Immigration Flashcards by Mike Potter

What is one method countries use to prevent their territories from being annexed by another nation?

a) Ensure that one ethnic group comprises more than 60% of the population.
b) Regulate who can enter and/or remain within their borders.
c) Maintain social and cultural homogeneity.
d) Have a national language.

b) Regulate who can enter and/or remain within their borders.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What is a common response by the citizenry when its country has been economically devastated by natural disasters?

a) Seek international aid.
b) Open its borders to wealthy immigrants.
c) Migrate to other countries.
d) Seek to rebuild.

c) Migrate to other countries.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The Transcontinental Railroad is an example of what?

a) Immigrants meeting the demand for cheap labor.
b) Immigrants competing with natives for jobs.
c) Immigrants driving down wages.
d) None of the above.

a) Immigrants meeting the demand for cheap labor.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Historically, why has the U.S. been concerned about allowing the poor and unemployable to migrate into the country?

a) They often resort to crime as a means of support.
b) They often find it difficult to assimilate into the culture.
c) They often rely on the government as a means of support.
d) All of the above.

c) They often rely on the government as a means of support.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

According to the reading, why do most people remain in their countries of origin?

a) Economics
b) Inertia
c) Politics
d) Religion

b) Inertia

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Unrestrained migration within the U.S. has resulted in which of the following?

a) Mass migration among the states.
b) Most people remain in their states of birth.
c) Mass migration out of the country.
d) Mass migration to the major U.S. cities.

b) Most people remain in their states of birth.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Tension between what two strands of thought permeate U.S. immigration laws?

a) Cultural homogeneity versus cultural diversity.
b) National sovereignty versus international law.
c) Moral reasons for immigration versus political reasons for limiting migration.
d) Individual rights for people in the country versus limited admission of people outside
the country.

d) Individual rights for people in the country versus limited admission of people outside
the country.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

According to the U.S. Supreme Court in Chae Chan Ping v. United States, the Constitution gives the federal government the power to exclude foreigners for all of the following reasons except:

a) To preserve independence.
b) To give security against foreign aggression.
c) To secure against foreign encroachment.
d) To avoid losing U.S. jobs to foreign nationals.

d) To avoid losing U.S. jobs to foreign nationals.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What is one reason why many nations employ strict border controls?

a) Nations want to prevent a terrorist attack similar to what the U.S. suffered on September 11, 2001.
b) Nations fear a loss of their culture.
c) Nations fear mass migration of foreigners.
d) Nations must have strict border controls as a symbol of national sovereignty.

c) Nations fear mass migration of foreigners.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Undocumented immigrants have a Constitutional right to which of the following:

a) Public elementary and secondary education.
b) Serve on juries, especially those involving other undocumented immigrants.
c) Medical treatment.
d) Right to an attorney in deportation hearings.

a) Public elementary and secondary education.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The “stake theory” refers to:

a) Undocumented immigrants have “no stake” in the country where they illegally reside.
b) The rights of undocumented immigrants decrease the longer they violate the law by illegally residing in a country.
c) The rights of undocumented immigrants increase the longer they reside in a country.
d) The rights of undocumented immigrants remain unchanged throughout their residency in a country because they have “no stake” in that country.

c) The rights of undocumented immigrants increase the longer they reside in a country.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

In the U.S. the hierarchy of rights from least to most is:

a) Temporary visitors, undocumented immigrants, lawful permanent residents, U.S. citizens.
b) Undocumented immigrants, temporary visitors, lawful permanent residents, U.S. citizens.
c) Undocumented immigrants, lawful permanent residents, temporary visitors, U.S. citizens.
d) Undocumented immigrants, lawful permanent residents, U.S. citizens, temporary visitors.

b) Undocumented immigrants, temporary visitors, lawful permanent residents, U.S. citizens.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Migration is far easier today than it was in the past due largely to:

a) More global tolerance.
b) Transportation improvements.
c) The pervasiveness of the English and Spanish languages.
d) Global economics.

b) Transportation improvements.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

The causes of immigration to the U.S. have traditionally been explained by:

a) “In” and “out” factors.
b) “Horizontal” and “vertical” factors.
c) “Wealth” and “poverty” factors.
d) “Push” and “pull” factors.

d) “Push” and “pull” factors.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

According to the reading, what is one of the principal goals of U.S. immigration laws?

a) To promote family reunification.
b) To satisfy the need for low-cost, unskilled workers.
c) To satisfy the need for specialized, skilled workers.
d) To promote cultural diversity.

a) To promote family reunification.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Why is it imperative to focus immigration law on labor migration?

a) The U.S. needs to become less dependent on overseas “sweatshops.”
b) The U.S. needs to become less dependent on foreign-made products.
c) The global economy has become increasingly competitive.
d) The global economy has become decreasingly competitive.

c) The global economy has become increasingly competitive.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What is something that complicates the efforts to reform immigration laws?

a) The president’s power to write executive orders affecting immigration.
b) The complex politics surrounding immigration.
c) National sovereignty.
d) Competition for unskilled jobs in the “border” states.

b) The complex politics surrounding immigration.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

According to the reading, illegal immigration may be in large part the result of what?

a) Economically unsound U.S. policies.
b) The pervasiveness of the English and Spanish languages.
c) The “stake theory.”
d) Lack of strict border controls.

a) Economically unsound U.S. policies.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Immigrants are often blamed for placing a downward pressure on wages for all of the following reasons except:

a) Immigrants will work for wages that U.S. workers are willing to accept.
b) Employers are unwilling to pay U.S. workers more than immigrant workers will take.
c) Immigrants are willing to do work that Americans simply will not do.
d) Employers won’t pay more to hire U.S. workers if they can hire immigrants for less.

c) Immigrants are willing to do work that Americans simply will not do.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

According to the reading, immigrants increase the wages of all native-born workers except:

a) Business executives.
b) Workers with master’s degrees or higher.
c) Workers without a high school diploma.
d) Workers with disabilities.

c) Workers without a high school diploma.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

Regarding public benefits, an underlying concern is that poor and working noncitizens will do all of the following except:

a) Not pay into social security.
b) Consume public benefits.
c) Exhaust scarce resources.
d) Constitute a net drag on the national economy.

a) Not pay into social security.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

All of the following have influenced the nation’s collective attitude toward immigration except:

a) War.
b) Political turmoil.
c) Economic turmoil.
d) National sovereignty.

d) National sovereignty.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

According to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, what is the proper term used to describe people who unlawfully enter and remain in the U.S.?

a) Undocumented immigrants.
b) Illegal aliens.
c) Non-immigrants.
d) Temporary residents.

b) Illegal aliens.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

What is the driving force behind the legal exclusion of poor and working class immigrants for much of U.S. history?

a) The idea that the nation cannot admit immigrants who would contribute little to the U.S. economy, but might exhaust public benefits.
b) The belief that the poor and working class would be unable or unwilling to learn English.
c) The fear of negatively affecting the national gene pool.
d) National sovereignty.

a) The idea that the nation cannot admit immigrants who would contribute little to the U.S. economy, but might exhaust public benefits.

How well did you know this?

Not at all

Perfectly

From 1790 until 1952, what was one of the requirements for immigrants to become U.S. citizens? a) The immigrant had to be white. b) The immigrant had to have family ties to the U.S. c) The immigrant had to meet an income threshold. d) The immigrant’s primary language had to be English.

a) The immigrant had to be white.

The anti-terrorism policies adopted after September 11, 2011, negatively affected what rights of immigrants? a) Voting rights b) Legal rights c) Civil rights d) Constitutional rights

c) Civil rights

Aside from the Muslim and Arab communities, what immigrant groups have suffered the ripple effects of the U.S. war on terror? a) Northern European immigrants. b) Eastern European immigrants. c) African immigrants. d) Mexican and Central American immigrants.

d) Mexican and Central American immigrants.

In recent years, the U.S. government has focused its enforcement efforts on deporting what type of noncitizens? a) Illegal aliens. b) Criminal aliens. c) Undocumented workers. d) Temporary visitors.

b) Criminal aliens.

What is an environmental concern of immigration? a) Overpopulation. b) Excessive greenhouse gases. c) Global warming. d) Climate change.

a) Overpopulation.

Pia sues Dion for breach of contract. At trial, in her case-in-chief, Pia calls Warren, and asks him which party did he see draft the contract. Dion says he knew then but does not recall now, but that he wrote who it was down in his journal at the time. Pia shows Warren his journal entry from the day in question. Warren states that he now remembers who drafted the contract. Pia then asks Warren to testify as to who drafted the contract. Dion objects on hearsay grounds. The objection should be: a) Sustained b) Overruled

b) Overruled

Pia sues Dion for breach of contract. At trial, in her case-in-chief, Pia calls Warren, and asks him which party did he see draft the contract. Dion says he knew then but does not recall now, but that he wrote who it was down in his journal at the time. Pia shows Warren his journal entry from the day in question. Warren states that he still does not remember who drafted the contract, but that whatever was in his journal would reflect what he saw. Pia then seeks to admit the journal into evidence. Dion objects. The objection should be: a) Sustained b) Overruled

a) Sustained

At trial, in a negligence suit arising from personal injuries allegedly sustained in a car accident, Paula Plaintiff calls Willy Witness to testify that Defendant Denny was speeding. On the stand, Witness surprises Plaintiff by testifying as follows: From Plaintiff’s Direct Examination of Willy Witness Q: Did you see the accident? A: Yes. Q: How fast was the defendant going at the time? A: No more than 30 miles per hour. Q: Isn’t it a fact that on the day of the accident you said to Officer Ollie that the defendant was going at least 65 miles per hour? A: No, I never made such a statement to Officer Ollie. Plaintiff’s Counsel: This witness is excused at this time subject to being recalled. * * * From Plaintiff’s Direct Examination of Officer Ollie Q: Did you have a conversation with Witness on the day of the accident? A: Yes. Q: What, if anything, did Witness say to you? A: Witness said to me, “The defendant was doing at least 55.” Defense counsel: Objection. Hearsay. How should the judge rule on the hearsay objection? a) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exception to the ban on hearsay. b) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exclusion from the definition of hearsay. c) Overrule the objection, because the statement is admissible for a non-hearsay purpose. d) Sustain the objection.

c) Overrule the objection, because the statement is admissible for a non-hearsay purpose.

Tony is charged with selling cocaine. At the preliminary hearing, a witness for the prosecution testifies that Tony supplied him with the cocaine. At the trial, the witness surprises the prosecution and, in response to the question of who supplied him with the cocaine, the witness says that he does not remember. In federal court, the prosecution may offer the transcript of the witness’s preliminary hearing testimony: a) To impeach the witness’ trial testimony and for the truth of the matter asserted. b) To impeach the witness’ trial testimony but not for the truth of the matter asserted. c) For the truth of the matter asserted but not to impeach the witness’ trial testimony. d) For no permissible purpose.

a) To impeach the witness’ trial testimony and for the truth of the matter asserted.

