Holders of the I-220A form face a silent threat: their court hearing dates before immigration courts are being moved up en masse and without prior notice, which may leave them with insufficient time to prepare or seek legal representation while awaiting the pending decision from the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).
The warning comes from immigration attorney Liudmila Marcelo, who in an interview with CiberCuba described an increasingly urgent scenario for this community.
"Please, you need to check in the EOIR system at least twice a week. We have received many calls in the last two weeks from people who didn't have a court date and now do, or from people who had a court date in 2028 or 2029 and now it's scheduled for June or early July," the attorney warned.
The system referred to by Marcelo is the EOIR (Executive Office for Immigration Review), accessible in the Automated Case Information System (ACIS) at acis.eoir.justice.gov.
The lawyer recounted specific cases from her own practice: "I had clients whose final court date was in 2028, but I was just assigned one of the new judges, and now they have their final court date set for September of this year."
The situation varies depending on whether the holder has an active date or not. Those without a scheduled hearing are in a more relaxed position, free from the immediate pressure of a judge and the need to defend an asylum case before the BIA issues a ruling. However, those with a scheduled hearing face a much more complex scenario.
"Some judges are granting continuances for the hearing dates while waiting for the BIA's decision," Marcelo explained. In response to this, his strategy is to file motions for postponement before each final hearing.
"It's very difficult for the judge to grant them because now there are instructions not to change the deadlines; on the contrary, the directive is to move them forward," he acknowledged.
Another critical point is the chain effect: when the master cut is advanced, the final cut is also automatically advanced, further compressing the margin for maneuvering.
Regarding the risks of deportation, Marcelo identified three main causes:
- failure to comply with court orders to submit documents on time
- the motions to bypass based on cooperation agreements with third countries —such as Ecuador in the case of Cubans—
- the motions dismissing the case due to a lack of apparent basis for asylum.
There is, however, a positive news for certain cases: the grounds for penalizing those who entered the country after March 2023 by evading legal channels such as CBP One were dismissed about a week ago.
"That's something positive," said Marcelo, who believes that something similar will happen with the motions based on agreements with third countries, since there are pending claims against them.
The final ruling of the BIA that could determine whether the I-220A is equivalent to a parole —thus potentially paving the way for the Cuban Adjustment Act for these holders— is still pending.
Meanwhile, Marcelo's advice is clear: “Don't assume you’re in the clear just because you don't have a cut-off, because you could still be affected. And don't rely on the fact that your cut-off is for 2028 or 2029, because people are already moving ahead.”
Filed under: