Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS)

Consent Issues for Children in ORR Custody 

*Note* This area of SIJS law is rapidly changing. The January 1, 2008 District Court decision Perez-Olano may make some of the following information obsolete. If you would like to discuss pursuing specific or express consent or appealing a denial of either please email Sara McDowell at smcdowell@uscridc.org. 

• Redacted Motion Appealing John Pogash's Denial of Specific Consent to Pursue SIJS filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. January, 2006.
• YZ v. Pogash, Redacted Order Granting Plaintiff's Appeal of DHS's Denial for Specific Consent, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, dated February 23, 2006. (Zheng v. Pogash;, 416 F. Supp. 2d 550 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 23, 2006) (order relating to above motion).
• Sample letter to John Pogash requesting he clarify that child does not need specific consent when not in federal custody. 2005.
• Response from DHS clarifying its position that specific consent is unnecessary when child has been released from federal custody. 2004.
• Redacted Consent Request Affidavit. “M Y ARBOL”, December, 2005.
• Redacted Request for Consent to Juvenile Court Jurisdiction-“M Y ARBOL”, December 14, 2005.
• Redacted Emergency Request for Consent in Obtaining Juvenile Court Jurisdiction Over Dependency Proceedings.  “Sample Letter to Mr. Perryman.” April 23, 2001.
• Emergency Request for Specific Consent to Juvenile Court Jurisdiction. “JSG”. Midwest Immigrant and Human Rights Center, a program of Heartland Alliance, June 27, 2005.
• Attachments include:
• Redacted Child Declaration
• Certificate of Translator's Competence
• Redacted Letter from Case Manager at shelter
• Redacted Letter from Field Coordinator
• Redacted Letter from Child Advocate
• John Pogash Letter Granting Consent. “JSP”. Midwest Immigrant and Human Rights Center, a program of Heartland Alliance.
• Request for Special Juvenile Immigrant Status: Decision on Consent for Jurisdiction in Juvenile Court.  Sample-INS Denial of Consent. 
• U.S. Department of Justice, Immigration and Naturalization Service, May 2001. 
• Redacted John Pogash Denial of Consent. Haitian Entrant, April 2006.
• Request to Pogash for Consent to Juvenile Court Jurisdiction
• Requesting consent to enter juvenile court for a juvenile who is currently in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement
• the minor has been severely physically and verbally abused by his alcoholic father
• minor is an abused, abandoned, and neglected child who has nowhere to return to in his country of origin
• Redacted Grant of Consent to Pursue SIJS filed by FIAC
• Response to above request
• Allowing child to pursue an SIJS classification
• Grant of consent does not constitute a finding or an endorsement of any substantive issue relating to SIJS, merely that sufficient evidence exists to consent to the jurisdiction of a state juvenile court to make independent findings related to SIJS.
• Redacted February 13, 2007 letter from John Pogash instructing that consent is not required when a child has been released from the custody of the federal government.

• Matter of Perez Quintanilla. The AAO adopted the foregoing decision on July 30, 2007 making it binding policy guidance on all USCIS personnel. The case held that specific consent is required only in circumstances where the child is in the actual or constructive custody of DHS and that constructive custody will be determined by the current policy and practices of ICE. ICE's current practice is that when a child is released from federal custody and remains in removal proceedings without a final order of removal, specific consent of the Secretary of DHS need not be obtained in order for the juvenile court to take jurisdiction under section 101(a)(27)J(iii)(I) of the INA.
• January 1, 2008 U.S. District Court Decision in Perez-Olano v. Chertoff holding that for children in federal custody, ICE's specific consent is only required before a juvenile court determines custody status or placement. Thus, if a petitioner is solely seeking an SIJ predicate order, specific consent is no longer necessary before proceeding in juvenile court. This decision is currently on appeal.
• January 30, 3008 USCIS letter explaining that following the District Court's decision, they are "enjoined from requiring specific consent where a minor only seeks state court jurisdiction for a SIJ predicate order.
• March 7, 2008 AAO Decision sustaining an appeal and finding that: 1) When an SIJS applicant turned 18, he was no longer in the actual custody of DHS nor constructive custody of ICE because ICE no longer deemed specific consent necessary and the juvenile court properly had jurisdiction; and 2) If the record supports the juvenile court's orders, CIS will give express consent to the orders and eligibility for SIJS is established.