Tony is charged with selling cocaine. At the preliminary hearing, a witness for the prosecution testifies that Tony supplied him with the cocaine. At the trial, the witness surprises the prosecution and, in response to the question of who supplied him with the cocaine, the witness says that he does not remember. In federal court, the prosecution calls the court reporter at the preliminary hearing to testify that at that hearing, the witness said that Tony supplied him with the cocaine. Defendant objects on hearsay grounds. The judge should: a) Overrule the objection. b) Overrule the objection, if the prosecution agrees to use the statement only for impeachment. c) Sustain the objection, because only the transcript is admissible to prove the inconsistent statement. d) Sustain the objection, because the court reporter was not under oath at the preliminary hearing.

a) Overrule the objection.

In a prosecution of a police officer for violating the civil rights of an arrestee, the prosecutor calls Fellow Officer, who testifies as follows: From the Direct Examination Prosecutor: What did the defendant do after he arrested and handcuffed the victim? Fellow Officer: He proceeded to kick him in the groin for five minutes. From the Cross Examination Defense Attorney: You, too, were charged with beating the victim? Fellow Officer: Yes. Defense Attorney: But in exchange for your testimony here today, the prosecutor promised to dismiss the charges against you? Fellow Officer: Yes. From the Redirect Examination Prosecutor: Prior to initiating plea negotiations with me, did you tell anyone about what you saw on the night of the beating? Fellow Officer: Yes, the day after the beating I said to my spouse, “The defendant kicked the victim in the groin for five minutes.” Defense Attorney: Objection. Hearsay. Move to strike. The judge should: a) Overrule the objection. b) Sustain the objection, because the witness’ credibility has not yet been attacked. c) Sustain the objection, because the prior statement was not made under oath. d) Sustain the objection, because no prior inconsistent statement has been introduced.

a) Overrule the objection.

Defendant is prosecuted for assault. The following is from the prosecution’s direct examination of the victim: Prosecutor: Can you identify the man who hit you on the head with a hammer? Victim: Yes, I can; it was the defendant, sitting right over there. Prosecutor: Did you talk to anyone about who hit you? Victim: Yes, at the police station the next day, in a lineup. Prosecutor: What did you tell the police? Victim: I pointed out the defendant from among the group of six men and said, “He’s the one who hit me on the head with a hammer.” Defendant: Objection, hearsay. Move to strike. The judge should: a) Overrule the objection, if the statement was made under oath. b) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exclusion from the definition of hearsay. c) Sustain the objection, because the witness’ credibility has not yet been attacked. d) Sustain the objection, because the witness’ recollection does not need to be refreshed.

b) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exclusion from the definition of hearsay.

Defendant is prosecuted for assault. The following is from the prosecution’s direct examination of the victim: Prosecutor: Can you identify the man who hit you on the head with a hammer? Victim: No, I can’t. Prosecutor: At one time, were you able to identify your assailant? Victim: I know that I told the officer at the police station who it was who hit me. Prosecutor: What did you tell the officer? Victim: During the lineup, I said, “The defendant hit me on the head with a hammer.” Defendant: Objection, hearsay. Move to strike. The judge should: a) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exclusion from the definition of hearsay. b) Overrule the objection, if the witness was shown a document that refreshes his recollection. c) Sustain the objection, because the refreshing document has not been shown to opposing counsel. d) Sustain the objection, because the statement falls within the exception for past-recorded recollection.

a) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exclusion from the definition of hearsay.

Professor Fresser is prosecuted for larceny. In the prosecution’s case in chief, they call Dean as a witness. The following is from the direct examination: Prosecutor: Did you see someone leave the Bookstore? Dean: Yes, someone left carrying a book but did not pay for it. Prosecutor: Can you tell us who this person was? Dean: No, I don’t remember. Prosecutor: Do you have anything that would help you remember? Dean: Yes, a candy wrapper. Prosecutor: May we have this wrapper marked as People’s Exhibit Number 1 for identification? Judge: Yes. Prosecutor: May the record reflect I am showing opposing counsel People’s Exhibit Number 1 for identification? Judge: Yes. Prosecutor: May I approach the witness? Judge: Yes. Prosecutor: Would you please read People’s Exhibit Number 1 silently to yourself? Dean: Yes. Prosecutor: Does it refresh your recollection about the identity of the person you saw? Dean: Yes. Prosecutor: Can you tell us who this person was? Dean: Professor Fresser. Defendant: Objection. Hearsay. Move to strike. The judge should: a) Overrule the objection, because the out-of-court statement falls within the exemption for statements of identification. b) Overrule the objection, because the testimony does not implicate the hearsay rule. c) Sustain the objection, if the statement is offered for the truth of the matter asserted. d) Sustain the objection, because it fails to meet the requirements for past-recorded recollection.

b) Overrule the objection, because the testimony does not implicate the hearsay rule.

Professor Fresser is prosecuted for larceny. In the prosecution’s case in chief, they call Dean as a witness. The following is from the direct examination: Prosecutor: Did you see someone leave the Bookstore? Dean: Yes, someone left carrying a book but did not pay for it. Prosecutor: Can you tell us who this person was? Dean: No, I don’t remember. Prosecutor: Do you have anything that would help you remember? Dean: Yes, a candy wrapper. Prosecutor: May we have this wrapper marked as People’s Exhibit Number 1 for identification? Judge: Yes. Prosecutor: May the record reflect I am showing opposing counsel People’s Exhibit Number 1 for identification? Judge: Yes. Prosecutor: May I approach the witness? Judge: Yes. Prosecutor: Would you please read People’s Exhibit Number 1 silently to yourself? Dean: Yes. Prosecutor: Does it refresh your recollection about the identity of the person you saw? Dean: Actually, no, I thought it would, but it does not. Prosecutor: Did you write the name of the person you saw leave the Bookstore without paying for the book on People’s Exhibit Number 1 for identification? Dean: Yes, I did so on the same day. Prosecutor: At the time you did so, was your memory of who took the book fresh on your mind? Dean: Yes. Prosecutor: Was the name you wrote on People’s Exhibit Number 1 for identification the name of the person you saw remove the book without paying for it? Dean: Yes. Prosecutor: Request the court’s permission to read People’s Number 1 for identification into evidence. Judge: Any objection? Defendant: Yes, hearsay. The judge should: a) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exception to the ban on hearsay. b) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exclusion from the definition of hearsay. c) Overrule the objection, because the statement is admissible for a non-hearsay purpose. d) Sustain the objection.

a) Overrule the objection, because the statement falls within an exception to the ban on hearsay.

The efforts of the colonist to regulate immigrate were successful in that most new immigrants came from what area? a) Africa, through forced migration b) Southern Europe c) Eastern Europe d) Western Europe

d) Western Europe

What was the effect of the Chinese Exclusion Act? a) The Chinese were not allowed to become naturalized citizens because of their “undesirable qualities.” b) There was an indefinite ban on all Chinese immigration. c) Chinese laborers were banned for a period of 10 years. d) All of the above.

c) Chinese laborers were banned for a period of 10 years.

What was the goal of the Quota Law of 1921? a) To limit the number of immigrants based on race. b) To limit the number of immigrants based on national origin. c) To limit the number of immigrants based on religion. d) All of the above.

b) To limit the number of immigrants based on national origin.

What was the cornerstone of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986? a) Employer sanctions. b) Prevent illegal immigrants from taking job from U.S. worker. c) Prevent illegal immigrants from exhausting public resources. d) All of the above.

a) Employer sanctions.

During the early Colonial Period, some individual colonies attempted to regulate immigration, but _______________ . a) they were bound to follow the immigration policies of England b) they had to comply with the policies approved by all 13 colonies c) there was no method of enforcement d) there was no integrated immigration policy

d) there was no integrated immigration policy

During the “open” era of immigration after the 1680s, how did the original 13 colonies attempt to define their new America? a) They promoted immigration only to select groups. b) They sought the tired, poor, and huddled masses yearning to breathe free. c) They welcomed everyone fleeing religious persecution. d) They sought farmers who could cultivate the land.

a) They promoted immigration only to select groups.

What early American sentiment has remained an important part of the immigration policy debate throughout the nation’s history? a) Making English the official language of the land. b) The unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. c) The belief that no foreign born person has a “right” to live in America. d) Seeking only those who would become patriotic loyalists.

d) Seeking only those who would become patriotic loyalists.

The Statue of Liberty’s refrain of “give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses” is a philosophy that _______________ . a) accurately captured the sentiment of the 13 original colonies b) was definitely not held by the 13 original colonies nor present day U.S. c) became popular after the U.S. accepted the Statue of Liberty as a gift d) is evident in current immigration laws

b) was definitely not held by the 13 original colonies nor present day U.S.

What naturalization requirement issued by the First Congress in 1790 is still a requirement for naturalization today? a) The person must have good moral character. b) The person must have been a resident for two years. c) The person must not be an indentured servant. d) The person must have family ties to the U.S.

a) The person must have good moral character.

Colonial charters frequently denied admission on the basis of what religious beliefs? a) Jewish b) Muslim c) Protestant d) Catholic

d) Catholic

What was the probable antecedent of deportation as an instrument of immigration policy? a) Indentured servitude b) Banishment c) Debtors’ prison d) Forced military conscription

b) Banishment

What is one factor that led to an early attempt at federal immigration control? a) America’s vast, unprotected coastline. b) The importation of African slaves. c) Fear of foreign influence. d) The need to create a unified body of immigration laws for all states.

c) Fear of foreign influence.

The forces of _______ have become embodied in U.S. immigration laws. a) justice b) evolution c) racism d) equality

c) racism

The Nationality Act of 1790 limited naturalization to which group of people? a) White people b) White men c) Free white people d) Europeans

c) Free white people

In 1870, Congress amended the Nationality Act of 1790 to specifically exclude which group of people? a) Africans b) Chinese c) Irish Catholics d) Native Americans

b) Chinese

The 1917 literacy law that excluded aliens who could not read and understand some language or dialect sought to exclude which group of people? a) Africans b) Southern and Eastern Europeans c) Pacific Islanders d) Native Americans

b) Southern and Eastern Europeans

What was the effect of the Asiatic barred zone? a) It excluded all people of Asian descent except those from the Philippines and Guam. b) It excluded all people of Asian descent not included in the Chinese exclusion laws and the Gentlemen’s Agreement. c) It excluded the Chinese and Japanese. d) It excluded all people of Asian descent.

a) It excluded all people of Asian descent except those from the Philippines and Guam.

What fear played an important part on the national psyche leading up the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952? a) The fear of war. b) The fear of lower wages for native-born Americans. c) The fear of homosexuality. d) The fear of communism.

d) The fear of communism.

Why was President Truman opposed to the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952? a) He was “soft on communism.” b) He believed the legislative attacks on membership in Communist organizations violated the Constitutional right of freedom to associate. c) He disagreed with the racialize quota system. d) He had a close relative who was homosexual.

c) He disagreed with the racialize quota system.

