>> Hello, this is David Lee. We are beginning shortly. I’m going to go ahead and start setting up the captioning. So one second, please. Hello This is David Lee and perfect. Caption something worker. Leslie, are you on the line? Leslie Leslie, am I hearing the voices from your phone? >> No. >> Scott, Livingston, are you on the line? I’m hearing a voice in the background. I’m going to remute the phone lines. Hello, this is David Lee and welcome to NIWAP’s webinar Expert Advice for Judges: How to Handle U Visa Certification Requests and T visa endorsement requests. … We are going to begin to record today’s session and we are beginning shortly Welcome to today’s NIWAP webinar Expert Advice for Judges: How to Handle U Visa Certification Requests and T visa endorsement requests. Today’s webinar is presented by NIWAP along with the State Justice Institute and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and CALCASA Please note that the project was developed under a grant from the State Justice Institute. Welcome to the session and thank you for joining in on the conversation on this very important topic. I want to familiarize you on using this technology. The first thing I you to do is raise your hand. Look on the far left, there is a hand, my status. Go ahead and raise your hands. There are times to ask you to raise hands to answer certain questions in the session. Great, I see we have got 30 of you raising your hands. Okay. Great. I’m going to lower the hands and going on to the next piece of this. There is a text chat. Type in here and click on this. Write in what city and state you are from and why don’t we share the weather is today where you are. Go ahead and write in what city and state and what the weather is where you are. Text chat is a way that we are able to get your feedback and the questions. Snowy in Wyoming. Cold in Missouri. Cloudy in Los Angeles. 60s in Washington, D.C and threatening rain in San Francisco, but warm and sunny in Florida. And warm in Richmond, Virginia and Texas is wet and the temperatures are dropping. Thank you for sharing the weather. So thank you very much. We have the power point slides and the slides are available on the NIWAP website. We’ll post the link to the slides and the resources and that is great for the people to see the resources available and you are able to get the copies of everything. We have a recording of this web conference available and that is on NIWAP website. We are asking a number of polling questions and all of the phone lines are muted. Ask the questions on the text chat and you can send a private text chat. I’m getting a cracking on one of the phone lines. Maybe it is you, judge Livingston? >> I have done that. >> That is better. If you have questions — >> you are breaking up, David. >> Okay. Let me go ahead and adjust that Okay. Great I’m here and so we have ILINC technical support. Thank you. All the materials are posted up I want to introduce today’s speakers that are presented today and really pleased to be joined with Leslye, who is director of the NIWAP at American University Washington College of Law. >> I’m good, David, thank you for hosting this. >> My pleasure. We are joined by Scott, officer with the office of policy and strategy. How are you doing, Scott? >> Good, how are you? >> Great. I’m getting a little bit of echo on you. >> I’m doing good, David. Everybody is okay on my

end. >> Great. We are going to be joined by judge Livingston from Texas. Hi, there. >> Hi, David, how are you? >> Doing great. Pleasure to have you here and being able to present on an important topic. We are getting a sense of who is in the audience. We are posting on the left hand side ABCD. Are you a lawyer? That is A. B most violence or sexual assault victim volunteer or C judge or court staff and D other. People are responding and going ahead and continue to respond. About half of the audience is lawyers. We are followed by quarter of the audience domestic violence especially will and sexual assault volunteers and we have 16% are judges or court staff and 6% other and if other, go ahead and write down what the other is. Paralegal is other. I understand I have static going on. If you are on the phone, we have the try to proceed. I’m not sure what is going on with the sound right now. Great, thank you all for sharing where you were. Today’s learning objectives, we are going to have judge Livingston, review what the people are getting from the webinar. >> Absolutely. Welcome to everyone to webinar. What we hope you are going to learn this afternoon are a number of things, and we hope you will achieve to have accurate information about the U Visa process and the T visa and the history and the purpose of the U Visa and the T visa programs and leave with a better understands of the homeland security thinking about the U Visa program and certainly what we hope to achieve is a much better understanding of the judge’s role in the visas and the endorsement process. We hope you leave knowing more about how U Visa certification promotes overall justice in the system and fairness in the system PD we hope when you leave you will know just a little more about how to handle a request to sign a certification or endorsement in family cases and civil cases and criminal court cases. that is the plan. >> Thank you very much, judge Livington. Yes no? Have you worked on a case in which a judge signed a you haves certification? Go ahead and yes or no? Put it in the left hand side. Have you worked on a case in which a judge signed a U Visa certification? I’m sharing the results. Leslie, interesting. Over 80% have not worked on a case where a judge signed a U Visa certification. >> Yes, I’m equalling to the 15% that have. That is good news. We understand that this is relatively new and more people are getting certification from the law enforcement. Congress clearly wanted to judges to be part of the certification process and that is why we are here today. >> Are you aware that the judges can sign a T visa endorsement? Go ahead and let us know. Are you away that judges can also sign a T visa endorsement? I think that the people are voting as we speak and it is live results. About 40% of the audience do know that. >> We are talking about both of those here today. >> Great. With that, I’m going to withdraw the piece. Scott, over to you

