Circumvention Lawful Pathway

I first heard about Circumvention Lawful Pathway (“CLP”) in about December 2023 when I was attending a Master Hearing remotely with a Texas judge. The client was detained and the judge briefly mentioned that CLP applies to client’s case because he failed to register at the border.

I first felt it was understandable since the Texas is a comparably conservative state but at the same time, I know it is a reasonable state since I really had a good time when I was traveling there.

Thereafter, same jurisdiction, individual hearing, where I was just observing while providing hints to my colleague as “second first chair”.

I still remember the opening of the individual hearing is to talk about whether CLP applies to client. Same, the judge stated that client failed to register on the CBP One app and asked my colleague whether there is “exception” applied.

Back then I did not have this question brought up in New York Immigration Court, but I vaguely remember one of the exception is due to “extraordinary circumstance”.

The colleague I assuming felt I am reliable so she texted me.

I answered, “he did not have a cellphone”.

Later on, CLP became my tool to win a case. When CLP gives some judges the impression of unconstitutional or at least “unreasonable”, my concession on the Asylum eligibility I believe arguably boosted the winning chance for Withholding of Removal.

Now we are at a new era, instead of complaining about the “new administration”, I prefer to update strategy.

So, now my focal point on my CLP brief is that whether country reports issued by the DHS agree that the countries client passing through are fit for such individual to seek asylum, Or

WHETHER ASYLUM IS A POSSIBILITY.