The term, persons afflicted with “psychopathic personality,” was meant to specifically exclude which group of people? a) Homosexuals b) Compulsive criminals c) Subversives d) Narcotics violators

a) Homosexuals

What was the major feature of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986? a) Removal of the “psychopathic personality” language from the exclusion provision b) Employer sanctions for hiring undocumented workers c) Amnesty to agricultural workers and those who entered before 1982 d) Increased enforcement along the U.S./Mexican border

b) Employer sanctions for hiring undocumented workers

Civil rights advocates and concerned members of Congress feared that employer sanctions could lead to what? a) The closure of many businesses that depended on cheap, immigrant labor b) Employment discrimination c) Rise in unemployment d) Rise in the cost of goods

b) Employment discrimination

What did critics of the Immigration Act of 1990 claimed would result from allowing foreign investors to obtain a two-year conditional residence status by investing at least $1 million and creating ten new jobs? a) The number of family-based petitions would decrease b) Foreign investors would hire more foreigners than Americans c) Foreign investors would be allowed to buy citizenship d) Investors would close their business after the two-year conditional residency period ends

c) Foreign investors would be allowed to buy citizenship

Passage of the Immigration Act of 1990 deliberately encouraged what group of people to resettle in U.S.? a) Northern and Western Europeans b) Young professionals from Ireland c) Agricultural workers d) Highly-skilled immigrants

d) Highly-skilled immigrants

The number of employment visas in the Immigration Act of 1990 signaled the beginning of what kind of shift in the focus of U.S. immigration law? a) A shift from concern with family reunification toward a policy of importing agricultural workers b) A shift from concern with importing agricultural workers toward a policy of family reunification c) A shift from concern with family reunification toward a policy of importing skilled workers d) A shift from concern with importing skilled workers toward a policy of family reunification

c) A shift from concern with family reunification toward a policy of importing skilled workers

What contributed to the record-setting naturalization applications during much of 1997? a) Waiver of the application fee b) Welfare reform c) Relaxation of the requirements for naturalization d) The amnesty in the 1980s created a larger pool of eligible people for naturalization

b) Welfare reform

Under what circumstances did the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 prohibit lawful permanent residents from seeking discretionary relief? a) When the person has been convicted of an aggravated felony b) When the person has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude c) When the person has been a lawful permanent resident for less than 10 years d) It did not prohibit lawful permanent residents from seeking discretionary relief

a) When the person has been convicted of an aggravated felony

Under the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, when must asylum seekers apply for asylum? a) When they arrive at the border b) Within one year of entering the U.S. c) Within one year of being placed in immigration proceedings d) At any time, as long as they are still in the U.S.

b) Within one year of entering the U.S.

Since September 11, 2001, what have Congress and the President had an eye toward as they screen immigration policies? a) National security b) Family reunification c) Skilled laborers d) Unskilled laborers

a) National security

What provision of the U.S. Constitution unequivocally authorizes the federal government to regulate immigration? a) The Due Process Clause of the 5th Amendment. b) There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that unequivocally authorizes the federal government to regulate immigration. c) The Delegation Clause of the 10th Amendment. d) None of the above

b) There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that unequivocally authorizes the federal government to regulate immigration.

What does the law consider immigrants to be? a) Noncitizens b) Foreign nationals c) Aliens d) Articles of commerce

d) Articles of commerce

What it the effect of the plenary power doctrine? a) The judicial branch of government is limited to interpreting laws passed by Congress. b) The immigration laws passed by Congress are not subject to judicial review. c) Courts generally defer to the political branches of government on immigration matters. d) The President has authority to issue executive orders affecting immigration.

c) Courts generally defer to the political branches of government on immigration matters.

What Constitutional rights are held by aliens seeking admission into the U.S.? a) Aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have no Constitutional rights. b) Aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have no Constitutional rights regarding their application for admission. c) Aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have as many Constitutional rights as noncitizens within the territory of the U.S. d) Aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

b) Aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have no Constitutional rights regarding their application for admission.

What was the goal of the Secure Communities Program? a) To make communities safer by giving incentives to neighborhood residents that report noncitizens who are involved in gang-related activities b) To enhance the detection of criminal aliens by withdrawing federal aid from sanctuary cities c) To improve public safety by implementing a comprehensive, integrated approach to identify and remove criminal aliens from the U.S. d) To prevent criminal aliens from entering U.S. communities by denying visas to anyone with a felony conviction

c) To improve public safety by implementing a comprehensive, integrated approach to identify and remove criminal aliens from the U.S.

What is the purpose of an ICE detainer? a) Police officers making an investigatory stop may detain an alien for a brief period to allow ICE to verify the alien’s immigration status. b) ICE has the authority to detain certain aliens in custody until the completion of their immigration proceedings. c) Jails can hold aliens up to 48 hours beyond the completion of their sentences to allow ICE to take those aliens into ICE custody for deportation proceedings. d) None of the above

c) Jails can hold aliens up to 48 hours beyond the completion of their sentences to allow ICE to take those aliens into ICE custody for deportation proceedings.

What is the specific purpose for ICE detaining aliens? a) To enhance public safety by keeping criminal aliens off the street b) To serve as punishment and deterrence for aliens illegally entering and/or remaining in the U.S. c) To make sure aliens show up for their immigration hearings d) All of the above

c) To make sure aliens show up for their immigration hearings

What is required in order for same sex-marriages to be recognized for immigration purposes? a) The same-sex marriage must be valid in the jurisdiction where the marriage took place. b) The same-sex couple must have a marriage license. c) Both parties must have been at least 18-years-old when the marriage took place. d) All of the above

a) The same-sex marriage must be valid in the jurisdiction where the marriage took place.

Who has primary responsibility for regulating immigration into the United States? a) States along the U.S. exterior and international borders b) All states have the responsibility for regulating immigration into their individual states c) The President of the United States d) The federal government

d) The federal government

b) There is no provision in the U.S. Constitution that unequivocally authorizes the federal government to regulate immigration.

Why were the framers of the Constitution reluctant to directly address the topic of immigration? a) One of the grievances against the King of England was that he had obstructed free immigration to the U.S. b) States were to maintain sovereignty and except for power expressly given to the federal government in the Constitution, states would govern themselves. c) Immigration implicated the movement of slaves and the institution of slavery. d) All of the above

c) Immigration implicated the movement of slaves and the institution of slavery.

In the earliest U.S. immigration cases, what Constitutional provision did the Court cite as authority to regulate immigration? a) Article I, section 8, clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution b) The Commerce Clause c) The Constitutional provision that regulated trade with Indian Tribes d) All of the above

d) All of the above

How did the U.S. Supreme Court classify immigrants in Edwards v. California? a) Articles of commerce b) Aliens c) Foreign nationals d) Noncitizens

a) Articles of commerce

What was the primary disagreement as to the effect of the Migration and Importation Clause of Article I, section 9, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution? a) There was disagreement about whether the clause allowed for the taxation of free immigrants admitted to the U.S. b) There was disagreement about whether the clause allowed Congress to ban the importation of slaves after 1808. c) There was disagreement about whether the clause afforded the federal government the general power to regulate migration. d) None of the above

a) There was disagreement about whether the clause allowed for the taxation of free immigrants admitted to the U.S.

Under the War Power Clause of Article I, section 8, clause 11 of the U.S. Constitution, what authority does Congress has to regulate immigration? a) Congress has the power to declare war against enemy aliens. b) The War Power Clause justifies the general regulation of immigration. c) The War Power Clause grants Congress the authority to ban the importation of slaves. d) Congress has the authority to exclude or expel enemy aliens.

d) Congress has the authority to exclude or expel enemy aliens.

What was the effect of the Supreme Court’s decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford? a) It limited the Presidency to only “natural born” U.S. citizens. b) It ensured full citizenship to all persons born in the U.S. as well as those who have naturalized. c) It denied citizenship to freed slaves. d) It ruled that Congress has the authority to regulate migration into the U.S.

c) It denied citizenship to freed slaves.

In Chae Chan Ping v. United States, what did the Supreme Court cite as the Constitutional basis for the federal government to regulate immigration? a) The Invasion Clause of Article IV, section 4 of the U.S. Constitution b) The Migration and Importation Clause of Article I, section 9, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution c) The federal government’s power to regulate interstate and international commerce d) The federal government’s power over foreign affairs

d) The federal government’s power over foreign affairs

What is one reason why the power to regulate immigration should belong to Congress? a) To evenly spread the cost of immigration enforcement among the states b) To prevent a single state from involving the U.S. in quarrels with other nations c) Because multiple states, like Texas and California, can border the same foreign nation d) All of the above

b) To prevent a single state from involving the U.S. in quarrels with other nations

What are two structural arguments to justify the power to regulate immigration? a) Self-preservation and self-definition b) Self-preservation and self-awareness c) Self-definition and self-determination d) None of the above

a) Self-preservation and self-definition

c) Courts generally defer to the political branches of government on immigration matters.

What did the Supreme Court hold in Demore v. Kim? a) Illegal aliens have no rights under the U.S. Constitution. b) Congress may make rules as to aliens that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens. c) Everyone on U.S. soil is protected by the U.S. Constitution. d) The Fourteenth Amendment only extends privileges to U.S. citizens, whether “natural born” or naturalized.

b) Congress may make rules as to aliens that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.

What has prevented states like Arizona and California from passing state laws that effective regulate immigration? a) Withdrawal of federal funds b) The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution c) The Supreme Court’s holding in Demore v. Kim d) Federal preemption

d) Federal preemption

b) Aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have no Constitutional rights regarding their application for admission.

What is one reason why aliens seeking admission into the U.S. have fewer Constitutional rights than U.S. citizens? a) The Invasion Clause treats all migrants as unwanted invaders b) The Fourteenth Amendment only extends privileges to U.S. citizens, whether “natural born” or naturalized. c) The power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative. d) All of the above

c) The power to admit or exclude aliens is a sovereign prerogative.

When seeking re-entry into the U.S., whose claim of admissibility must be determined in proceedings that comply with Due Process? a) U.S. citizens b) Lawful permanent residents c) Temporary visitors d) Undocumented immigrants

b) Lawful permanent residents

Generally speaking, how are lawful permanent residents treated when entering the U.S.? a) They are treated as if they are seeking initial admission into the U.S. b) They are treated like U.S. citizens. c) All noncitizens seeking admission into the U.S. are treated the same. d) None of the above

d) None of the above

What state action did the Supreme Court determine was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause? a) A state government imposed a citizenship requirement on state jobs that perform a “political function” b) A state government declined to hire a lawful permanent resident as a probation officer c) A state government barred undocumented immigrant children from elementary and secondary public schools d) All of the above

c) A state government barred undocumented immigrant children from elementary and secondary public schools

What limits judicial review of immigration decisions? a) The Equal Protection Clause b) Separation of Powers c) General deference afforded to administrative agencies d) National Sovereignty

c) General deference afforded to administrative agencies

In INS v. Chadha, why was Congress prohibited from reversing the deportation decision of the Attorney General? a) It violated the plenary power doctrine. b) It violated the separation of powers principal. c) General deference is afforded to administrative agencies. d) The Attorney General’s decision on immigration matters is subject to limited judicial review.

b) It violated the separation of powers principal.