>> Great, thanks, David. Thank you everyone for joining us today, we want to get the word out to the judicial officials and the public as well. Going ahead and jumping on in, a brief overview on the T and U Visas and Cher providing temporary status to victims of human trafficking or human trafficking and other qualifying criminal activity and we are getting into the details on that. This is a tool for law enforcement agencies such as police departments, sheriff’s departments, and federal law enforcement agencies such as FBI and ICE, the department of labor, and also a tool for prosecutors and judges. Congress created these back in 2000, in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, and Congress found, and lots of people were testifying before congress, talking about how alien victims were afraid to come forward and report the victimization to law enforcement. That can go for a lot of reasons. We are talking about language barriers, cultural barriers, fear of law enforcement, whether it be law enforcement back in the home country, a number of reasons why the people were not coming forward and reporting crimes. This is strengthing the ability of law enfocement and judges and prosecutors for the government agencies to allow victims to come forward, report their crimes and allow the agencies to investigate and prosecute and sentence certain bad actors and the visa qualifying criminal activities that we are talking about here with criminal behavior and human trafficking. >> Just to give you a little background, as part of the trafficking victims and the VAWA passed in the protection victims act in 2000, when the law passed, then Senator Biden talked about the U Visa and T visa protections of that bill as a some of the single most important provisions of that bill in that there was—that those provisions were passed with bipartisan support and avoiding the kinds of retribution that happens when the perpetrators are threatening the enforcement against the victims and that that was truly needed to bring the perpetrators to justice. The goal was to be able encourage victims to be able to report and fully participate in the justice system process and that congress believed that the reason for that is that that encouraging crime victims and supporting them in the ability to come forward furthers the humanitarian efforts of the United States. We are going to start off by talking about the perceptions and thinking about the department of homeland security, they think about it enforcement only agency and since actually the first law that began to really change this in terms of crime victim was the battered spouse law and a variety of different laws created three purposes of the department of homeland security to provide a path to permanent residency and citizenship for lawful immigrants, noncitizen crime victims and different contexts of children and encourage and promote family unity and to remove undocumented immigrants from the United States. So Scott, when an immigrant qualifies for a U Visa or T visa that is available to them, is that, is what that person qualities is a preferential status? >> No. Congress like we talked about before, congress specially created the vie KAs for the folks to come forward and report victimization to law enforcement. These recited

by congress, that allows folks to come forward and if eligible for this benefit, then they are arable to apply So the folks are not jumping in line, they are not getting a preferential treatment. If applied and granted the visa, they get the visa. There are certain statutes and we at DHS drafted the regulations and they have avenues to be eligible for the benefits >> Can somebody who is not speaker mute their phones by hitting star 6 Speakers press star 6 to unmute your lines. >> I’m on. >> Perfect. >> And we are back to Scott, I believe. >> Yes, I’m here. Just to wrap up, this is created by congress These victims have their own statutes that are available to them and if they are meeting the requirements and we are going to go through the list of requirements it is a visa, they are governed by the laws and regulations of the visas and they have to meet the requirements and be admissible to the United States and they are are RER percussions if they are not cooperating. If they commit crimes down the road, that kind of thing, they are repercussions as well. They are on their own track that was created for them by congress >> David? >> Going to the next slide. >> Go ahead and moving forward, again, just very, very quick will all the forms are found on our website. The T visas are on 914 and U Visa I-918 UsCIS agency, we have the sole jurisdiction of doing the T and U Visas and this is done by the USCIS. It is not ice benefit or a federal law enforcement agency. This is done by USCIS. If they are granted a T of a U Visa and they have certain benefits going along with those. They are granted and GETTing a temporary status up to four years. This is nonimmigrant visa, they have a shelf life. Once granted, they have the status available for four years. However, done the road, the congress created statutes and we put together regulations based on those and somebody can apply for a green card down the road and request apply for permanent residency in the U.S. based on the fact that they were awarded these visas. Now if they are granted a T or a U Visa and the victim is getting that visa they can apply for a family member to have status here in the United States. And if they are also granted, they are able to apply and get a working permit and work legally and pay taxes in the United States. We have a test, we have a cap of 5,000 on the T visas. We have not come close to hitting that cap. That is not because they have a high denial rate, just we have not seen the amount of petitions coming in to rise to the level of 5,000. The most we have done in a fiscal year is last year at 900. So that’s showing

the lack of petitions or applications that are coming in for T status. However, on the U Visa visa, there is a cap of ten thousand, we have hit the cap now six years straight. When I first started, to put it in perspective on how the program has grown and how more law enforcement agencies are utilizing the U Visa process, when I first started five years ago working on this program, we were getting roughly between 8 to 900 petitions per month. Right now we are getting over 2,000. Doing the math on that, 25 to 26,000 U Visa petitions per year. Now, with that, we run into the cap all of the time and we are getting to the ten thousand limit, and then we have a wait list process that’s spelled out in regulation and people can still apply for the U Visa and it is not that we stop working. The officers are working and going over everything and we are accepting the petitions even though we hit the KWAP. If we go over the petition and go through everything and approve this person and passing the background checks and they have the law enforcement certification and meeting the requirements for a U Visa and we want to approve it, but we can’t because fresh out of visas, what we do is place them on the wait list. While on the wait list, they don’t receive a visa, we are out, however, we do place them in deferred action and deferred action is not immigration status. Deferred action is a tool that we have that basically says we have got an alien victim and applied for the U Visa and they are eligible but we don’t have them to give out. We know where you are and who you are and you have applied for the visa and now go to back of the line for deportation. So if you even though you don’t have a status here, you came forward, you are eligible for a visa, but we are placing you in a deferred action program until a visa becomes available for you. Again, it is not a status, but protecting them up to a point. While in that process, they are eligible to apply for work authorization, while on this deferred action process with the wait list, they are allowed to apply for work authorization and if they are granted that, they’ll be able to work legally and pay taxes legally here in the states. >> Great, thank you, Scott. We have a question of the audience and ABCD again. For those of you working on doing T visa endorsements, who have been signing them, A, law law enforcement, B, prosecutors, C, judges, D., not getting T vie KAs endorsed? Scott, this is interesting to see. The most common response is B, prosecutors. Now the most common one is D, not getting them endorsed. 14% from A, law enforcement. 0 on judges from this audience. Interesting, Scott. >> Yes, very interesting. That goes to fact too like we talked about earlier with T visa applications and not ever getting to level of the 5,000. It is going to show how difficult human trafficking identifying and actually putting together a solid case and making arrests can be and how difficult the job is for the prosecutors to bring it forward and getting a successful human trafficking case prosecuted. It is a difficult process. The law is very specific. So this is information is going with the flow and our understanding of human trafficking and in the criminal justice and judicial process. So then going ahead and moving forward to T visa requirements. There are four basic requirements. The victim has to be a

