Steve handles a wide variety of immigration and naturalization matters on behalf of aliens seeking authorization for U.S. residence or employment. Those areas include, but are not limited to, the following:
Steve has specialized in immigration law since 1993.
Gone are the days of immigration law 'business as usual.' Since 1997 in particular, Congress and immigration agencies have implemented changes in U.S. immigration law, many of them sweeping. Moreover, immigration enforcement authorities have recently become more aggressive in initiating removal proceedings - and sometimes detention - in certain cases, while in the business immigration area visas (such as H-1B and H-2B) have presented aliens and their would-be employer sponsors with severe quota-based timing issues. These days, in order to provide legal services in this area of law, a lawyer must possess strong research, analytical, advocacy and planning skills and the willingness to navigate in an increasingly variable legal landscape.
Two examples of Steve's work in this shifting landscape of law:
EXPEDITED REMOVAL:
Severe problems are being experienced by
some aliens on entry into the U.S. even when they have valid
passport visas. Such problems include being handcuffed, being
detained for hours or days and being denied access to hosts,
family or legal counsel. Steve handled one such case,
featured by the columnist Anthony Lewis in the Friday, December
12, 1997 issue of the New York Times (Page A35, Op-Ed). Steve
obtained governmental reversal of the removal order and
readmission for his client despite the re-entry ban. To do so,
he mounted a three-pronged attack on INS's five-year ban on entry
in
that case. He obtained acceptance of his client by the
American Immigration Lawyers Association free of charge into a
landmark court action challenging abuses of the expedited removal
process, he obtained the aforementioned New York Times coverage of the injustices involved,
and he prepared an extensive application to INS for readmission.
On their part, governmental authorities conducted an administrative investigation of the
abusive INS officer involved in that case.
RELIEF FROM REMOVAL FOR CERTAIN ALIENS WITH CRIMINAL
CONVICTIONS:
Changes of law since 1997 may bring about disastrous immigration
consequences based on past criminal convictions - even for
longstanding U.S. lawful permanent residents, and even where
criminal convictions were trivial and happened long before the
recent changes in law. Steve won relief from
deportation for a lawful permanent resident alien in one such
case, as a result of four years of what might be called creative
lawyering. That particular case involved an alien who had had
one conviction for possession of cocaine; he had served honorably
in the U.S. military, had a father and many siblings with U.S.
citizenship or permanent resident status in the U.S. and other
factors generally favoring relief from deportation in his case.
Unfortunately, however, during the midst of this proceeding,
Congress passed legislation which threatened to reverse relevant
law 180 degrees. Worse yet, the Justice Department then
interpreted certain ambiguities in that law to apply it to those
in Steve's client's position to bar them from even the
possibility of applying for relief from deportation. At the
lowest point in this case, it appeared that this alien would be
ordered deported with little or no prospect for relief on appeal.
At that point, in a novel move, Steve petitioned the Attorney
General directly, using the bare authority of a statutory
provision in new law, to terminate deportation proceedings and
reinitiate them as removal proceedings, in an attempt to obtain
lawful permanent residence status for this client. While that petition was
pending, and while INS objected to its use, two favorable things
happened in the case. The Attorney General decided to afford
many aliens, such as Steve's client, the possibility of applying
for the newer form of relief. Perhaps more importantly, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit overruled the Justice
Department's interpretation of the new law, meaning in effect
that Steve's client would be allowed to apply for the relief he
had initially sought. These developments ultimately allowed
Steve to obtain relief from deportation for this client.
The foregoing case histories, and the content of this web site generally, are not intended to be and should not be relied upon as legal advice. To be effective and reliable, legal advice must be tailored to the specific facts and relevant law pertaining to each individual case.
The foregoing case examples demonstrate Steve's down-to-earth analysis and forceful handling of tough immigration problems now arising in a shifting and sometimes harsh legal landscape.
Steve apprenticed on pro bono cases with Reverend Robert "Father Bob" Vitaglione, the Brooklyn-based priest considered by many, including some immigration judges, to be a legend in Immigration Law. In hearings and appeals, Steve generally follows his mentor's spirited and tenacious style of advocacy, which has produced good results for Steve's clients. Like Father Bob, Steve serves clients of every race and religion, from all over the world, including Asia, Europe, Africa, and South and Central America.
Steve added immigration law to a corporate, trusts and estates and entertainment law practice. This addition was largely motivated by his enjoyment of work abroad (three months on film production in Mexico City), travel (in Europe, Mexico and the Caribbean), and amateur soccer, which has brought him into contact with players from the Caribbean, South and Central America, the U.K., Eastern Europe and the Middle East, and by his love of cultural variety.