What is the purpose of Article VI, Clause 2, of the Constitution? a) It establishes Congress’ plenary power over immigration. b) It makes the Constitution the supreme law of the land. c) It grants Congress the authority to delegate legislative duties to the states. d) All of the above

b) It makes the Constitution the supreme law of the land.

Why have states been able to regulate the use of firearms by immigrants? a) Congress specifically delegated immigrant gun control rights to the states. b) In Congress’ view, the preemption doctrine prevented states from legislating in an area where the federal government had exclusive control. c) Congress specifically contemplated concurrent state firearm regulation. d) Congress specifically legislated the area of immigrant gun control away from the states.

c) Congress specifically contemplated concurrent state firearm regulation.

In terms of regulating immigration, what has Congress delegated to the states? a) The administration of public benefits programs. b) The right to define “qualified aliens” with respect to public benefits. c) The right to deny “paupers” admission to a state’s territory. d) The ability to withhold public benefits from U.S. born children based on the immigration status of their parents.

a) The administration of public benefits programs.

When are state laws affecting immigration unlikely to be upheld? a) When they target undocumented immigrants. b) When Congress has occupied the field. c) When they are considered to involve an overriding state interest. d) When they are consistent with federal immigration laws or policies.

b) When Congress has occupied the field.

What originated the doctrine of federal plenary immigration power? a) The U.S. Constitution b) The Immigration and Nationality Act c) The Chinese Exclusion Case d) All of the above

c) The Chinese Exclusion Case

What was one effect of the doctrine of federal plenary immigration power? a) The doctrine became the only source of federal immigration power. b) The doctrine did not end state regulation of immigrants. c) The doctrine did not protect from judicial scrutiny the substantive decisions of Congress on immigration admissions and removal criteria. d) None of the above

b) The doctrine did not end state regulation of immigrants.

What is omnibus immigration legislation? a) Laws that combine a range of types of regulation of immigrants into a single law b) Laws that restrict the migration of several categories of immigrants c) The individual states’ attempts to enact laws affecting immigration d) Immigration legislation that has been adopted by several states

a) Laws that combine a range of types of regulation of immigrants into a single law

When has the success of federal immigration power preemption claims been greater? a) When states deny rights or benefits to undocumented immigrants in the absence of federal laws or policies b) When states discriminate by reserving public benefits to their citizens c) When Congress has legislated specifically in the area d) None of the above

c) When Congress has legislated specifically in the area

When are state laws affecting immigration more likely to be upheld? a) When they target undocumented immigrants b) When they are consistent with federal immigration laws or policies c) When they are considered to involve an overriding state interest d) All of the above

d) All of the above

What did the Territorial Land Act of 1787 do? a) It restricted land ownership to native-born citizens. b) It forbade all noncitizens from owning land. c) It forbade extensive alien landholding in the organized territories, except by immigrant farmers who had applied for citizenship. d) It prohibited aliens from selling land in the newly settled Western territories.

c) It forbade extensive alien landholding in the organized territories, except by immigrant farmers who had applied for citizenship.

What was the purpose of the alien land laws enacted during the Cold War that limited the rights of foreigners to receive land by inheritance? a) They served as a retaliatory step taken after communist governments banned democratic nations from receiving land by inheritance. b) Their goal was to advance the Western European culture in the U.S. c) They were meant to prevent diversion of U.S. wealth to communist governments. d) The purpose was to deprive Russian operatives of places to reside in the U.S.

c) They were meant to prevent diversion of U.S. wealth to communist governments.

Why has no federal statute that could pertain to alien property restrictions been used to challenge state alien land laws? a) The rights of foreign nationals with respect to real property have been primarily a matter of state regulation. b) The ownership of real property within a state does not fall under the Interstate Commerce Clause. c) No foreign nationals have decided to challenge the state laws in federal court. d) State alien land laws are neutral on their face, but have a disparate impact against foreign nationals.

a) The rights of foreign nationals with respect to real property have been primarily a matter of state regulation.

How did Congress view state interaction when it enacted the Gun Control Act? a) Congress specifically contemplated concurrent state firearm regulation. b) Congress specifically legislated the area of immigrant gun control away from the states. c) Congress specifically delegated immigrant gun control rights to the states. d) In Congress’ view, the preemption doctrine prevented states from legislating in an area where the federal government had exclusive control.

a) Congress specifically contemplated concurrent state firearm regulation.

Historically, what role has states played in determining alien voting rights? a) States determined who was eligible to vote in state and local elections. b) With few exceptions, states determined who was eligible to vote in both state and federal elections. c) The states played no role in determining alien voting rights. d) States were allowed to pass laws that interpreted federal statutes on alien voting rights.

b) With few exceptions, states determined who was eligible to vote in both state and federal elections.

Throughout the history of alien voting rights, the battle to allow noncitizens the right to vote has been ____________. a) state discretion rather than judicial intervention b) judicial intervention rather than state discretion c) political rather than legal d) legal rather than political

c) political rather than legal

The citizenship requirement for jury service is mandated by what? a) The U.S. Constitution b) The U.S. Supreme Court c) Federal law d) State law or practice

d) State law or practice

What is the special public interest doctrine? a) The right of citizens to serve on juries b) The right of states to prohibit lawful permanent residents from serving on juries c) The right of states to restrict access to natural resources and commercial licenses solely to citizens d) All of the above

c) The right of states to restrict access to natural resources and commercial licenses solely to citizens

With the death of the public interest doctrine, what has emerged to allow states to restrict their resources to citizens? a) Congress’ legislature devolution of its immigration power to the states b) The preemption doctrine c) The decline of the federal plenary power doctrine over immigration d) None of the above

a) Congress’ legislature devolution of its immigration power to the states

What has allowed states to continue to restrict certain public jobs to their citizens? a) The political-function exception b) The special public interest doctrine c) The preemption doctrine d) The state’s police power

a) The political-function exception

Do states have the power to condition professional or occupational license eligibility on immigration status? a) No, in all cases b) Yes, in all cases c) No, at least in regards to lawful permanent residents d) Yes, at least in regards to lawful permanent residents

c) No, at least in regards to lawful permanent residents

What is the test to determine if state legislation of immigration is preempted? a) Determine whether the state regulation is invalid as a regulation of immigration. b) Determine if Congress has shown a clear and manifest purpose to completely enact an ouster of state power. c) Determine if the state law stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress. d) All of the above

d) All of the above

How are measures that exclude immigrants from access to rights and benefits of U.S. citizens viewed? a) As indirect means of controlling immigration and a proper preservation of benefits b) As a direct means of controlling immigration but an improper method of a state’s attempt to preserve benefits c) As an effective deterrent of migration to the U.S. solely for public benefits d) None of the above

a) As indirect means of controlling immigration and a proper preservation of benefits

What has Congress delegated to the states? a) The right to deny “paupers” admission to a state’s territory. b) The right to define “qualified aliens” with respect to public benefits c) The ability to withhold public benefits from U.S. born children based on the immigration status of their parents d) The administration of public benefits programs

d) The administration of public benefits programs

Which social benefits programs require states to verify an applicant’s immigration status and to report to immigration officials an applicant who is out of status? a) Public housing, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance to Needy families b) Social security, Medicaid, Temporary Assistance to Needy families c) Social security, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy families d) Social security, public housing, and Medicaid

c) Social security, public housing, and Temporary Assistance to Needy families

In Plyler v. Doe, how did the Supreme Court characterize primary and secondary school education? a) A public benefit b) A quasi-fundamental right c) A fundamental right d) A Constitutional right

b) A quasi-fundamental right

What has muddled the waters for the protection of undocumented workers under U.S. labor and worker laws? a) The establishment of employer sanctions b) The special public interest doctrine c) Congress’ legislature devolution of its immigration power to the states d) All of the above

a) The establishment of employer sanctions

According to the legislative history, what was not an intent of the Immigration Reform and Control Act? a) To prevent illegal aliens from collecting unemployment benefits b) To limit workplace protections afforded to undocumented workers c) To establish employee sanctions for working illegally d) None of the above

b) To limit workplace protections afforded to undocumented workers

What are day laborers? a) Laborers who work during the day b) Undocumented workers who are forced to work as long as there is daylight c) Laborers that work every day of the week d) Workers who congregate at informal places to wait for temporary or permanent employment

d) Workers who congregate at informal places to wait for temporary or permanent employment

What have some states done in an attempt to harass, displace, or improve the lots of day laborers? a) Instituted civil and criminal sanctions on those hiring day laborers b) Required day laborers to report to state-run work centers c) Imposed license restrictions on those hiring day laborers d) Created an additional state tax for day laborers

c) Imposed license restrictions on those hiring day laborers

What prompted the issuing of driver’s licenses to become a matter of national security as opposed to a local road safety regulation? a) The dramatic increase in noncitizens with temporary visas seeking driving privileges. b) The need to create a fuller record of the identity of undocumented persons in the U.S. c) The REAL ID Act. d) The terrorist attacks on 9/11.

d) The terrorist attacks on 9/11.

Why have court challenges to driver’s license restrictions for noncitizens generally been unsuccessful? a) Although undocumented immigrants are treated as a protected group, the restriction is not considered to be a violation of a fundamental right. b) Although the restriction concerns a fundamental right, undocumented immigrants are not treated as a protected group. c) Undocumented immigrants are not treated as a protect group and the restriction is not considered to be a violation of a fundamental right. d) Undocumented immigrants are treated as a protected group and the restriction concerns a quasi-fundamental right.

c) Undocumented immigrants are not treated as a protect group and the restriction is not considered to be a violation of a fundamental right.

On what state authority did localities rely to pass ordinances containing tenancy restrictions? a) The state’s Constitution b) The state’s police power to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens c) Federal regulations, which allowed localities to avoid the preemption doctrine d) Congress’ delegation to the states the duty to administer public benefits programs

b) The state’s police power to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens

What is the stated purpose of English-only laws? a) Reducing the spread of foreign influence b) Easing communication between government officials and the public c) Saving economic resources by not having multilingual employees and signage d) Promoting unity through a common language

d) Promoting unity through a common language

What is the highest administrative body for interpreting and applying immigration laws? a) United States Citizenship and Immigration Services b) The Administrative Appeals Office c) Immigration Judge d) The Board of Immigration Appeals

d) The Board of Immigration Appeals

Decisions by the Board of Immigration Appeals are binding on who? a) All Department of Homeland Security Officers b) Immigration Courts c) Immigration Judges d) All of the above

d) All of the above

Generally speaking, what must happen before an unfavorable immigration decision can be appealed in federal court? a) There must be a final order of removal. b) There must be a disagreement among the circuits. c) All administrative remedies must be exhausted. d) All of the above

c) All administrative remedies must be exhausted.

When can an alien file a habeas corpus action in federal district court? a) Any time an alien is being held in immigration detention. b) Six months after a final order of removal. c) After all administrative remedies have been exhausted. d) Never, because federal district court is not a federal appellate court.

b) Six months after a final order of removal.