victim of severe victim of human trafficking. They have to be a victim. They have to be a victim of trafficking and have to meet one of the federal definitions of sex trafficking or labor trafficking. The victim has to be physically present in the United States on account of the trafficking. So physical presence here, whether they have just been rescued, if they are cooperating in a prosecution, whatever it is, their physical presence in the United States is based on the trafficking situation. The victim further has to comply with the reasonable requests from the law enforcemented or the prosecutors in the investigation or the prosecution of the human trafficking crime. If we have a victim under 18 years of age at the time of the trafficking or a victim that has suffered so much trauma due to trafficking they are not expected to KOOM comply with the law enforcement, they may meet that that exception. Now the exception, the burden of proof on that is rests with the victim. So the victim can’t merely say I suffered trauma, I don’t have to cooperate. There has to be evidence there to show that they suffered trauma rising to the level they can be expected to cooperate in the investigation or the prosecution. Finally, the victim has to demonstrate extreme hardship involving unusual and severe harm upon remove if we removed them from the United States. That means that the victim is showing the homeland security and my agency, if we removed them from the United States, that victim suffers extreme hardship with unusual and severe harm. Some, now this is not an ux HAESive list, some of the evidence that we see to show extreme hardship is separation from family, medical issues, we run into victims where they are suffering from illness or trauma, whatever it is, where they cannot reasonably, they know they are not going to good medical treatment back home. United States is the only place to receive the adequate medical treatment and that is another source of evidence we see and economic situations. If we have a trafficking victim and they are the only one supporting their family and when they are in the trafficking situation and now that they are out, all they have to do is show us hey I will suffer and my family will suffer economically if I’m removed from the United States. That is one of the other points of evidence that folks share with us on that. Now jumping forward to the law enforcement supplement B. This is the form that a law enforcement or a judge or prosecutor can sign for a human trafficking victim that is cooperating in the investigation and the prosecution. The form is optional. What it means in this case, for the T visa caply cants they can apply for a T visa even if they don’t have this form. The form is not required, however, it is providing a lot of evidence for that victim. It is considered a primary source of evidence. So it is carrying the weight with it. It is a 3-page form Very simple. Just asking about the trafficking situation and how this victim cooperated or for a judge, the observations of the victim in the process. Now if there is signed off by the law enforcement or the prosecutor or the judge, it is signed at the judge’s or the law enforcement’s discretion. No federal law, no statute, no regulation, no requirement that says law enforcement or a judge or a prosecutor must sign these forms. These are always signed at the discretion of the person signing the form. If you ever have an attorney or anybody like that saying hey, you have to sign this form, federal law says you have to sign this, that is not the case. They are always signed at the discretion of the law enforcement or the judge. Of course, if you want to provide additional documentation with the 914 that you are going to sign, attach anything you want to that and once that is finished, hand it back to the victim or to the victim’s attorney or advocate

or whoever is assisting that victim. You don’t have to send anything separate to USCIS. Return it to the victim and it is sent to us. Nothing on the side you have to do. Nothing specific or separate to send to USCIS. Return it to the victim or the attorney and they’ll send it into us for that. Going ahead and jumping forward to the U Visa requirements. Now on to the U. They have a lot of similarities and they have differences as well. So the four basic requirements for the U Visa, we need a victim of a qualifying crime or occurred in the United States or violated the United States law and yesterday BL and relevant information about the crime. They have to know the details and the facts and the information of the criminal activity that took place against them. The third eligibility requirement and this is causing confusion with the victims and attorneys and advocates and law enforcement. Is that the victim either has been, is being or likely to be helpful in the investigation or prosecution of that crime. Again, we are going to get into more details on that. That is specific language that the congress put in and we mirror that. It has a lot of background to it and information to it. Finally, the victim has had to suffer substantial physical or mental abuse BAZed on that crime. Is substantial fizz KAG or mental abuse requirement is not something that we are asking the law enforcement or the prosecutors or judges to make the determination or whether or not they think that person suffered substantial physical or mental abuse. It is a core eligibility requirement and the officers are looking at this and determining whether or not that the victim suffering substantial physical or mental abuse. So we don’t ask the law enforcement, we don’t ask prosecutors or judges to sit there and try to make a determination on whether or not they believe that there was substantial abuse there. We are following the federal guidelines on that. The victim is supplying plenty of evidence that they have suffered substantial abuse and further, on the form, on the law enforcement certification form, there is a section there where you can write this what you have seen in terms of abuse. Whether or not you did notice the abuse or you have evidence of it. I did want to point out that is for USCIS to determine the eligibility requirement. >> Yes, judge, can you talk about the U Visa regulation definitions? >> Sure. You know, lawyers and those of us in the legal community are often trying to figure out what we mean by the words and this another example of that. When the regulations speak in terms of investigation or prosecution, basically that means detection, investigation, prosecution, convictions, sentencing, we want to make the point it is not just one of those things, it can include a variety of activities and we want to think broadly in terms of how an immigrant victim, for example, might be able to take advantage of the U Visa process. So think broadly when working with victims and think in terms of detection, investigation, prosecution, convictions, sentencing. Crime not necessarily, I think again think broadly in terms of criminal activity. What they have done? We are going to show you a list of all of the qualifying crimes, it is a simple list and what happened in this particular circumstance is on that list, it is going to qualify. Think about the activity that is law breaking. Think of activity that is generally considered criminal activity and that is probably going to work. The point of this is to try to improve the stability for the victims and getting early detection underway and putting an end to escalating violent situation

