address, once again, for ICE in Burlington is:

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
Office of Detention and Removal Operations (DRO)
10 New England Executive Park
Burlington, Massachusetts 01803

I hope this information is helpful to you.  Should you need assistance with an immigration case, please call my office at (617) 722-0005 and schedule an immigration consultation to meet with me.

When I go to Immigration Court in Boston, my goal is to protect my clients from deportation. I work hard to explore all options, to come up with a winning strategy and to prepare my cases in a way that ensures success. Of course, I want my clients to come away with a green card.

But the sad reality is that for some people who must appear in Immigration Court, the facts of their particular cases render them ineligible for any relief from deportation. For such cases, there is simply no way under the current immigration laws to prevent deportation. And, when faced with limited options, many lawyers routinely ask the Immigration Judge for an order of voluntary departure.

Voluntary departure permits a person to leave the United States voluntary and it removes a bar to inadmissibility that would otherwise result from being deported, i.e., receiving an order of removal. The consequences of being deported are indeed severe. If you receive an order of removal, you would be inadmissible for 10 years. And this 10 year bar runs from the date that you are physically removed from the United States, not the date that the Immigration Judge ordered your removal.

Although voluntary departure may help you avoid deportation, the consequences of failing to comply with a voluntary departure order may be worse than deportation itself.  Consider that a person who is granted voluntary departure after 1996 but fails to voluntarily leave the United States may face:

• civil penalties including fines of $3,000; and
  
• a 10-year bar from important immigration options such as cancellation of removal, adjustment of status, and change of status;
  

Also, it is harder to file a motion to reopen or reconsider a voluntary departure order, although this issue has been the subject of extensive litigation and new regulations.

These stiff penalties for those who violate an order of voluntary departure do not apply to people who are given orders of removal or deportation.  And what's worse, once a person fails to voluntarily leave the U.S., the voluntary departure order then becomes an order of removal or deportation.  If such a person decides to leave the U.S. after failing to depart voluntarily as required, this later departure is considered "self-removal," which is the equivalent of deportation.

Sure, voluntary departure may sound better than deportation.  But if an Immigration Judge gives you an order of voluntary departure and you fail to depart, you may end up in a worse position than someone who simply receives an order of removal or deportation.  You should not consider voluntary departure unless you are truly prepared to leave the United States, preferably in consultation with an immigration lawyer and as part of a strategy to return to the US.  The decision becomes complicated because many people who are in deportation proceedings face additional grounds of inadmissibility for being unlawfully present in the U.S.

In short, voluntary departure is relief from deportation.  Yet given the harsh consequences, for most people, I consider voluntary departure to be a cure that is worse than the disease.

Need advice about voluntary departure in Boston Immigration Court or other immigration law issues?  Call me at (617) 722-0005 and set up an immigration consultation in my Boston law office.

I'm proud to announce that I've been re-appointed as a liaison to Boston's Immigration Court for the American Immigration Lawyers Association ("AILA") - New England Chapter. As a member of the Liaison Committee to the Executive Office of Immigration Review, I look forward to assisting my esteemed colleagues. 

In Boston, immigration lawyers and the Immigration Court have a tradition of warm relationship, for which we can thank the leadership of Court's Administrator Robert Halpin.  As a liaison, I'm happy to be able make a small contribution to this on-going comity.

If you are facing deportation or removal from the United States and have a hearing in Immigration Court in Boston or elsewhere, your fate is in the hands of an Immigration Judge who will weigh the evidence and reach a decision. Immigration lawyers refer to this process as the Court's or the Judge's discretion.

People often underestimate the power of an Immigration Judge's discretion.  So I'd like to give you three specific examples of how Immigration Judges have the discretion to decide deportation cases:

#1:  "Why did the Immigration Judge deny my case?  All of my criminal cases were dismissed!"  Imagine that you are married to a U.S. citizen and are applying for a green card.  You have a hearing before an Immigration Judge for your I-485 application to adjust your status to permanent residency.  You have been arrested several times but all of your criminal cases were dismissed.  Even though your criminal charges didn't result in a conviction, it would be a mistake to assume that the Immigration Judge will automatically approve your I-485 just because your criminal cases did not result in a conviction.  You are not necessarily entitled to a green card.  The Immigration Judge has discretion to approve or deny your green card application.  In making that decision, the Immigration Judge will want to know more about your criminal cases even if you were not convicted.  The Judge will weigh the evidence and reach a decision in their discretion.  And if you don't convince the Immigration Judge that you deserve to become a permanent resident, you are going to lose.

#2:  Immigration Bond.  If Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") arrests you and puts you in jail, you have a right to a bond hearing where you may ask an Immigration Judge to release you on an immigration bond.  The immigration regulations require the Immigration Judge to make three important discretionary decisions.  First, as a threshold matter, the Judge must decide whether you are a danger to the community.  Unless this decision is in your favor, you will not be released on bond. Second, if the Immigration Judge believes that you are not a danger to the community, the Immigration Judge will then decide whether you are likely to return to court if released.  And, third, if the Immigration Judge decides that you are not a danger to the community and that you are likely to return to Immigration Court for future hearings, the Judge will determine the cost of the bond.  The important point is that these three key decisions--dangerousness, flight-risk, and cost of bond--are all entirely within the Immigration Judge's discretion to determine as he or she sees fit.

#3 Asylum:  If you are applying for asylum in Immigration Court, you must convince an Immigration Judge that you have suffered past persecution or have a well-founded fear of returning to your home country. To prove your claim, you may testify and present evidence.  An Immigration Judge has the discretion to decide whether you are telling the truth and whether your case deserves to be approved or denied.