Who monitors State Department consular officers in their initial screening function to issue visas overseas to noncitizens prior to entry into the U.S.? a) The Department of State b) The Department of Homeland Security c) The Department of Justice d) Congress

b) The Department of Homeland Security

Which unit within the Justice Department holds hearings to make decisions on individual immigration matters? a) The Executive Office of Immigration Review b) The Board of Immigration Appeals c) The Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Office d) All of the above

d) All of the above

What creates a lack of uniformity in Immigration Court? a) Immigration Judges are not required to be lawyers b) Many of the reform measures for the Executive Office of Immigration Review have not been implemented. c) Inconsistent decisions by Immigration Judges in the interpretation and application of immigration law d) None of the above

c) Inconsistent decisions by Immigration Judges in the interpretation and application of immigration law

What has been a major concern about removal hearings before Immigration Judges? a) Immigration Court is not an Article I specialized federal court b) The lack of legal representation c) EOIR backlogs in removal hearings d) The plenary power doctrine limits judicial oversight

b) The lack of legal representation

What streamlining mechanism has the Board of Immigration Appeals adopted to lessen the backlog of appeals? a) Gave the Administrative Appeals Office a larger role in reviewing immigration appeals b) Required Immigration Judges to give oral opinions so that appeals can be forwarded quicker c) Shifted from having a three-member panel hear an appeal to allow one member to review an appeal d) None of the above

c) Shifted from having a three-member panel hear an appeal to allow one member to review an appeal

Who administers domestic refugee resettlement programs that provide assistance to new refugees, to include employment training? a) The Department of Labor b) The Department of Health and Human Services c) United States Citizenship and Immigration Services d) All of the above

b) The Department of Health and Human Services

In terms of immigration, what is one criticism of the Department of Homeland Security’s mission to ensure homeland security? a) Ensuring homeland security does not adequately consider the primary goal of U.S. immigration laws, which is family reunification b) Ensuring homeland security disparately impacts immigrants from predominantly Arab and Muslim nations c) Because of DHS’ size, too few resources are dedicated to immigration d) Enforcement dominates other immigration objectives

d) Enforcement dominates other immigration objectives

What is the name of the proceedings for aliens who were placed in immigration proceedings after 1996? a) Removal hearings b) Deportation hearings c) Exclusion hearings d) Immigration Court

a) Removal hearings

What is the government’s burden of proof regarding inadmissibility to the U.S.? a) Probable cause b) Preponderance of the evidence c) Clear and convincing d) Beyond a reasonable doubt

c) Clear and convincing

Regardless of length of time in the U.S. or immigration status, to what type of hearing are noncitizens physically present in the U.S. entitled before they can be removed from the U.S.? a) A removal hearing b) A deportation hearing c) An exclusion hearing d) A hearing that complies with the Due Process Clause

d) A hearing that complies with the Due Process Clause

What is one result of the courts’ hands-off approach in reviewing the Executive and Legislative Branches’ immigration decisions? a) Enforcing immigration laws dominates other immigration objectives. b) Immigrants in removal proceedings are not entitled to due process. c) The creation of a body of immigration laws that permits discrimination against groups of noncitizens that would violate the Constitution if the same group were citizens. d) Inconsistent decisions by Immigration Judges in the interpretation and application of immigration law.

c) The creation of a body of immigration laws that permits discrimination against groups of noncitizens that would violate the Constitution if the same group were citizens.

What is Chevron deference? a) Courts must defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutes administered by that agency. b) There is significant deference to the factual and legal determinations of administrative agencies. c) An agency’s factual finding can only be overturned if they are clearly erroneous. d) The Judicial Branch must defer to the Executive and Legislative Branches in matters of immigration.

a) Courts must defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutes administered by that agency.

When will the Supreme Court not accord Chevron deference? a) When such deference would violate the Due Process Clause b) When an agency’s interpretation of the law is contrary to Congressional intent c) When the law the agency seeks to interpret is ambiguous d) All of the above

b) When an agency’s interpretation of the law is contrary to Congressional intent

When will the Supreme Court reverse an agency policy? a) When there are substantial Constitutional questions b) When there is no ambiguity in a statute for an agency to resolve, which is a prerequisite for deference c) When it cannot discern a reason for the policy d) None of the above

c) When it cannot discern a reason for the policy

What is the standard of review for an Immigration Court’s factual findings? a) Due to the plenary power doctrine, there is no judicial review of which noncitizens Congress chooses to exclude. b) Courts exercise de novo or independent review. c) Administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude the contrary. d) The findings are conclusive unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.

c) Administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude the contrary.

What is the standard of review for an Immigration Court’s decision on whether to grant asylum? a) Due to the plenary power doctrine, there is no judicial review of which noncitizens Congress chooses to exclude. b) Courts exercise de novo or independent review. c) Administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude the contrary. d) The findings are conclusive unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.

d) The findings are conclusive unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.

What is the standard of review for an Immigration Court’s legal findings? a) Due to the plenary power doctrine, there is no judicial review of which noncitizens Congress chooses to exclude. b) Courts exercise de novo or independent review. c) Administrative findings of fact are conclusive unless any reasonable adjudicator would be compelled to conclude the contrary. d) The findings are conclusive unless manifestly contrary to the law and an abuse of discretion.

b) Courts exercise de novo or independent review.

What is a stay of removal? a) A delay in the commencement of removal proceedings to allow adjudication of an alien’s visa petition. b) When the court enjoins or restrains ICE operations in removal proceedings. c) When an alien’s removal hearing is held in abeyance while the alien pursues an appeal. d) Non-enforcement of a removal order to give aliens time to conclude their affairs in the U.S.

d) Non-enforcement of a removal order to give aliens time to conclude their affairs in the U.S.

When can an alien file a habeas corpus action in federal district court? Incorrect Response a) To challenge a final order of removal Correct Answer b) To challenge a decision to detain an alien while the alien’s removal proceedings are pending c) To challenge an asylum denial d) None of the above, aliens must pursue all appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals and the Circuit Courts of Appeals

When can an alien file a habeas corpus action in federal district court? a) To challenge a final order of removal b) To challenge a decision to detain an alien while the alien’s removal proceedings are pending c) To challenge an asylum denial d) None of the above, aliens must pursue all appeals to the Board of Immigration Appeals and the Circuit Courts of Appeals

b) To challenge a decision to detain an alien while the alien’s removal proceedings are pending

When can a federal court review a final order of removal? a) Immediately after an Immigration Judge issues a removal order b) When aliens have exhausted all administrative remedies that are available as a matter of right c) At any point in the proceedings when an Immigration Judge makes a legal error d) When aliens are being detained while there removal proceedings are pending

b) When aliens have exhausted all administrative remedies that are available as a matter of right

What is the rule of consular absolutism? a) U.S. Department of State consular officers have absolute authority concerning whether to issue a visa. b) All overseas visa applications must be processed by U.S. Department of State consular officers. c) A visa denial is not subject to review by any court. d) U.S. Department of State consular officers are not required to show a facially legitimate and bona fide reason for denying a visa in cases in which U.S. citizen’s rights are implicated.

c) A visa denial is not subject to review by any court.

When can expedited removals be used to exclude noncitizens that immigration inspectors believe are inadmissible on documentary or fraud grounds? a) On arriving aliens within 100 miles of an international border b) On arriving aliens and illegal aliens who are unable to prove two years continuous physical presence c) On all noncitizens, except lawful permanent residents d) The Secret Service

b) On arriving aliens and illegal aliens who are unable to prove two years continuous physical presence

What forms of relief are shielded from judicial review? a) Statutory forms of relief b) Discretionary forms of relief c) Declaratory forms of relief d) None of the above

b) Discretionary forms of relief

What is considered to be a discretionary form of relief? a) Cancellation of removal b) Voluntary departure c) Adjustment of status d) All of the above

d) All of the above

What is the Supreme Court’s view on judicial review of motions to reopen an immigration proceeding? a) An Immigration Judge’s decision on whether to grant the motion is final. b) Only the Board of Immigration Appeals can review an Immigration Judge’s decision on a motion to reopen. c) A Circuit Court of Appeals can review the Board of Immigration Appeals decision on a motion to reopen. d) Because a motion to reopen is based on discretionary factors, a Circuit Court of Appeals cannot review the Board of Immigration Appeals decision on a motion to reopen.

c) A Circuit Court of Appeals can review the Board of Immigration Appeals decision on a motion to reopen.

The worldwide annual visa allocation system establishes a baseline for total annual immigrant visas at 675,000 for family-sponsored, employed-based, and diversity visas. After all 675,000 visas had been issued, Vivian is in the U.S. and sought an immigrant visa because she was facing persecution in her home country. Five years earlier, her parents, who are now U.S. citizens, were facing the same persecution and were granted asylum. Based on her parent’s successful asylum application, Vivian believes that she should also qualify for an immigrant visa. How likely is it that she would be granted an immigrant visa? a) It is very likely because persecution-based migration is not subject to numerical limitations. b) It is very likely because a prima facie claim for persecution has been established based on her parents’ grant of asylum. c) It is highly unlikely her parents were granted asylum while she was under 21 years old and named her on the asylum application. d) It is highly unlikely unless she is unmarried and under 21 years old.

d) It is highly unlikely unless she is unmarried and under 21 years old.