or criminal activity of some kind. Think broadly about the terms and what they mean. >> Thank you. Back to you, Scott >> Thank you. Jumping forward or ahead again to the U Visa qualifying criminal activity. I’m going to put up the slide showing the criminal activities that congress laid out here in a second. There are a couple of things to state first, granted these are general crime categories, for instance, domestic violence is one of the crime categories that are listed. No federal definition of domestic violence that a victim has to meet to be eligible. As the general crime categories we are looking at the crime committed against the victim in their local jurisdiction. We are looking at the definition of the crime that that state or city has for for that crime. And if that definition, that criminal offense, you know, looks very similar to the general crime category of the crime we have, that person is eligible for a U Visa. Now this is also includes substantially similar crimes as well. Now, for instance, I will flip over here to show you the crimes here. One example is sexual exploitation. That is a qualifying crime. If we have a victim of sexual exploitation. What about a Vick of the of lawyerism. If they move forward and said, well, we don’t have sexual exploitation and this is video lawyerism and we are charging and prosecuting that. That doesn’t mean that that victim is out of luck and not eligible for a U Visa. They can certainly argue that it is a form or a type of sexual exploitation. The burden is on them to show to USCIS that the crime they have suffered from is similar to the criminal qualifying activities and if the crime is substantially similar they certainly may be eligible. And my agency,,SCIS, is making the determine whether or not that that crime is substantially similar to one of the qualifying crimes. Again, looking at the chart, it is not created by the department of homeland security. This was actually in statute. So the KWONG put these crimes in and this is what congress said will act as qualifying criminal activity. Most violence is up there. I can tell you that domestic violence is the most prevalent crime apply for the U Visa and a lot of sexual assault cases and can be listed as domestic assault. Human trafficking >>– is on here. Why have it in both the T and U Visas. In the T visas you have to be a victim of human trafficking. In the U Visa world we don’t have that requirement. In the U Visa world, you can be a victim of human trafficking, meeting your state definition. All 50 states have their definitions of human trafficking. If you don’t meet a federal definition, but meeting the state definition, you can apply under the U Visa as well. Again, a lot of the crimes that you are seeing here are serious in nature and a lot them related to sex trafficking or labor trafficking. >> I have a question, one difference between the T and U Visa is you have a victim not able to prove the extreme hardship. They don’t have to for the U, but they have to for the T. >> Absolutely. And if again, if they can’t meet the human trafficking elements, we have involuntarily servitude and we have rape and felonious assault and a number

of crimes that might be wrapped up in the human traffic scenario. So then moving on the helpfulness and diving into more details on this. So the alien has been, or is being and is helpful in the investigation or the prosecution of the criminal activity. So what we have here is an investigation or prosecution and also the verb tenses are here. Now, there is nothing in federal law, not in the stat institute or the regulations and didn’t establish when the crime occurred and when they are eligible. So somebody can be a victim of a crime, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 years ago and still eligible for a U Visa. They still have to meet all of the requirements. They have to be helpful to the law enforcements and victim of the qualifying crime, however, they are eligible, nothing that bars them from apply for the U Visa because the crime occurred out of the last six months. Now, however, a couple other big things that I want to note on helpfulness. If someone applies for a U Visa, the moment that they send in their application and we get it, we send out a receipt notice, hey, we have got the application and now we are looking at it. From that moment, so from the time we receive it and it is pending and being reviewed and if it is approved, the entire time they are in U Visa status as well, that four years that entire time, pending and while they are in the U Visa status, they have an on going duty to cooperate request the law enforcement, prosecutors or judges in the investigation or the prosecution. That is a requirement that is in their by regulation. They have to do it. Now, what that means if someone applies and they later refuse to cooperate or help whoever signed off on the certification, a police department or a prosecutor or a judge, those certifying officials can notice us usCIS saying they are not helping any more and they want to withdraw on that. It is a huge, huge rearment for the petitioners to continue the cooperation and helpfulness with the official that signed the certification. So I wanted to bring that up as well. Finally, we have an exception for those under 16 or incompetent or incapacitated. If the victim is under 16 or incompetent, they don’t have to show the helpfulness requirement. Somebody can step forward to provide the helpfulness for them and making them eligible for the U Visa. For those under 16 or in incompetent or incapacitated someone else can step forward in the helpfulness. >> Do which profession would be most likely to certify future helpfulness? So far, now the people are starting to vote. We are seeing, I believe, Scott, we are getting this live response, people are saying C police and prosecutors. Then a little bit also B, prosecutor and D., judges. So people are saying police and prosecutors the most likely to certify future helpfulness. >> This is lessly. that is correct. Generalingly speaking when the judges sign certifications, they are going to be in large part based on helpfulness they have already observed Opposed to law enforcement and prosecutors, they are likely to encounter the case earlier on in the process and they might be more likely asked to sign

