Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Understanding Reasonable Fear vs. Credible Fear Interviews: A Critical Guide for Immigrants Facing Removal

Client Alert
May 23, 2025

Washington, D.C. – In a timely new article, Rob Ratliff, Immigration Attorney and former Immigration Judge, clarifies the differences between Reasonable Fear Interviews and Credible Fear Interviews, essential processes for noncitizens fearing persecution or torture. Published at www.removal-defense.com, the article explains concepts central to recent judicial rulings, including U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy’s order addressing the Trump administration’s unlawful deportations to South Sudan, which violated his April 18, 2025, injunction (U.S. District Court, Massachusetts).

Reasonable Fear Interviews apply to individuals with prior removal orders, like those with aggravated felonies or reentry after deportation (INA § 238(b), § 241(a)(5)), assessing a “reasonable possibility” of persecution or torture. Successful cases lead to withholding-only proceedings for withholding of removal or Convention Against Torture (CAT) protection (8 CFR § 208.31). Credible Fear Interviews target those in expedited removal, like border apprehensions, requiring a lower “significant possibility” of eligibility for asylum, withholding, or CAT protection, potentially leading to an Asylum Merits Interview or removal proceedings (INA § 235(b)(1); 8 CFR § 208.30).

Both allow an immigration judge (IJ) review of negative findings, but the IJ review is final with no appeal (8 CFR § 1208.31(g); 8 CFR § 1003.42), unless a new hearing is granted. An alien may consult with counsel prior to a hearing with an IJ or asylum officer, but during asylum officer interviews, attorneys are limited to observation and consultation (8 CFR § 208.30(d)(4); 8 CFR § 208.31(c)). It is the discretion of the IJ or asylum officer, is the attorney is permitted provide brief argument on behalf of their client. Notice for a hearing is provided via Form I-863 or Notices to Appear (8 CFR § 1208.31(e); 8 CFR § 1239.1).

“Judge Murphy’s ruling underscores the due process issues in these screenings,” said Ratliff. “Our article connects these processes to real-world cases.” Read the full analysis at www.removal-defense.com.

ImmigrationImmigration LawRobert Ratliff
Client Alert

New Ohio Recovery Housing Rules Take Effect January 1, 2025

January 2, 2025Ohio’s new recovery housing rules, effective January 1, 2025, require certified community behavioral health providers to refer clients only to accredited recovery housing residences listed on the statewide registry.Client Alert

SCOTUS to Weigh In on Medicaid Beneficiaries’ Right to Choose their Provider

January 2, 2025The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments this spring on whether Medicaid beneficiaries have an enforceable right to choose their healthcare providers without state interference, as outlined in Section 1902(a)(23) of the Social Security Act. This case stems from a South Carolina petition challenging a Fourth Circuit ruling that blocked the state from terminating Planned Parenthood’s Medicaid provider agreement.Client Alert

I Went to Bed and the Rules Changed: the Corporate Transparency Act is Back on Hold

December 27, 2024The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ordered on December 26, 2024 that in an effort to “preserve the constitutional status quo” while it considered the Federal Government’s appeal, it vacated the prior order for a stay of the nationwide injunction pending appeal entered on December 23, 2024, and reinstated the preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the CTA and its corresponding Reporting Rule.Client Alert

Telemedicine Flexibilities Extended to March 31, 2025

December 26, 2024The American Relief Act of 2025 extends key telehealth flexibilities through March 31, 2025, originally enacted during the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency (PHE). These flexibilities remove geographic and originating site restrictions for Medicare patients, expand the list of qualified practitioners, and allow for audio-only services and telehealth mental health care without in-person requirements. Although this extension is temporary, it provides continued access to essential healthcare services. Congress will need to pass permanent legislation to solidify these changes beyond March 2025.Client Alert

Corporate Transparency Act Is Back in Effect: Are You Ready?

December 26, 2024On December 23, 2024, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the filing requirements under the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA), overturning a prior injunction. Businesses now have updated deadlines to file initial beneficial ownership information reports with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), based on their registration date. Affected companies must comply with these new deadlines, which vary depending on when the company was created or registered.
Older posts
Newer posts