At an overseas consular office, four people are applying for a visa to enter the U.S. based on family preference. Ben is the sole caretaker of his younger brother. They are noncitizens who live abroad, but they have an older brother who is a U.S. citizen. Charles, a noncitizen, lives with his parents overseas, but he has a child who is a U.S. citizen. Paul, a noncitizen living outside of the U.S., is divorced but has parents who are U.S. citizens. Sahir is a noncitizen who lives in a country that allows polygamy. He has a spouse in his native country and also has a spouse who is a lawful permanent resident of the U.S. Which person can obtain a visa without being subject to the numerical limitation? a) Ben, if he and his older brother share the same parents, then Ben is an immediate relative b) Charles, as long as his child is at least 21 years old c) Paul, regardless of Paul’s age d) Sahir, because spouses are immediate relatives

b) Charles, as long as his child is at least 21 years old

At an overseas consular office, four people are applying for a visa to enter the U.S. based on family preference. Ben is the sole caretaker of his younger brother. They are noncitizens who live abroad, but they have an older brother who is a U.S. citizen. Charles, a noncitizen, lives with his parents overseas, but he has a child who is a U.S. citizen. Paul, a noncitizen living outside of the U.S., is divorced but has parents who are U.S. citizens. Sahir is a noncitizen who lives in a country that allows polygamy. He has a spouse in his native country and also has a spouse who is a lawful permanent resident of the U.S. Once all parties receive a visa, who will receive a visa at the same time as a derivative beneficiary? a) Ben’s younger brother, if Ben has legally adopted that brother b) Charles parents, because parents are immediate relatives c) Paul spouse, as long as Paul has not remarried d) Sahir’s spouse, if Sahir is legally married because spouses are immediate relatives

a) Ben’s younger brother, if Ben has legally adopted that brother

Miguel, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., married a Mexican citizen on January 1. On February 1, he filed a visa petition for his spouse. On August 1, the visa petition was approved. On December 1, Miguel naturalized and became a U.S. citizen. What is the priority date for Miguel’s petition? a) January 1 b) February 1 c) August 1 d) December 1

b) February 1

Miguel, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., married a Mexican citizen on January 1. On February 1, he filed a visa petition for his spouse. On August 1, the visa petition was approved. On December 1, Miguel naturalized and became a U.S. citizen. What is the visa preference category on the date the petition is approved? a) First Preference b) Second Preference c) Third Preference d) Fourth Preference

b) Second Preference

Miguel, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., married a Mexican citizen on January 1. On February 1, he filed a visa petition for his spouse. On August 1, the visa petition was approved. On December 1, Miguel naturalized and became a U.S. citizen. What effect, if any, does Miguel’s naturalization have on the visa for his spouse? a) No effect b) The preference is converted to first preference c) Miguel’s spouse is not subjected to the numerical limitation d) None of the above

c) Miguel’s spouse is not subjected to the numerical limitation

Carl, a Canadian citizen, was dating Adam, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S. Carl and Adam broke up after 11 months of dating. Carl had a good managerial job in the U.S. and did not want to return to Canada. Carl proposed to Adam so that he could remain in the U.S. Adam agreed to the marriage, as long as Carl would get Adam hired in the company where Carl worked. Carl got Adam a job and the two were legally married in a jurisdiction that authorizes same sex marriages. Adam immediately filed a visa petition for Carl. What is a likely result? a) The visa petition will be approved because the INA now recognizes same sex marriages. b) The visa petition will be approved because in addition to the INA’s recognition of same sex marriages, the marriage took place in a jurisdiction that authorizes same sex marriage. c) The visa petition will be denied because the relationship lasted less than one year. d) The visa petition will be denied because the purpose of the marriage was to evade immigration laws.

d) The visa petition will be denied because the purpose of the marriage was to evade immigration laws.

Laura, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., received her LPR status by marrying a U.S. citizen. A year-and-a-half after the marriage, Laura and her husband divorced. Two year after her divorce, Laura married a foreign national and filed a visa petition for her new spouse. What was Laura’s immigration status at the time she married the foreign national? a) Laura is out of status because her first marriage ended in divorce in less than two years b) Laura is out of status unless she was granted a waiver of the joint petition c) Conditional permanent resident d) Lawful permanent resident

b) Laura is out of status unless she was granted a waiver of the joint petition

Laura, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., received her LPR status by marrying a U.S. citizen. A year-and-a-half after the marriage, Laura and her husband divorced. Two year after her divorce, Laura married a foreign national and filed a visa petition for her new spouse. What is the likely result of Laura’s visa petition for her new husband? a) It’s likely to be denied unless special circumstances exist. b) It’s likely to be denied because Laura’s first marriage was a sham marriage. c) It’s likely to be approved if Laura was granted a waiver of the joint petition. d) It’s likely to be approved if Laura’s first marriage was determined not to be a sham marriage.

a) It’s likely to be denied unless special circumstances exist.

Linda, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S., filed a visa petition for her 19-year-old daughter, Debra. When Debra was 20-years-old, Linda became a U.S. citizen. When Debra was 21 years old, the visa petition Linda filed on Debra’s behalf was approved. What is the visa preference category on the date the petition is approved? a) First preference because she is the unmarried daughter over the age of 21 of a U.S. citizen b) Second preference (2-A) because based on the Child Status Protection Act, Debra retains the age she held at the time the visa petition was filed c) Second preference (2-B) because based on the Child Status Protection Act, Debra retains the age and Linda retains the status they held at the time the visa petition was filed d) A visa is immediately available for Debra as a child of a U.S. citizen

d) A visa is immediately available for Debra as a child of a U.S. citizen

Bob, a U.S. citizen, filed a visa petition for his younger sister Sarah on the day he retired. Bob had migrated to the U.S. when he was a young man and now that he was older, he wanted to spend his remaining time with family. His sister Sarah was married to Mike, and they had a 20-year-old son, Sam. The visa petition for Sarah and her family was not approved until after Sam turned 21-years-old. What is the visa preference category on the date the petition is approved? a) Fourth Preference because Sarah is the sister of a U.S. citizen, Mike is her spouse, and the Child Status Protection Act allows Sam to retain the age he held at the time the petition was filed b) Fourth Preference for Sarah as the sister of a U.S. citizen, but no preference for Mike and Sam c) Fourth Preference for Sarah as the sister of a U.S. citizen and her spouse Mike, but no preference for Sam because he is not under 21 d) Fourth Preference for Sarah and Sam because the Child Status Protection Act allows Sam to retain the age he held at the time the petition was filed, but no preference for Mike

c) Fourth Preference for Sarah as the sister of a U.S. citizen and her spouse Mike, but no preference for Sam because he is not under 21

Joey, a juvenile, was granted Special Immigrant Juvenile (SIJ) status when he was 13-years-old. He obtained LPR status and ultimately naturalized to become a U.S. citizen. When he was 22-years-old, he filed a visa petition for his mother, the woman who had adopted him before he arrived in the U.S. What is the visa preference category on the date the petition is approved? a) No preference because SIJ’s parents are not eligible for immigration benefits b) No preference because Joey’s “mother” is not a natural parent c) A visa is immediately available because Joey is petitioning for his mother d) A visa is immediately available because adoptive parents meet the definition of parents, and Joey is a U.S. citizen over the age of 21

a) No preference because SIJ’s parents are not eligible for immigration benefits

Yuri is a professional hockey player from Russia. He and several other U.S. born hockey players competed for a position on the Chicago Blackhawks. Of all the players who competed for the position, Yuri was the worst player. However, the Blackhawks’ general manager signed Yuri to a three-year deal because Yuri’s uncle had given the Blackhawks’ general manager his first coaching job. Is it likely that Yuri will be able to remain in the U.S. and play for the Blackhawks? a) No, not unless he marries a U.S. citizen who can file a family-based visa petition b) No, because it is unlikely that he will get labor certification establishing that there are no available, able, willing, or qualified U.S. worker to fill the position he was offered c) Yes because he can qualify as an EB-1, person of extraordinary ability d) Yes because hockey constitutes a Schedule A occupation and Yuri can qualify as an EB-2, person of exceptional ability

c) Yes because he can qualify as an EB-1, person of extraordinary ability

Asad is a wealthy entrepreneur from Saudi Arabia who just sold all of his foreign businesses for a substantial amount of money. While visiting his U.S. citizen sister in the U.S., he decides that he wants to live in the U.S. What is the fastest way for Asad to legally remain in the U.S.? a) First Preference employment-based visa as a multinational executive or manager b) Fifth Preference employment-based visa if he is willing to invest one million dollars and create ten U.S. jobs c) As an immediate relative if he is willing to find a U.S. citizen to marry d) Fourth Preference family-based visa because he has a sister who is a U.S. citizen

b) Fifth Preference employment-based visa if he is willing to invest one million dollars and create ten U.S. jobs

The Chicago College of Electricians is a two-year trade school that trains students to become certified electricians. The college offered a foreign national an associate professor position at a salary that was much lower than most community colleges in Chicago. When the college sought labor certification in order to obtain an EB-3 visa, the Department of Labor denied certification. If the college appeals to the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals, what is the likely result? a) The college’s appeal will be denied because the college did not offer a wage comparable to other colleges in the local geographical area. b) The college’s appeal will be denied unless the college can establish that it made a job offer to someone who has risen to the very top of the field of endeavor. c) The college’s appeal will be granted because teaching college teaching positions have been pre-certified by the Department of Labor. d) The college’s appeal will be granted if it can establish that the offered salary was comparable to other two-year trade schools in the area.

d) The college’s appeal will be granted if it can establish that the offered salary was comparable to other two-year trade schools in the area.

Adam, a U.S. citizen, met Kate online, who is a citizen of Kyrgyzstan. The two began a long-distance relationship and after nine months, Adam flew to Kyrgyzstan to meet Kate. After a month in Kyrgyzstan, Adam flew back to the U.S. and filed a visa for Kate. The visa was approved and Kate flew to the U.S. to marry Adam. However, once in the U.S., Kate fell in love with Bill, a lawful permanent resident. After about two months in the U.S., Bill and Kate were married and Bill filed a visa petition for Kate and Kate filed a visa petition to attend college in the U.S while she awaited the approval of her husband’s visa petition. What is Kate’s category? a) As the spouse of a lawful permanent resident, Kate can apply for a V visa to allow her to remain in the U.S. while her second preference family-based petition is pending. b) Kate violated the terms of her visa and will have to return to Kyrgyzstan. c) Kate has a valid K visa because she married a U.S. citizen within 90 days of her arrival to the U.S. d) Kate is in the process of changing her fiancée visa to a student visa.

b) Kate violated the terms of her visa and will have to return to Kyrgyzstan.

Ted, a homeless man, is a native and citizen of Trinidad and Tobago. He always dreamed of being a playwright and studying theatrical performances. Because of his love for the arts, he often thought about visiting New York City as a tourist and attending a Broadway musical. He was involved in an accident in Trinidad and received $7,500 as a settlement for his injuries. Ted immediately got a passport and checked online prices for visiting New York. After discovering that he had enough money for a roundtrip flight to New York, a hotel stay for a week, and Broadway theater tickets, Ted applied for a visitor’s visa to come to the U.S. Is it likely that Ted’s petition for a visitor’s visa will be approved? a) It is likely because Ted wants to travel to the U.S. as a visitor. b) It is likely because Ted has residence in a foreign country and he has adequate resources to carry out the purpose of his visit. c) It is unlikely because a visitor’s visa is unavailable for those planning to study in the U.S. d) It is unlikely because Ted’s homelessness makes him unable to satisfactorily prove that he has no intention of abandoning his foreign residency.

d) It is unlikely because Ted’s homelessness makes him unable to satisfactorily prove that he has no intention of abandoning his foreign residency.

In the summer, the Major League Baseball (MLB) Players Association went on strike and MLB used replacement players from college and the minor leagues to continue the baseball season in spite of the strike. In the fall, the National Hockey League (NHL) Players Association went on strike and wanted to use professional hockey players from Canada and Eastern Europe as replacement players. Is this permissible? a) No, because foreign workers cannot be used to replace U.S. workers when there is a strike. b) No, because there are U.S. workers who can perform the same job. c) Yes, because they qualify as persons with exceptional abilities. d) Yes, because they have Schedule A precertification.

c) Yes, because they qualify as persons with exceptional abilities.

The nurses at the University of Chicago Hospital go on strike and the hospital wants to temporarily replace the nurses with nurses from Great Britain and Australia. Is this permissible? a) No, because foreign workers cannot be used to replace U.S. workers when there is a strike. b) No, because there are U.S. workers who can perform the same job. c) Yes, because they qualify as persons with exceptional abilities. d) Yes, because they have Schedule A precertification.

a) No, because foreign workers cannot be used to replace U.S. workers when there is a strike.

