Ethics of Filing for Asylum to Apply for Cancellation of Removal
The practice of affirmatively filing an application for asylum with the end goal of applying for cancellation of removal has become a widespread practice. Some attorneys seek relief for clients with exceptional cases. And other attorneys exploit clients with misleading promises such as a “10-year green card” or a work permit for a “hardship case.” Many attorneys have struggled to decide whether this strategy can ever be appropriate for their clients. How do they counsel their clients? How do they balance their roles as both advocate and officer of the court? What are the ethical considerations and the relevant rules? What is the possibility of discipline? The speakers will identify the relevant issues and help lawyers work through these difficult questions.
- The State and Federal Rules Governing Attorney Conduct
- The Differing Definitions of “Frivolous” Under the CFR, Model Rules, and U.S. Code
- The Obligation of Candor to the Tribunal
- Client Communication and Informed Consent
- Non-Attorney Partnerships
- Fraud and Other Unlawful Conduct
|This product contains digital goods. All digital goods (MP3, PDF, ZIP. Etc.) are available for downloading from your digital library for two years from the date of purchase. This product is available in electronic format ONLY; no print copies are offered.|
Ratings & Reviews
All reviews will be reviewed by AILA prior to appearing on this page.
Be the first to review Ethics of Filing for Asylum to Apply for Cancellation of Removal!