On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Representing Unaccompanied Children in California – Best Practices & Key Avenues for Relief from Deportation: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and Asylum

Released on: Dec. 17, 2014
Running Time: 12:15:45

Note: Credit for this program has expired in various states. If seeking credit for this course, please verify the credit status in your jurisdiction before commencing.

Unaccompanied immigrant children (UACs) from Central America have been coming to California in increasing numbers for the past few years.  These children are placed in removal proceedings, and without access to government appointed counsel, they have difficulties navigating the confusing and complex immigration system alone.  Many children are eligible for some form of humanitarian relief or have other avenues to avoid deportation, however without an attorney to help them, the majority are ordered removed to their home countries, often to very dangerous conditions.  Attorneys who work with immigrant youth, or pro bono attorneys interested in working on these issues, can learn the basics of the immigration detention and removal process for children, best practices for working with these children, how to effectively present asylum and special immigrant juvenile status claims, and other removal defense strategies.

Lecture Topics [Total time 12:15:45]

Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Program Overview and Introductions* [00:02:17]
    Kristen M. Jackson, Hayley Upshaw
  • Overview of Representing Children in Immigration Cases [01:08:08]
    Kristen M. Jackson, Helen Beasley, Hayley Upshaw
  • Ethical and Practical Considerations When Working with Children [00:58:55]
    Jayne E. Fleming, Jennifer Horne, Erin Maxwell, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • The Detention and Removal System for Children [01:00:35]
    Rachel Prandini, Hayley Upshaw
  • Overview of Special Immigrant Juvenile Status [01:00:35]
    Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck, Rachel Prandini
  • Nuts and Bolts of SIJS in California Probate Courts [00:59:25]
    Jennifer Horne, Rachel Prandini, Hayley Upshaw
  • Nuts and Bolts of SIJS in California Family Courts [01:01:05]
    Katie Annand, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Presenting Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Cases to USCIS and EOIR [01:00:55]
    Kristen M. Jackson, Hayley Upshaw, Rachel Prandini
  • Introduction to Children’s Asylum: Jurisdiction and Substantive Law [02:01:25]
    Lisa Frydman, Robin L. Goldfaden, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Nuts and Bolts of Preparing an Asylum Case for an Unaccompanied Child and Working with Experts [01:00:25]
    Jayne E. Fleming, Helen Lawrence, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Motions to Suppress and Other Pre-Plea Challenges to Removability [00:59:25]
    Kristen M. Jackson, Helen Lawrence
  • Unaccompanied Children and Eligibility for Benefits [01:02:35]
    Tanya Broder, Alice Bussiere

