Contra Costa Lawyer - September 2019 Immigration Issue

Contra Costa

Lawyer Volume 32, Number 5 | September 2019

The Immigration Issue

Asylum Seekers Need Not Apply Justice by Injunction?

Recent Court Decisions

The Importance of an Independent Immigration Court

Don’t overreact to market swings.

Get a second opinion.

Investors have survived market swings and corrections before. But a twinge of uncertainty may have you wondering if you should get another opinion to help confirm your wealth is in the right place. That’s why we’ve made it as easy as we can to have a complimentary, face-to-face meeting with a Financial Advisor.

Maybe you just want to know if you’re really on track for retirement or if your investments could be better aligned to your goals. Or in the process of working hard for your money, you worry you’ve overlooked some necessary steps to transfer your wealth.

Whatever’s on your mind, we’re here to listen, and we’ll help you evaluate your plan. It’s free, and there’s no obligation. Then you can decide if your wealth is getting the care it deserves.

WEALTH MANAGEMENT | INVESTMENT PLANNING | RETIREMENT

The Novak Wealth Management Group of Wells Fargo Advisors

Investment and Insurance Products: u NOT FDIC Insured u NO Bank Guarantee u MAY Lose Value Wells Fargo Advisors is a trade name used by Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC, Member SIPC, a registered broker-dealer and non-bank affiliate of Wells Fargo & Company. © 2015 Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC. All rights reserved.

97772-v1b A1952

Perry A. Novak Senior Vice President – Investments 2033 N Main St Ste 600 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Direct: (925) 746-7278 Perry.Novak@wellsfargoadvisors.com thenovakwealthmanagementgroup.com CA Insurance # 0A79397

CAR-1018-02667

Contra Costa 2019 BOARD of DIRECTORS James Wu President Oliver Greenwood President-Elect Nicole Mills Secretary Mika Domingo Treasurer Nick Casper Past President Gina Boer David Erb David Marchiano Ericka McKenna Cary McReynolds Craig Nevin

David Pearson Dorian Peters Michael Pierson Summer Selleck Qiana Washington Rachael Zeiph

CCCBA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Theresa Hurley | 925.370.2548 | thurley@cccba.org CCCBA main office 925.686.6900 | www.cccba.org

Barbara Arsedo Carole Lucido

LRIS & Moderate Means Director Communications Director

Jennifer Comages Anne K. Wolf

Membership Director Education & Events Director

Emily Day

Fee Arbitration Program Director & Systems Administrator

Contra Costa Lawyer CO-EDITORS EDITORIAL BOARD Inga Miller David Arietta 925.402.2192 925.472.8000

Samantha Sepehr Ann Battin

925.287.3540 510.234-2808

BOARD LIAISON Marcus Brown Nicole Mills 925.482.8950 925.351.3171 Jaime Kissinger BOARD LIAISON 925.930.6000 Dorian Peters Perry Novak COURT LIAISON 925.746.7278 Kate Bieker Lorraine Walsh 925.957.5600 925.932.7014

DESIGN Christina Weed Carole Lucido 925.953.2920 925.370.2542

ADVERTISING R.W. Walker Co. 213.896.9210

PRINTING Modern Litho 800.456.5867

The Contra Costa Lawyer (ISSN 1063-4444) is published 12 times a year – six times online-only – by the Contra Costa County Bar Association (CCCBA), 2300 Clayton Road, Suite 520, Concord, CA 94520. Annual subscription of $25 is included in the membership dues. Periodical postage paid at Concord, CA. POSTMASTER: send address change to the Contra Costa Lawyer, 2300 Clayton Road, Suite 520, Concord, CA 94520. The Lawyer welcomes and encourages articles and letters from readers. Please send them to contracostalawyer@ cccba.org.

The CCCBA reserves the right to edit articles and letters sent in for publication. All editorial material, including editorial comment, appearing herein represents the views of the respective authors and does not necessarily carry the endorsement of the CCCBA or the Board of Directors. Likewise, the publication of any advertisement is not to be construed as an endorsement of the product or service offered unless it is specifically stated in the ad that there is such approval or endorsement.