on the future helpfulness. The next few slides talk about some of the key ways that helpfulness can occur. It can occur by a victim being a KOOB rating witness, at the grand jury stage, identifying the perpetrator, participating and communicating with prosecutors about the bond and stay away orders in place, motions, victim impact statements, a number of ways that in a criminal context the victim may provide helpfulness that the court may observe. Judge Livingston? >> Yes, we have the examples on the slide in a civil courtroom or a family courtroom. In the context of the civil protection order and providing the evidence of a domestic abuse evidence, providing information about elder or child abuse to the services agencies. Providing evidence in any kind of sort of civil context or family context and making a police report >> Back to me, I think. >> Yep. >> And so and what prosecutors and police see, judges may observe this as well. The victim may have called 911 or spoke to the police on the scene and you might have evidence in the custody case a copy of the police report and testimony or evidence about the various different kinds of roles that in a case before a court that the victim worked with the prosecutors or the police in the case. So what’s really important helpfulness can be met as Scott was talking earlier there’s the victim actually first of all, no statute of 4RI78 limitations and it is helpful for a victim to come forward. It could be a past crime. The perpetrator could be prosecuted for a different crime. In Danning or drug prosecutions we see that. The victim from one of the gang members or drug traffickers might actually be a witness in that case and report the domestic violence or sexual assault and getting the certification in the assault case even though the case being prosecuted the drugs or gang violence violence, for example. There are a variety of THIPGs that don’t preclude helpfulness. >> Yes, Scott, our time is going quickly. We want to get to the forms that we are reviewing later on. >> Absolutely. So very quickly, victims, for all, being very general about it, it is the person that had the crime committed against them. Nine times out of ten that is what we are seeing. However, a Vick testimony of murder or manslaughter, a family member can step forward and may be able to be eligible for U Visa as an indirect victim. The most prevalent indirect victims that we see are actually where we have someone who, we have a child who is an American citizen. We have this child, they have a crime committed against them and the parents find out about it and the parents come forward and report the crime to law enforcement Now, the child as an American citizen is not eligible for the immigration benefits, they are already a citizen. There is nothing to give them. However, in this situation, the parents can speak for the child victim and if the parents are meeting the requirements for the U Visa, the parent may be able to apply for U Visa as indirect principle victim. The parent may be able to step forward and speak for their child and as long as they are meeting the requirements, and helpful with the law enforcement,

they may be able to get a U Visa down the road Now, the law enforcement certification, now this is the law enforcement form, it is the form that the judge or the prosecutor or the police department is signing for someone that wants to apply for a U Visa. With the T visa, it is optional. They can apply without the form. With the U Visa, it is a requirement. So we have a victim and they want to apply for the U Visa, they have to have this form signed off by the law enforcement in order to be eligible for the U Visa. Now the 918 B, this form is not granting any benefit, it is not guaranteeing that someone is granted a U Visa if somebody applies. This form is telling us a few things, and providing USCIS the information about the criminal activity that took place against the victim. It is signed with the discretion of the law enforcement, the judge or the police department. If someone is saying you have to sign this, that is certainly not the case. This is something again that if you are going to sign this 918 B, this is signed at your discretion. And there needs to be more evidence that the victim provides to USCIS and showing they are eligible for the U Visa and that is the victimization and the abuse and criminal qualifying activity. While this form is a requirement, it is not grant any benefit if you sign off on it and you are not mandated to sign. These are always signed at your discretion. If you sign, again, you hand that back to the victim and the victim is sending it to us. We want it completedly the law enforcement or the prosecutor or the judge. This is the time where we certainly want law enforcement or the judge to speak to USCIS and have them tell us about the interaction and what they have witnessed with the victim. And a we at USCIS don’t have a regular — republican STRAGS process or anything that the judge or the prosecutor has to follow on and sign off on these. We don’t keep a data base or anything like that. You can put on official letter head from the circuit or the department or your office that says this is my agency, this is who I am and I have the authority to sign off on these. We keep them for a record for ourselves, but no official registration process or something special to sign off on one of the 918 B PE situations. >> Great. Who is authorized by the U Visa to sign certifications for the U Visa? Who is authorized? Click into the box on the left. Judge, prosecutor, police law enforcement or? And Leslie, I am seeing half of the audience, no, it is changing. It is equal between the four. Now a little more with C. >> All of the above actually should be one of the answers It can be in that people do it in a number of ways. There are entities and detects and investigates or prosecutes or sentences. Detection agencies, judges and the EEOC’s, people certifiers that are doing it based on the vacation or the prosecution and prosecutors. >> We have a voice in the background. We have to mute the lines. Just a second >> I’m back. >> Great. Thank you. >> So other there’s a range of agencies that can certify. The next question is can you guys, could you please fill in the box. Do people have ideas about why judges are made U Visa

certifiers. >> Why do you believe that congress included the judges as U Visa certifiers? I’m included a neutral view. >> That is one of the reasons Other ideas? Judges are more willing to sign. Neutral party. Able to certify helpfulness. Facilitate the judges in handing the criminal againsts against the defendant. May be hearing the cases at a later time. So I’m seeing many people — they are the main part. So a number of reasons we are seeing. >> Generally, all of that is true, part of it has to do with the fact that judges are a neutral broker. They are all of the groups what they have in common are people who kind of by definition as part of the day jobs are deciding day in and day out probable cause, credibility, who is telling the truth, things like that, and congress wanted to include judges because they actually understand there are jurisdictions where the judges or the prosecutors wouldn’t certify. All of the reasons above and plus that is generally why the judges were chosenen as certifiers. They wanted to victims to get stock. In that essentially there are times in which the court for limiting English proficient victims can be the first responder with a qualified interpreter. To so the slide is reporting the research done about immigrant victims and the police in 2013, which found high levels of cases in which victims didn’t have interpreters to speak with the police and resulted in police reports not taken correctly. So the courts may be the first time that the victim is explaining their story. Back to you, Scott. >> Scott, I want to encourage you to move quickly, we have a lot of slides. >> Star 6, Scott. >> Yep. Okay. Just very quickly. A lot of language on this slide, but it is simple. So for the law enforcement supplement B for the T and the U, who with actually put the pen to paper and sign it. That is saying any federal, state or local law enforcement agency or prosecutor or a judge, who has the authority in their day-to-day operations for the detection, investigation, prosecution, conviction or sentencing of the qualifying criminal activity, those agencies are allowed to sign off of the certification. That includes judges and prosecutors and law enforcement. There are civil authorities that may sign off as well. Certain civil authorities that are specifically given are child and adult or family protection services and department of lay bar and equal employment opportunity commission and we talked about it before is signing the 9D 18 or 914 B law enforcement forms Monday taxpayer. It is completely as your discretion. No federal law says you have to sign off on those. It is at your discretion. So who is the actual person that can sign off? For law enforcement and prosecutors we are looking at the head of the certifying agency or anyone in a supervisorY role. We have to have the head of the