If you lose in Immigration Court because the Immigration Judge makes a discretionary decision that you dislike or disagree with, you do have the right to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals.  But no matter how much you disagree with the outcome of your case, it is extremely difficult to successfully challenge an Immigration Judge's discretionary decision.  Appealing the denial of your bond is particularly difficult because you will be in jail while the appeal is pending.  The likely result of your appeal could merely prolong your time in jail.

In short, winning or losing in Immigration Court usually boils down to an Immigration Judge's discretionary decision. And my job as a deportation defense attorney is to persuade the Immigration Judge to make a discretionary decision in your favor.

If you have questions about Boston Immigration Court, bonds, hearing, trial strategy or other issues; or if you need an attorney to represent you, please call me in my Boston office at (617) 722-0005 to schedule an immigration consultation.

A recent decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals changes the immigration process for Cubans seeking permanent residency in the United States. Pursuant to the Cuban Refugee Adjustment Act of 1966, Cuban nationals who appear at U.S. border posts seeking admission are generally paroled into the United States as "Cuban asylees." After entry into the U.S., Cubans can immediately apply for work permits. Then, one year after living in the U.S., Cuban nationals can file I-485 applications to adjust their status to obtain their green cards.

Although Cubans who are paroled into the U.S. have a clear path to permanent residency (getting a green card), they are placed into the deportation proceedings and, therefore, must appear before an Immigration Judge in Immigration Court.

Until recently, Immigration Judges had jurisdiction over adjustment of status applications (I-485 or green card applications) filed by Cubans, and Cubans would apply for their green cards through Immigration Court and before an Immigration Judge. The Court then could grant their green card and simultaneously take them out of removal proceedings.

But now, according to the Board of immigration Appeals in Matter of Martinez-Montalvo, 24 I&N Dec. 778 (BIA 2009), Immigration Judges have no jurisdiction over adjustment of status applications (I-485 or green card applications) filed by Cubans who have been paroled into the U.S. under the Cuban Refugee Act. Instead, to obtain green cards, Cuban parolees must file their I-485 with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS").

This Board of Immigration Appeals decision puts Cuban parolees in an odd situation: they must appear in Immigration Court, yet Immigration Court has no jurisdiction over the adjustment of status applications that they are eligible to file. If you are a Cuban national who is in removal proceedings, your most likely option is that your lawyer will ask the Immigration Judge to continue your case until USCIS adjudicates your I-485. The problem is that it could easily take two years for USCIS to make a decision on the I-485!

To me, this new scenario for Cuban asylees makes no sense. It clogs the docket and wastes the Immigration Court's limited resources. 

If you have questions about the deportation process, Cuban adjustment, other immigration issues, or if you are seeking an attorney to represent you in Boston Immigration Court, call my Boston office at (617) 722-0005 to set up an immigration consultation.

Boston area residents with final orders of deportation may request a stay of removal with U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) by filing Form I-246 at its Burlington, Massachusetts immigration office.  In the past, there had been no filing fee for this immigration application.  But, apparently, the free ride is over.  Effective immediately, a filing fee of $155 must be paid with Form I-246 in cash, money order or cashier's check (no personal checks).

As a lawyer specializing in deportation defense who frequently appears in Boston Immigration Court, I find it fascinating that a close family member of the President appeared yesterday in our court before our own Immigration Judge Shapiro.  Zeituni Onyango, the Kenyan aunt of President Obama, is in deportation proceedings in Boston as everyone on the populated Earth knows by now.

Of course, asylum applications are confidential.  I certainly have no direct knowledge about this case.  But my experience as a deportation lawyer in Boston tells me that Ms. Onyango's immigration case has been widely reported in a way that is quite misleading.  The headline of the Boston Globe, for instance, claims that the Immigration Judge allowed Ms. Onyango to stay in the U.S. until February 2010.  What is misleading about this headline is that it falsely suggests that the Immigration Judge made a discretionary decision in favor of Ms. Onyango.  This is not at all what happened at the hearing yesterday.

Allow me to explain.  But first, some background:  In 2004, according to press reports, Ms. Onyango applied for asylum and the Immigration Court in Boston denied her application.  As a result, she received an order of removal.  The Immigration and Nationality Act allows applicants to reopen removal proceedings where the applicant can present evidence of changed circumstances that could not have been presented at the prior hearing. My guess is that the immigration lawyer defending Ms. Onyango filed a motion to reopen and argued that the conditions in Kenya have changed in a way that would affect the merits of her claim.  A second and obvious argument as to changed circumstances is that Ms. Onyango would likely be a target if she were returned to Kenya because she is now well known as the aunt of the President of the United States. 

After Ms. Onyango filed her motion to reopen her order of removal, the Immigration Court in Boston had to make a discretionary decision as to whether to grant or deny the motion to reopen.  It is clear that the Court granted her motion to reopen because if it hadn't, she wouldn't have had to appear in Immigration Court.

What actually happened in Boston Immigration Court yesterdays is that, most likely, Ms. Onyango appeared at what is called a master calendar hearing.  A master calendar hearing is usually a brief, administrative hearing in which the Immigration Judge sets up the issues in contention and, typically, schedules a merits hearing at which these issues can be addressed.

So when the Boston Globe announced that Immigration Judge Shapiro allowed Ms. Onyango to remain in the U.S. until February 2010, what really happened is that she just showed up for a routine master calendar hearing and the Immigration Judge scheduled her to return for a merits hearing.  That's it.  The Immigration Judge didn't grant her a reprieve or approve her application for asylum.  This result gives us little indication about her prospects for success in immigration court.  It does tell us that the docket of Boston's Immigration Court is so full that asylum applicants need to wait almost 12 months to have their cases heard--even if your nephew is the President!