Presentation Material


  • Representing Children in Removal Proceedings: Ethical and Practical Issues, American Immigration Lawyers Association, Immigration Practice Pointers (2014-15 Ed.)
    Kristen M. Jackson
  • Immigrant Legal Resource Center: Immigration Options for Undocumented Immigrant Children Fact Sheets
    Angela Junck
  • Immigrant Legal Resource Center: Unaccompanied Immigrant Children Resources
    Angela Junck
  • Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto: Confidential Immigrant Client Intake Form
    Helen Beasley
  • Overview of Representing Children in Immigration Cases PowerPoint Slides
    Angela Junck, Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson
  • Esperanza Immigrant Rights Project: Agreement for Legal Representation
    Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Ethical and Practical Considerations When Working with Children PowerPoint Slides
    Lindsay Toczylowski, Erin Maxwell, Jennifer Horne, Jayne E. Fleming
  • Deportation System For Minors Map
    Rachel Prandini, Hayley Upshaw
  • The Detention and Removal System for Children Resource Page
    Rachel Prandini, Hayley Upshaw
  • The Detention and Removal System for Children PowerPoint Slides
    Rachel Prandini, Hayley Upshaw
  • Special Status Seekers, Los Angeles Lawyer (February 2012)
    Kristen M. Jackson
  • Report to the Judicial Council-Family and Juvenile Law: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status and the California Courts (October 6, 2014)
    Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck
  • Judicial Council of California Memorandum to the Presiding Judges and Court Executive Officers of the Superior Courts: Senate Bill 873 and the Special Immigrant Juvenile Process in the Superior Courts (September 30, 2014)
    Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck
  • U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Fact Sheet: Special Immigrant Juvenile Status: Information for Juvenile Courts
    Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck
  • Immigrant Legal Resource Center Fact Sheet: How California’s New Law SB 873 Benefits Unaccompanied Minors
    Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck
  • U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Fact Sheet- Immigration Relief for Abused Children: Information for Juvenile Court Judges, Child Welfare Workers, and Others Working with Abused Children
    Helen Beasley, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck
  • Overview of Special Immigrant Juvenile Status PowerPoint Slides
    Angela Junck, Kristen M. Jackson, Helen Beasley
  • Pro Bono Guardianship Project Manual: A Guide to Obtaining Legal Guardianships in San Mateo County-Appendix N Excerpt
    Jennifer Horne
  • Nuts and Bolts of SIJS in California Probate Courts Resource Page
    Jennifer Horne, Rachel Prandini, Hayley Upshaw
  • Nuts and Bolts of SIJS in California Probate Courts PowerPoint Slides
    Hayley Upshaw, Rachel Prandini, Jennifer Horne
  • Nuts and Bolts of SIJS in California Family Courts Materials (Samples)
    Katie Annand, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Nuts and Bolts of SIJS in California Family Courts Online Resource List
    Katie Annand, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Nuts and Bolts: SIJS Findings in Family Courts PowerPoint Slides
    Lindsay Toczylowski, Katie Annand
  • Presenting Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Cases to USCIS and EOIR: Cecilia’s Story (Hypothetical)
    Angela Junck, Kristen M. Jackson, Hayley Upshaw
  • Sample I-360 Petition for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status
    Kristen M. Jackson
  • Sample I-485 Petition: Adjustment of Status for Special Immigrant Juvenile
    Hayley Upshaw
  • Presenting Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Cases to USCIS and EOIR Resource Page
    Angela Junck, Kristen M. Jackson, Hayley Upshaw
  • Presenting Special Immigrant Juvenile Status Cases to USCIS and EOIR PowerPoint Slides
    Hayley Upshaw, Kristen M. Jackson, Angela Junck
  • Sample Asylum Brief #1
    Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample I-589 Application for Asylum and for Withholding of Removal Cover Letter
    Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample I-589 and Office of Refugee Resettlement Release Forms
    Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample Motion to Administratively Close Proceedings
    Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample Annotated Table of Contents #1: Exhibits in Support of Application for Asylum, Withholding of Removal and Protection Under the Convention Against Torture
    Lisa Frydman, Robin L Goldfaden, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample Expert Affidavit: Declaration of Dr. Ubaldo Herrera Coello, Expert on Children’s Rights in Honduras
    Lisa Frydman, Robin L Goldfaden, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Introduction to Children’s Asylum: Jurisdiction and Substantive Law Resource List
    Lisa Frydman, Robin L Goldfaden, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Introduction to Children’s Asylum: Jurisdiction and Substantive Law PowerPoint Slides
    Lindsay Toczylowski, Robin L Goldfaden, Lisa Frydman
  • Sample Asylum Brief #2
    Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample Declaration in Support of Asylum Application
    Jayne E. Fleming, Helen Lawrence, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Sample Annotated Table of Contents #2: Exhibits in Support of Application for Asylum, Withholding of Removal and Protection Under the Convention Against Torture
    Jayne E. Fleming, Helen Lawrence, Lindsay Toczylowski
  • Nuts and Bolts of Preparing an Asylum Case for an Unaccompanied Child and Working with Experts PowerPoint Slides
    Lindsay Toczylowski, Helen Lawrence, Jayne E. Fleming
  • Motions to Suppress and Other Pre-Plea Challenges to Removability: Alex and Miriam’s Stories (Hypothetical)
    Kristen M. Jackson, Helen Lawrence
  • What to Do when DHS Alleges Your Client Is a Bad Actor: Challenging I-213s Created When Your Client Was a Minor, American Immigration Lawyers Association, Immigration Practice Pointers (2013-14 Ed.)
    Kristen M. Jackson
  • Motions to Suppress and Other Pre-Plea Challenges to Removability PowerPoint Slides
    Helen Lawrence, Kristen M. Jackson
  • Benefits for Immigrant Survivors of Trafficking, Domestic Violence, and Other Serious Crimes in California (March 2013)
    Tanya Broder
  • U.S. Department of Education Fact Sheets: Educational Services for Immigrant Children and Those Recently Arrived to the United States
    Tanya Broder, Alice Bussiere
  • U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice Dear Colleague Letter: School Enrollment Procedures (May 8, 2014)
    Tanya Broder, Alice Bussiere
  • U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice Fact Sheet: Information on the Rights of All Children to Enroll in School
    Tanya Broder, Alice Bussiere
  • U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Department of Justice Information on the Rights of All Children to Enroll in School: Questions and Answers for States, School Districts and Parents (May 8, 2014)
    Tanya Broder, Alice Bussiere
  • National Immigration Law Center: Major Benefits Programs Available to Immigrants in California (February 2014)
    Tanya Broder, Alice Bussiere
  • National Immigration Law Center: Eligibility for In-State Tuition, Fee Waivers, Financial Aid, and Scholarships in California (March 2013)
    Tanya Broder
  • Unaccompanied Children and Eligibility for Benefits PowerPoint Slides
    Alice Bussiere, Tanya Broder
  • Pro Bono Opportunities in California: Representing Unaccompanied Minors (November 2014)
Co-Chair(s)
Kristen M. Jackson ~ Senior Staff Attorney, Public Counsel
Hayley Upshaw ~ Senior Staff Attorney, Legal Services For Children
Speaker(s)
Katie Annand ~ Law Offices of Katie Annand
Helen Beasley ~ Senior Immigration Attorney, Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto
Tanya Broder ~ Senior Staff Attorney, National Immigration Law Center
Alice Bussiere ~ Staff Attorney, Youth Law Center
Jayne E. Fleming ~ Pro Bono Counsel, Reed Smith LLP
Lisa Frydman ~ Associate Director & Managing Attorney, Center for Gender & Refugee Studies
Robin L. Goldfaden ~ Senior Attorney, Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area
Jennifer Horne ~ Staff Attorney, Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County
Angela Junck ~ Supervising Attorney, Immigrant Legal Resource Center
Helen Lawrence ~ Law Office of Helen Lawrence
Erin Maxwell ~ Social Worker, Legal Services For Children Inc
Rachel Prandini ~ Immigrant Youth Project Attorney, Immigrant Legal Resource Center
Lindsay Toczylowski ~ Directing Attorney for Direct Representation, Esperanza Immigrant Rights Project
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3 on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

 

Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.