agency or given that role. Now, this also includes federal, state and local judges and these can be civil or criminal or administrative courts as well. And moving forward, just notes here, as mentioned before, convictions, prosecutions and arrested are not necessary in order to be eligible for a U Visa. We have seen plenty of instances where someone is cooperateing with the law enforcement Local PD goes out the make the arrest and finding out that ice beat them to it and ice picked up the perpetrator and I supported them. We are not going to penalize the victim just because ice beat them to it and was able to deport the individual so that person may be eligible for the U Visa. If we have a defendant convicted or pleaded down, as long as the KRFL activity is there and there is the evidence of a qualifying victim occurred they are still eligible to apply. They’ll go through a background check. So once they apply for a T or a U, we’ll send them a notice right away and give them a fingerprint appointment and going to a federal DHS facility and have their fingerprints taken and they go off to the FBI, and the FBI does a full background check on the prints and full name and date of birth check and we do that as well and look at the immigration records and we do a TLUR row investigation. Any agency or judge can notice of any activity that that person was engaged in. If there is information you want us to know, you can let us know that as well. Speaking to the certification, what is it telling USCIS. We talked about it is not granting benefits. Just because it is signed, that is not automatically granting them a visa. The certifications is telling us that the person signing the form as seen evidence of the qualifying criminal activity and the victim had knowledge of the criminal activity and going to eligibility requirements that that victim has specific knowledge of the criminal activity, and then finally, that that victim was, is or will be helpful to the law enforcement. So those are the three basic things that the form is telling us. It is not speaking to any type of future conduct for the victim. You are not serving as a character witness for the victim. You are not saying they are a pillar of the community. You are just saying that the certifications is telling us the three basic things. Again, if law enforcement signs off on this form, they are not sponsoring, they are not endorsing, they are just saying that this person is helpful, they had knowledge and they were a victim of a crime that is all that that form is telling us. The form doesn’t guarantee a visa being issued. Only my agency will do that. We’ll only make that DRM nation once we see all of the evidented coming in. This is one spoke in the wheel to make a determination and moving into the future, if you sign a certification, there is nothing that makes you liable for any future conduct or any type of conduct down the road or the actions committed by the alien victim and you are not speaking for the victim. You are not saying they have to check in with you. No type of requirement like that. The certifying official is telling us those three small things that we talked about. >> The one point I want to add in that judges have the discretion to sign as we are going to talk about it, most judges are signing after they have issued the ruling, they have the disrecreation to sign at earlier point in

the proceedings as well. >> Well, let me just jump in here by adding that in addition to if you decide you are going to exercise your discretion as a judge, I remember that the order be specific. So when it comes to providing information about what criminal activity occurred if for example it is in the context of a civil protection order, the family violence occurred, that is a typical finding that have a requirement for the issuing of a protective order. You are going to say a family violence occurred or will occur in the future. That is the easy one, adding the information to the U Visa certification form. Identifying the victim is easy as well this is a common and typical example of them coming to play out. Identifying the victim is easy to do. Regarding the helpfulness, current, past, willingness to be helpful. It is easy to assess that element as well. Family members that are implicated in the crime is helpful information and if the perpetrator is a spouse, for example, or intimate partner and including that information is the findings is a very helpful piece of information. That is the kind of information you want to add to the form. In terms of criminal activity and helpfulness, I think that the timing is key in some respects. Before a ruling, as I once thinking about this in preparation for the webinar, I think about the phases that we encounter people asking the judges to sign the certification forms. Sometime it is before a ruling. So you are evaluating the credibility, is the information that you have received trust WORny and believable, even if it is a temporary restraining order or a preliminary hearing. Some credible evidence is enough. Probable cause. If you were going to make a probable cause determination to issue an arrest warrant, the same kind of information that your used to issue an aRERT warrant are the same of evaluations you are going to meet. More than just bare suspicion but probable cause and judges are aKUS Tommed to that. We have examples of how encounter these. After the ruling, you are going to enter findings, you are going to use the bahsic standards of proof, preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt. >> I have to interrupt for a second. >> Sure. >> We have the slides, never mind. Go ahead. >> Okay. I think actually my only footnote is after the ruling, these are the exact kinds of the things that the judges do every day and the standards of which we do them, so it is a comfortable zone for the judges to be in because we make these decisions all of the time. >> I’m going to take one, a poll, two questions, of those of you have signed or received a certification from a judge, how many of have you done it in the protection order context? Raise your hands? At least one. >> A few are coming in. >> Great. So a couple have. David, put down the hands. How many in a criminal case? Not seeing anybody. A few. Okay. >> A few more. >> Okay. What about a custody case? Signed one in a custody case or a child abuse case? We have one of those. Okay. So essentially the certifications can happen in all of these different