Owen is an internationally acclaimed concert pianist. He plays so well that no other instruments or performers accompany him on stage. Although he is married, he travels with his girlfriend. His wife is not suspicious because the girlfriend is a highly trained instrument tuner and without her tuning Owen’s custom-made piano, the musical quality of Owen’s piano would suffer greatly. Owen received a three-year visa to travel to the U.S. to perform. Will he be able to bring his girlfriend? a) Yes, because she is an integral part of his performance. b) Yes, because she can be treated as a common law spouse. c) No, because she is not his spouse or immediate family member. d) No, because she is not a performer.

a) Yes, because she is an integral part of his performance.

Hector is an agriculture worker who has legally traveled from Mexico to the U.S. during the harvest season every year for the last ten years. One year after the harvest season, rather than returning to Mexico, Hector stayed in the U.S. and took a vacation. He was ultimately found by ICE because he overstayed his visa, and he was returned to Mexico. Three years later, Hector applied for a visa so that he could do agricultural work in the U.S. during the harvest season. Is it likely that Hector’s visa petition will be approved? a) It is not likely because there are U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents that can work during the harvest season. b) It is not likely because Hector overstayed his visa. c) It is likely because there is a sufficient time lapse between Hector’s former visa violation and his current visa petition. d) It is likely because of Hector’s favorable history of obtaining a visa for season agricultural work.

b) It is not likely because Hector overstayed his visa.

Fred traveled to U.S. on a visa to attend college, and he brought his wife and children with him as derivatives. His wife, Debra, tutored Fred during his studies. Without Debra’s help, Fred would not have been able to carry a full course of study. Debra enjoyed the subject matter so much that she decided to enroll in the same college program as Fred. Is this permissible? a) Yes, because Debra is a derivative on Fred’s student visa. b) Yes, because as long as Fred maintains his student status, his family can legally remain in the U.S. c) No, because without Debra help, Fred will not be able to carry a full course of study and will fall out of status. d) No, because Debra is a derivative on Fred’s student visa.

d) No, because Debra is a derivative on Fred’s student visa.

Tina was destitute and in desperate need of a job. Ray promised her a way to travel to the U.S. and earn money. As a condition of Ray’s help, Tina would have to reimburse Ray the travel expenses, plus interest. Tina agreed and traveled to the U.S. Once in the U.S., Tina worked 16 hours a day, seven days a week in a restaurant. Because her employer automatically sent 90 percent of Tina’s wages to Ray, Tina could not afford housing and had to sleep in a room above the restaurant with several other women who owed Ray money. Because of accumulating interest, Tina would never be able to pay off her debt without additional income. The owner of restaurant told Tina that she could make extra money that would not go to Ray if she were willing to sleep with some of his customers. However, Tina refused and continued living above the restaurant. During a worksite enforcement raid conducted by ICE, Tina was discovered to have traveled to the U.S. illegally. What is likely to happen to Tina? a) She is likely to be returned to her home country because she illegally entered the U.S. b) She is likely to be returned to her home country because she was not forced to engage in commercial sex. c) She is likely to remain in the U.S. because she is a victim of illicit trafficking. d) She is likely to remain in the U.S. because she was being groomed to engage in commercial sex.

c) She is likely to remain in the U.S. because she is a victim of illicit trafficking.

Ursula, a foreign national, entered the U.S. illegally. Subsequent to her illegal entry, she married Adam, a U.S. citizen. They live in the U.S., but Adam has not filed a visa petition for Ursula. Adam is physically and mentally abusive to Ursula, but every time that Ursula threatens to leave, Adam counters by saying that he will report Ursula to ICE and have her deported. Ursula’s native country is so poor that she thinks living in an abusive relationship is better than returning to her home country. Can Ursula petition for a visa without Bill? a) Yes, as long as she has law enforcement certification. b) Yes, because she is legally married to Bill. c) No, because she entered illegally. d) No, because as her U.S. citizen spouse, Bill would need to file the visa petition on her behalf.

a) Yes, as long as she has law enforcement certification.

Ursula, a foreign national, entered the U.S. illegally. Subsequent to her illegal entry, she married Adam, a U.S. citizen. They live in the U.S., but Adam has not filed a visa petition for Ursula. Adam is physically and mentally abusive to Ursula, but every time that Ursula threatens to leave, Adam counters by saying that he will report Ursula to ICE and have her deported. Ursula’s native country is so poor that she thinks living in an abusive relationship is better than returning to her home country. What would Ursula need to do in order obtain a visa to lawfully remain in the U.S.? a) Divorce Bill. b) Request an order of protection from Bill. c) File a police report against Bill. d) Cooperate in the investigation or prosecution of Bill.

d) Cooperate in the investigation or prosecution of Bill.

Hector is a native and citizen of Honduras. He submitted a visa application to the U.S. Embassy in his native country and was approved for a nonimmigrant tourist visa. He could not afford airfare to the U.S., so he traveled by bus through Central America and Mexico until he was at the Mexican/U.S. From there, he unwittingly traveled into Texas with a group of Mexicans who were being smuggled into the country. Once in Texas, Hector was met by his family and they went to Minnesota. After Hector explained how he entered the U.S., his family took him to the nearest Immigration Court so that he could be inspected by an immigration officer. Would this be a proper admission? a) No, because Minnesota is not on an international border b) No, because he had already entered without inspection c) Yes, because he unwittingly traveled with smugglers even though he had a valid visa d) Yes, because he has a valid visa and would have been inspected by an immigration officer

b) No, because he had already entered without inspection

Steve submitted a visa application to the U.S. Embassy in his native country. He was approved for a nonimmigrant tourist visa. Now that Steve has an approved visa, can he lawfully enter the U.S.? a) No, not unless he is inspected by an immigration officer b) No, not unless has was issued a Form I-551 c) Yes, as long as he enters through any authorized entry point d) Yes, as long as he pursues the purposes of his nonimmigrant visa

a) No, not unless he is inspected by an immigration officer

Edward is a native and citizen of England who lawfully entered the U.S. as part of the visa waiver program. While in the U.S., Edward married a U.S. citizen. Also, a prospective employer received an approved labor certification and filed an employment-based petition for Edward to become a lawful permanent resident. Can Edward remain in the U.S. and adjust his status based on the filed petition? a) Yes, because there is an approved labor certification b) Yes, because he is the immediate relative of a U.S. citizen c) No, not unless an employment visa in his preference category is currently available d) No, because he entered as part of the visa waiver program

d) No, because he entered as part of the visa waiver program

Carl is a native and citizen of Canada who married a U.S. citizen. Prior to his marriage, Carl was convicted in Canada of aggravated driving under the influence of alcohol. On a separate occasion before he married, he was convicted of simple battery against a police officer. After his marriage, Carl’s U.S. citizen spouse applied for a family-based visa petition so that Carl could ultimately become a lawful permanent resident of the United States. Is the visa petition likely to be approved? a) No, because Carl is inadmissible to the U.S. because simple battery against a police officer is a crime involving moral turpitude b) No, because Carl is inadmissible to the U.S. for multiple criminal convictions where the aggregate sentence imposed was five years or more c) Yes, as long as Carl and his U.S. citizen spouse are legitimately married d) Yes, as long as Carl can qualify for a waiver of inadmissibility

c) Yes, as long as Carl and his U.S. citizen spouse are legitimately married

Jeff is a native and citizen of Jamaica. In January, he met Vera, a U.S. citizen who was in Jamaica on vacation. Jeff and Vera immediately fell in love and were married in Jamaica. In February, Vera returned to the U.S. and filed a visa petition for Jeff. In April, the visa petition was approved. In May, Jeff went to the U.S. Embassy in Kingston, Jamaica where a consular officer processed his paperwork and provided him with an approved lawful permanent resident package. In January of the following year, Jeff arrived at an authorized port of entry into the United States. What is likely to happen at the port of entry? a) Jeff will be allowed to enter the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident. b) Jeff must first be inspected by an immigration officer, and then he will be allowed to enter as a lawful permanent resident. c) Jeff will be denied admission. d) Jeff will have to adjust his status in the U.S.

c) Jeff will be denied admission.

Maria is a native and citizen of Mexico. She surreptitiously entered the U.S. by wading across the Rio Grande and then avoiding detection. She established a life in Texas and met a U.S. citizen whom she dated for several years. After Maria became pregnant and gave birth to their first child, the couple decided to get married. Maria’s U.S. citizen spouse immediately filed a visa petition for her, which was approved. The couple then filed an I-485 with USCIS so that Maria could adjust her status to that of a lawfully permanent resident. What is the likely result if Maria attempts to adjust her status in the U.S. based on the approved petition filed by her husband? a) Maria will have to file a waiver of inadmissibility before she can adjust. b) Maria will have to return to Mexico because she illegally entered the U.S. c) Maria should be able to adjust because her marriage to a U.S. citizen appears to be bona fide. d) Maria should be able to adjust because she has a U.S. citizen child.

b) Maria will have to return to Mexico because she illegally entered the U.S.

Maria is a native and citizen of Mexico. She surreptitiously entered the U.S. by wading across the Rio Grande and then avoiding detection. She established a life in Texas and met a U.S. citizen whom she dated for several years. After Maria became pregnant and gave birth to their first child, the couple decided to get married. Maria’s U.S. citizen spouse immediately filed a visa petition for her, which was approved. The couple then filed an I-485 with USCIS so that Maria could adjust her status to that of a lawfully permanent resident. What would be the likely result if, rather than adjusting in the U.S., Maria returned to Mexico? a) Maria would have to restart her visa petition in the U.S. Embassy in Mexico. b) Maria would be able to consular process. c) Maria would need to return to the U.S. within six months or her approved visa would expire. d) Maria would be inadmissible to the U.S. unless she obtained a waiver for her unlawful presence.

d) Maria would be inadmissible to the U.S. unless she obtained a waiver for her unlawful presence.

Ted lawfully entered the U.S. on a tourist visa. Once he entered the U.S., Ted liked it so much that he decided that he wanted to permanently live in the U.S. He overstayed his visa and found a job. After a few years on the job, Ted’s employer was able to get an approved labor certification for the job Ted had been working. Ted’s employer then filed an employment-based adjustment application. What is the likely result? a) Ted will also need a waiver of inadmissibility before he can adjust. b) Ted will have to return to his country of citizenship because he worked without authorization. c) Ted should be able to adjust because his employer has an approved labor certification. d) Ted should be able to adjust because he lawfully entered the U.S.

b) Ted will have to return to his country of citizenship because he worked without authorization.