Lawyer Volume 32, Number 5 | September 2019

The official publication of the

B A R A S S O C I A T I O N

features

Asylum Seekers Need Not Apply, by Marco Garzon . . . . . . . . . . 10 The Importance of the Need for an Independent Immigration Court in Support of Due Process and the Rule of Law and its Volatile Impact in the Courtroom, by Erika Portillo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Justice by Injunction? Recent Court Decisions, by Liat Romick. . . 16 Trump Administratiion to End Parole in Place Program and Deportation Protection for United States Armed Forces Family Members Without Legal Status, by Spojmie Nasiri. . . . . . . . . . . . 19 The End of ICE Detention at WCDF, Blessing or Burden?,

by Nienke Schouten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

SPOTLIGHT

Securing Safety for Low-Income Immigrant Survivors in Contra Costa County: A Holistic Approach,

by Juliana Morgan-Trostle and Mélody Saint-Saëns. . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Columns

Inside: Reflections from the Guest Editor,

by Peggy J. Bristol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 President’s Message: Immigration Perspectives, Interview with Presiding Judge Barry Baskin, by James Wu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

DEPARTMENTS 6 Thank you to the Sponsors of Judges Night 21

CCCBA Wins ABA Partnership Award

22

PHOTOS: Out to Play with the CCCBA

23

PHOTOS: Women’s Section Annual Luncheon

30

Immigration Law Acronyms

31

sUSTAINING FIRMS

32

MCLE SPECTACULAR

33

WHAT yOU MISSED: August Online Issue

34

INDEX OF ADVERTISERS

34 Classifieds 35-38 Calendar 39

BAR FUND BENEFIT

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

3

INSIDE Reflections from the Guest Editor

by Peggy J. Bristol

This issue of the Contra Costa Lawyer is devoted to immigration, a subject that is challenging at best and polarizing at worst. It invokes debates on a myriad of questions, including what is happening to due process and the rule of law in this country; whether the situation at our southern border is an immigration crisis, a humanitarian crisis or just political theater; whether there should be such things as amnesty or sanctuary any more, and if so who deserves it; and whether business immigration needs to grow in light of American unemployment.

The starting point for such a dialogue calls for a painful, but necessary understanding of the history of American immigration policy starting with the Chinese Exclusion Act. From there, one would set out on a twisting, turning, convoluted journey of examining the economic, political, geographic and racial policies that determined what it meant to be an American over two centuries ago…what it means to be American today…and just who should be allowed to call themselves American in the future…ending up smack in the middle of the ongoing tension of discerning how to keep the lights on in the welcoming torch of the Statue of Liberty while maintaining meaningful economic and national fairness and security.

4

SEPTEMBER 2019

The Editorial Board could not have picked better timing for this issue, considering all the recent developments that were breaking news right up to the very week of our print deadlines.

• On August 10, 2019 the New York Times reported that the Department of Justice had just filed a petition asking the Federal Labor Relations Authority to consider decertifying the National Union of Immigration Judges.1 While this is not the first time this union has been challenged—it appears the Clinton administration did the same thing years ago—in 2019 this appears to be attempt to not only limit the power of immigration judges but to silence them, underscoring the timeliness and urgency of Erika Portillo’s article.

• In July 2019, the Trump administration announced a major change in asylum policy that would require migrants seeking asylum to first apply in any country they were passing through before arriving in the United States.

This might appear logical at first glance, until one considers that those countries (El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Mexico in particular) cannot provides a safe haven to their own citizens, let alone others in flight.

On July 24, 2019 U.S. District Court Judge Jon Tigar in San Francisco issued a nationwide preliminary injunction on the ground that the new rule was inconsistent with existing asylum laws—just hours after another federal judge on the East Coast refused to block the rule.2 Marco Garzon shares his insights on these events.

• In June 2018, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions dealt a major blow to victims of domestic violence and certain cases of gang violence by ruling that asylum protections generally would not extend to them.3 A federal judge struck down part of the ruling six months later, but it has had a devastating impact on women and young girls literally fleeing for their lives from male-dominated, machista cultures with welldocumented histories of femicide.4 Erika Portillo writes about this, as well as the need for greater independence for the immigration court system.