kinds of cases and at different times in the case. So now to Scott. >> Thank you. As we talked about it in the beginning, if they are granted a T or U Visa visa it is a defined life of four years, however, congress put in the ability to have a T or U Visa holder to have the abilitied to apply for a green card or the lawful permanent residency. What that means for you as someone that signed a certification, that means someone may come to you three years down the road, because the regulations require three years of someone having the visa before applying and they may come to you and ask you for a follow up letter and saying this person has not refused to cooperate at all in the investigation or the prosecution. Now, that is a piece of evidence they need in order to be eligible for a green card. So a couple of ways to do that. It is real, real simple. If you have held on to a copy of the original 914 or 918 B that you have seened, maybe a copy of that and signing it and saying they have not refused to cooperate. You can fill out a new 914 or 918 B and stating they have not refused to cooperate at all in the investigation or the prosecution. And that sufficient FISs as well. Or do something very simple on your official letter head. Again, simply stating that the person has not refused to cooperate. Any of those will work. If they come to you down the road and asking for this, this is why they are asking for that, it is for the eligibility for a green card. As talked about before, with this letter, they are showing that they have fulfilled their on going duty to cooperate with the law enforcement. So the victim is saying hey, they have asked me to cooperate and I did, or they never asked me, and therefore, I didn’t refuse to cooperate. I was here and available. So that’s what the letters are telling us. If they refuse to comply with reasonable requests for continuedcontinued cooperation, the law enforcement or the judge or the prosecutor could revoke the certificationcertification. So what they’ll do is notify the service center where the T and U applications are adjudicated. So all you will do is mail the service center, and saying you want to pull it. You can always pull a certification that you have previously signs and that again is at your discretion. Nobody can tell you to pull out the certification. That is always your call. And once if you do that, and that withdrawal is done and that person no longer has a certification, that may lead to that person’s visa status being revokedrevoked The duty of cooperation is taking seriously. If that certification is pulled, we send a notice to the victim and stating they no longer have a certification and they have the opportunity to send information to us and responding and saying why the visa shouldn’t be revoked, whether or not we revoke that is up to USCIS and my agency has the final say and has the responsibility of looking over all of the evidence and determining whether or not that person refused to cooperate and whether or not we are revoking the visa. It is not common, but we certainly have done that. >> What is important to understand, there are a number of checks and balances in the system and the addition of revoking and et cetera, it is PORNT to understand that when somebody comes after three years and files for a lawful permanent residency as a U Visa holder they have to prove cooperation,

which is where the second certification comes for, or they can prove and this is why it is not automatic revocation, but they can prove they didn’t unreasonable refuse to cooperate. They under stood for some of the crime victims they couldn’t show up and they have the TOUNT the show that their failure to cooperate was not uncondition BL because of the circumstances of the case and the decision to unrevoke could go forward if the victim is showing cooperation. However once that meet the elements they have to show in order to get lawful permanent residency through the U Visa program humanitarian need, familiar unity or public interest. Humanitarian need is where the perpetrator served time in jail and deported to their home country sharing with the victim and could retaliate if she’s deported, family unity is he has a number of family members in the United States and so lawful permanent residence and public interest is the way I think about it, somebody where given what they went through and coming forward and the courage they have used to come forward, maybe they were a star witness in a rape conviction Scott? >> Thank you. This slide just has our DHS contact information. What we talked about previously if you want to contact the Vermont service center and revoke a certification or a case specific question on something that you have signed, you can get ahold of them at the long email address on the top left there. The officers will respond and certainly get back to you within 72 hours. I remember doing the email address. The phone line is not a live line. It is to a voice mail. I would certainly email. That is the quickest route. You can always CC me on the emails as well. My contact information is top right. That is the Scott address and the phone number is there as well. If you needed to contact me about the policy questions or anything in terms of issues or concerns with the T or the U program, you can get ahold of me as well. Of course, just like Vermont, the best way to get ahold of me is email T visa and VAWA my colleagues are there as well. Those are the colleagues on my team. The DHS blue campaign, wide efficient FORLT on combatting human trafficking and AUM of the information for the department in general. Ice, FEMA, coast guard, secret service, they are under neath that blue campaign umbrella. There is a ton of information there and what they are doing for human trafficking and all sorts of information, but free materials to take and print or order. In terms of posters and tear cards. All sorts of stuff to look at there as well. >> Okay. >> We have ten minutes left. We probably want to go through the next section quickly. >> It takes approximately 7-10 # months to adjudicate the U Visas at this point and many are domestic violence, sexual assault and human trafficking Scott, you can review the forms and fill them out and save five minutes for lawyer to talk about judicial ethic issues. >> Sure, no problem. So the forms are really, really straightforward. T