In 1996, Oscar illegally entered the U.S. to work at the summer Olympics in Atlanta. That same year, Oscar’s employer filed a labor certification for Oscar. The labor certification and employment-based visa were approved, but Oscar never adjusted his status. Once the Olympics were over and the clean-up was done, Oscar’s job ended. Oscar remained in the U.S. and eventually found another job. Several months ago, Oscar married a U.S. citizen who filed a family-based visa petition for him. That petition has been approved and Oscar now seeks to adjust his status to that of a lawful permanent resident. What is the likely result? a) Oscar should be able to adjust in the U.S. because of his approved employment-based visa. b) Oscar should be able to adjust because in the U.S. because he is married to a U.S. citizen. c) Oscar will not be able to adjust in the U.S. because the job on which his employment-based visa was approved has now ended. d) Oscar should be not able to adjust in the U.S. because he entered unlawfully.

a) Oscar should be able to adjust in the U.S. because of his approved employment-based visa.

Larry is a lawful permanent resident of the U.S. In January, he traveled to his home country to tend to his dying father. In July, Larry’s father passed away. In August, Larry held his father’s funeral and wrapped up his father’s affairs. In September, Larry returned to the U.S. At an authorized port of entry, how will Custom and Border Patrol officers likely view Larry? a) Larry will be treated like a U.S. citizen because U.S. citizens and LPRs are treated the same at the border. b) Larry will be treated like an LRP because LPRs and U.S. citizens are treated differently at the border. c) Larry will be treated as a noncitizen seeking admission. d) None of the above

c) Larry will be treated as a noncitizen seeking admission.

Anna paid a smuggler to help her enter the U.S. without detection. She then found a job in a restaurant. While a labor certification filed by Anna’s employer was pending, ICE raided the restaurant and found Anna working there. Regarding admissibility, how will ICE likely view Anna? a) Anna will be treated as an applicant for an employment-based visa petition. b) Anna will be treated as an applicant for admission because she entered without inspection. c) Anna will be treated as a criminal because she unlawfully entered the U.S. and worked without authorization. d) All of the above

b) Anna will be treated as an applicant for admission because she entered without inspection.

Adam arrived at an authorized port of entry and was placed into expedited removal proceedings. He claimed a fear of being persecuted in his country of citizenship, but the Custom and Border Patrol officer determined that Adam did not have credible fear. What is likely to happen to Adam? a) Adam will have an Immigration Judge review his expedited removal. b) Adam will have an Immigration Judge review the credible fear determination. c) Adam will be removed from the U.S. because there is no review of expedited removals. d) Adam will be removed from the U.S. because there is no review of credible fear determinations.

b) Adam will have an Immigration Judge review the credible fear determination.

Victor became a lawful permanent resident of the United States in 1994. In 2003, he was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. Later that same year, he was convicted of a traffic violation and sentenced to time served. Before he was released from state custody, ICE agents learned of his detention. ICE agents detained Victor and placed him in removal proceedings. What is the likely result? a) The proceedings will be terminated because only one of Victor’s convictions is a CIMT. b) The proceedings will continue because has two convictions within the same year. c) The proceedings will be terminated because Victor was convicted of a CIMT in 2003. d) The proceedings will continue because Victor was convicted of a CIMT in 2003.

c) The proceedings will be terminated because Victor was convicted of a CIMT in 2003.

Matt is a foreign national who entered the U.S. on a K visa and married a U.S. citizen within 90 days. Immediately after the marriage, Matt’s spouse filed a petition for a family-based visa, which was approved. Matt adjusted his status and became a conditional lawful permanent resident. Approximately 18 months later, Matt and his spouse divorced and his conditional LPR status was terminated. Will Matt be allowed to remain in the U.S.? a) No, because his LPR status was terminated. b) No, because his marriage ended in less than two years. c) Yes, because he fulfilled the purposes of his visa. d) Yes, if he can establish that he entered the marriage in good faith.

d) Yes, if he can establish that he entered the marriage in good faith.

After Fred had been a lawful permanent resident for six years, he was convicted on two charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States of sales taxes. In a hearing to determine removability, what are the likely results? a) Because the convictions were more than five years after admission, Fred will not be found removable unless his crimes arose from a single scheme. b) If Fred’s convictions are determined to be two separate schemes resulting in crimes involving moral turpitude, he will be found removable. c) Even though Fred has two convictions, he not will be found removable if his crimes arose from a single scheme. d) All of the above

d) All of the above

After Sam had been a lawful permanent resident for six years, he was convicted of misdemeanor sexual abuse of a minor and given a suspended sentence of six months in jail. In a hearing to determine removability, what are the likely results? a) Sam will not be removable because he was convicted more than five years after admission. b) Sam will not be removable because misdemeanors are not aggravated felonies. c) Sam will be removable because he committed an aggravated felony as defined by the pertinent immigration law. d) None of the above

c) Sam will be removable because he committed an aggravated felony as defined by the pertinent immigration law.

Dan has been a lawful permanent resident for ten years and he has been a habitual heroin user for the entire time. Although Dan has been arrested on several occasions for his illegal drug use, he has never been convicted. Following his most recent arrest for heroin possession, the police called ICE agents. Dan admitted to ICE agents that he was addicted to heroin. In a hearing to determine removability, what are the likely results? a) Dan will not be found to be removable because he has not been convicted. b) Dan will not be found to be removable because he has been a lawful permanent resident for more than five years and he has not been convicted of an aggravated felony. c) Dan will be found removable because he committed an aggravated felony. d) Dan will be found removable because he admitted to being addicted to heroin.

d) Dan will be found removable because he admitted to being addicted to heroin.

Mike has been a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. for 15 years. He is from a severely economically depressed country and was able to gain status in the U.S. through an employment-based visa. He is single, has no children, and his parents still reside in his native country. Mike was recently convicted of murder. He was allowed to post bond while his criminal case was on direct appeal and ICE agents took him into immigration custody. In a hearing to determine removability, what are the likely results? a) Mike will not be found to be removable because his conviction has not yet been determined to be an aggravated felony. b) Mike will not be found to be removable because he has not been convicted for immigration purposes. c) Mike will be found to be removable because he has been convicted for immigration purposes. d) Mike will be found to be removable because even though he’s an LPR, he has been convicted of an aggravated felony.

b) Mike will not be found to be removable because he has not been convicted for immigration purposes.

Mike has been a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. for 15 years. He is from a severely economically depressed country and was able to gain status in the U.S. through an employment-based visa. He is single, has no children, and his parents still reside in his native country. Mike was recently convicted of murder. He was allowed to post bond while his criminal case was on direct appeal and ICE agents took him into immigration custody. If Mike is found to be removable, is he likely to be granted relief from removal? a) No, because he committed an aggravated felony. b) No, because he cannot show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to a family member. c) Yes, because he has been an LPR for at least five years and he has at least seven years of continuous physical presence after admission. d) Yes, because his positive equities outweigh any negative factors.

a) No, because he committed an aggravated felony.

In 2000, Jose entered the U.S. without inspection. In 2002, he married a Mexican national who was illegally present in the U.S. In 2004, Jose was convicted of aggravated domestic battery and given a suspended sentence of one year incarceration. In 2006, Jose’s wife gave birth in the U.S. to their first child. In 2008, Jose’s child was diagnosed with a rare disease for which experimental treatment is only available in the U.S. In 2010, Jose was arrested for DUI. Following Jose’s DUI conviction in 2011, he was placed in removal proceedings and was found to be removable for entering without inspection. Is he likely to be granted relief from removal? a) Yes, because he can show exceptional and extremely unusual hardship to his U.S. citizen child. b) Yes, because he has continuous physical presence for at least seven years. c) No, because he does not have the required continuous physical presence. d) No, because he has been convicted of an aggravated felony.

c) No, because he does not have the required continuous physical presence.

In 2000, Jose entered the U.S. without inspection. In 2002, he married a Mexican national who was illegally present in the U.S. In 2004, Jose was convicted of aggravated domestic battery and given a suspended sentence of one year incarceration. In 2006, Jose’s wife gave birth in the U.S. to their first child. In 2008, Jose’s child was diagnosed with a rare disease for which experimental treatment is only available in the U.S. In 2010, Jose was arrested for DUI. Following Jose’s DUI conviction in 2011, he was placed in removal proceedings and was found to be removable for entering without inspection. What forms of relief from removal are available to Jose? a) Cancellation of removal for certain nonpermanent residents b) Asylum c) Withholding of removal d) All of the above

c) Withholding of removal

Alice is a foreign national who entered the U.S. without inspection. She married Bob, a U.S. citizen. Bob is verbally and physically abusive to Alice. Bob has not filed a family-based visa petition, and every time Alice threatens to leave Bob, he threatens to report her to ICE. After a night of heavy drinking, Bob came home and tried to be romantic with Alice. When she rebuffed his advances, he slapped her and tried to force himself on her. Alice stabbed Bob with a pair of scissors and ran out of the house. Alice ultimately pled guilty to felony battery. Because she had no other criminal history, the court showed leniency and she was only required to serve probation for three years. Following her satisfactory completion of probation, Alice was placed in removal proceedings and was found to be removable for entering without inspection. Is she likely to be granted relief from removal? a) Yes, because she has at least three years of continuous physical presence. b) Yes, because she is married to a U.S. citizen. c) No, because she cannot show good moral character. d) None of the above.

a) Yes, because she has at least three years of continuous physical presence.

When Juan was two-years-old, his parents brought him into the United States without inspection. Juan grew up in the U.S., graduated from elementary and high school in the U.S., and considers himself to be a U.S. citizen. When Juan was 22-years-old, he was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol, a misdemeanor. He was placed in removal proceedings and was found to be removable for entering without inspection. Is he likely to be granted relief from removal? a) Yes, because it was not his choice to enter the U.S. without inspection. b) Yes, because he qualifies for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. c) No, because a DUI is a significant misdemeanor that makes him ineligible for deferred action. d) No, because deferred action is not a form of relief the court can give.

d) No, because deferred action is not a form of relief the court can give.

Custom and Border Patrol agents apprehended Rose as she was attempting to enter the U.S. without inspection. Although Rose had no criminal history, she was held in ICE detention and immediately placed in removal proceedings. She was found to be removable for entering without inspection. She then filed applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. She also filed for voluntary departure in the alternative. What is the likely result if Rose is denied her persecution-based claims? a) She will be required to withdraw her applications. b) She will be ordered removed. c) She will be granted voluntary departure. d) None of the above

b) She will be ordered removed.

Custom and Border Patrol agents apprehended Rose as she was attempting to enter the U.S. without inspection. Although Rose had no criminal history, she was held in ICE detention and immediately placed in removal proceedings. She was found to be removable for entering without inspection. She then filed applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture. She also filed for voluntary departure in the alternative. What is the likely result if Rose withdrew her persecution-based claims prior to the conclusion of the proceedings, waived her right to appeal, and only requested voluntary departure? a) She will be given voluntary departure if she can demonstrate the ability to pay her own way out of the country. b) She will be given voluntary departure if she can establish good moral character for at least five years prior to the application. c) She will be given 120 days to voluntarily depart the U.S. d) All of the above

a) She will be given voluntary departure if she can demonstrate the ability to pay her own way out of the country.

Immigration Flashcards

(210 cards)