endorsements and the U certifications. They are three pages long. The first page of the T here. Part B, agency information, that is where you put your agency’s information there. The judge, you are a judge or a prosecutor what office it is. Going forward from there. Same thing for the police departments as well. Certifying agency categories, prosecutor, judge or other, and law enforcement Second page, going down part C state of claim, sex trafficking and labor trafficking there. Second page, again, real, real simple. Part here is describe the victimization. Your knowledge of that there. Expressed fear of retaliation or revenge? We are just looking for dates here Citations are placed there. And again, more on the dates on when the investigations or the prosecutions took place. Here we are just looking for a little more information about the applicant. Have they complied with the requests? Have they failed to do that? Have they requested to respond? Any information about the cooperation or the helpfulness will go in the box there. And then again, hoar in terms of any family members implicated in the trafficking? If they have family members part of the trafficking scheme they are not eligible. Down here, signature of the law enforcement official or supervisor, judges, you can put your name here and put down you are a judge and we are looking for dates here as well. that is what we are looking for with the T visas. With the U’s, again, straight forward. >> We don’t have a lot of time here. We are taking a look at the form. A couple of things, one, going to the next slide, it is self-explanatory and you can look at the power point we are going to send to you. And with the handbooks and written materials available related to tool kits and how-to east and the questions. For the judges and certifiers, one, you have to amend the form to say what you need it to say. It needs to be accurate and comfortable for you to sign it. Your signature means a lot as a judge and you want to form to say what you are comfortable saying. If it says something you should feel free to amend the form. They are going to review what you are actually saying and judges have a responsibility, so don’t hesitate to amend it and initial the changes to the form. I think that the other big thing I want to tell you about the process, for me, it is easy if I attach a copy of the order that I entered. The slide up now, for example, is one of the places, that’s the one there. You will see we drew a line through on behalf of the agency and based on investigation of the facts, well, judges don’t do anything on behalf of agencies and judges don’t investigate, so this is an example of something you cross out We don’t investigation. We adjudicate. We listen to the evidence. Just cross all the language and sign it. I think they’ll understand. Based on myish YANS of a protective order. that is going to explain what is going on. Attach a copy of the order. My suggestion for the certifiers for the judges, put as much information in the order itself. Nobody can complain about a specific finding you made in the order. Nobody can complain about being partial by making findings in the order. Family violence occurred. I find this

happened. This is the evidence that I’m basing the order on. You are making that, you are hearing the evidence and making a decision based on the evidence and put that into the order which reflects what you have done in the context of this hearing that you have had as a judge. that can go easily into your protective order, for example and that is basis for the decision. The fact that DHS or USCIS looks at that and finds that helpful in process of granting the U Visa request, great, good for them, but from the judge’s standpoint the that you are making findings based on the evidented you have heard and you are putting that evidented in the order. So I would remind judges not to worry about that kind of thing. A couple of other ethical points and David, you have to skip to a few slides to the one that begins, a sort of cover slide that talks about best practices for signing the U Visa certification. We have to skip a few of the slides above that. Just a couple of things on ethics. Just let me say he’s skipping the slides because of the time, but they can full of information and please take the time when you have it to go through the power point. For the judges, there are judicial ethics commissions that are considering this issue, North Carolina has looked at the issue. We think that the North Carolina commission decision’s on this is not completely, really, and we think they have misunderstood things but we have to point out there is at least one state that doesn’t recommend that the judges sign it and thinking that the judges shouldn’t sign it. I think that judges have every right to sign it. Scott talked to length about the discretion that this judges and the federal law is clear about the judges being those that can certify. How do you do that? The first thing to keep in mind, you are making a form say what it needs to say. So the notion about amending form. You can avoid the appearance of impro priority. Make specific findings in the order. If you can find probable cause and justify the arrest warrant, you can find the probable cause to believe that SKWUN was helpful in the investigation of a crime or a victim of a crime and so forth. If to stick to what you do as a judge, there are no problem being a certifier. Think about what you do and do just that. ExpartE communications, that is inappropriate thing. All though there are times when it is not problematic. When it is authorized by law, for example, if they come to you under the state law for a temporary restraining order in a brand new lawsuit that is not served yet, just filed it and entitled to expartE relief, obviously, in exception to this rule, so ebbing get information. Also, judges can give information. We can’t give legal advice, but we can give information and pointing people to resources in the community, food stamps, housing, no different than pointing to the resources available through DHS and safe and better protected in the community by aveiling themselves of the opportunities to them through the agencies. Keep that in mind. If you are in the middle of a case, you have to evaluate whether or not that is the time to sign the certification. Should you wait until the case is over and the protective order is adjudicated. These are considerations. I don’t have time to go

through each of them. These are the considerations that you as a judge in your discretion will make. Just remember you run the traps in your head, is this the best time to sign it. Should I wait until the end of the process. Should I sign it at the TRO process. Those are just the things to be thinking about as you go through this and the center and Scott and others are available for assistance. I see that people have questions and they are being answered while the webinar is underway. Please, please, please be encouraged to ask the questions and we’ll provide the support as much as we can. Look at the tool kit. Think about how this plays out from a practical standpoint for you as a judge. Can I sign it. Should I sign it. Should I sign it now or later and I think you will answer in most of the cases you will be able to sign it and finding yourself comfortable signing it. Times is very important. Just consider that. >> Take it out, Leslie. >> Thank you. We appreciate you all joining us today and we hope this is going to help to answer many of the questions that people have about the usages and UFSZ certification. Scott and I and NIWAP are available to answer further questions as they come up. This is a tool kit that we have prepared to help answer the questions and it has all of the details in it and the forms and filling them out and we are available to provide direct technical assistance to judges add court staff as well as advocates and attorneys and making sure you have all of the information that you need and answer the questions on U Visa and a variety of other issues. We have lots of materials available on issues that arise for immigrant crime victims when coming before the state courts. So thank you very much for attending today. We will — any questions we have not had the opportunity to answer, we will do a question and answer sheet and we’ll distribute it and post it on the website along with a live version of this webinar. And we hope we have answered some of your questions and we encourage you to signing the U Visas in the future. Thank you. >> This concludes the webinar for NIWAP. Thank you for joining us. Thank you to all of the speakers and we’ll keep the text chat open for another minute. Thank you for joining us today

You Want To Have Your Favorite Car?

We have a big list of modern & classic cars in both used and new categories.