• The ACLU-backed lawsuit, Sierra Club v. Trump, tests the doctrine of separation of powers by raising the question of whether the executive branch of the federal government may divert budgets from one department without the approval of the legislative branch.

Liat Romick offers her insights into this issue.

• Decades ago, enlistment in the U.S. military was a path to U.S. citizenship. Now it may not even guarantee a green card.5 Spojmie Nasiri writes about the possible end to the “Parole in Place” program for members of the military and their families.

• Juliana Morgan-Trostle, Equal Justice Works Fellow sponsored

by Greenberg Traurig, LLP and Mélody Saint-Saëns, Immigration Regional Counsel, discuss some of the issues, concerns and resources available for immigrant communities in Contra Costa County.

• It’s been a year since Contra Costa County Sheriff David Livingston announced the end of the contract with ICE to house undocumented immigrants at the West County Detention Facility.6 Nienke Schouten shares her experiences representing immigration clients in the aftermath of this decision that came as a shock to many.

And in other news: • In July 2019, the Department of Homeland Security announced a new policy that would allow ICE agents to implement “expedited removal” procedures to deport undocumented immigrants who are unable to prove they have been in the U.S. for at least two years. This increases the risk of wrongful deportations—even of American citizens—and it further erodes due process by giving more power to ICE officers instead of trained, knowledgeable immigration judges.7 • Also in July 2019, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of asylum seekers in Padilla v. ICE, holding that those who seek the protection of asylum in the United States are entitled

to receive bond hearings while the case is pending, and that the policy of leaving immigrants indefinitely stranded in detention by denying bond hearings is a violation of due process. Padilla also claims that denial of bond hearings violates the Immigration and Nationality Act and the Administrative Procedures Act. (Note: more than one conservative immigration judge has defied the Ninth Circuit’s previous decisions, holding that they still have “no jurisdiction” over certain immigration bond proceedings.8) • Further, in July 2019 Attorney General William Barr, having certified Matter of L-E-A- to himself, issued a new decision that set aside well-settled law by his holding that fear of persecution on the basis of family membership might not qualify an individual for asylum.9 • In June 2019, disputes over the question of whether the upcoming census could lawfully include a question about citizenship led to charges of contempt in Congress.10 • In 2018, as part of the Department of Justice’s “zero tolerance” policy of criminally prosecuting immigrants who entered the U.S. at the southern border,11 the Trump administration enacted harsher detention policies that separated families at the southern border in an attempt to discourage asylum-seekers from Central America, particularly the well-publicized “caravan” from Honduras.12 At least six children have died in ICE custody in six months, more than in the previous decade.13 By June 2019, ICE released the names of over 10 people who died while in their custody since April 2018.14 The national debate over our immigration policies has stretched friendships, professional relationships, and even family relationships to

the breaking point--and sometimes even beyond. It would be impossible to cover every aspect of this issue in just one issue of any magazine. Our goal for the September issue is not to create more divisiveness or animosity, but to invite more dialogue in the legal community by sharing objective information about what is happening with immigration policies, due process and other important constitutional protections in a few key areas, so that we understand not just what may be happening to “those people” today but how the decisions we make—or allow—today might come back to affect our own lives, and the lives of our friends and loved ones, in the future.

Contra Costa County is no stranger to the broad spectrum of issues and perspective in this area of law. I’ve met with detained immigrants at West County Detention Facility, and I never failed to shudder a little when I heard those heavy metal doors clang shut behind me. But I’ve also experienced times of pure elation when Contra Costa County’s probate and family courts granted our young clients’ petitions for custody orders, finding that they are eligible to apply for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status because of parental abuse, abandonment or neglect. This county has, literally, saved more lives than any one of us may ever fully realize, and for me it has been an honor and pleasure to practice law here.

I deeply appreciate the Editorial Board of the CCCBA for their support and encouragement, and am indebted to the contributing writers in this issue: Spojmie Nasiri and Marco Garzon, Section board members; Erika Portillo, Liat Romick, Nienke Schouten, Juliana Morgan-Trostle, Equal Justice Works Fellow and Mélody SaintSaëns of the Immigration Regional Council for taking time (when they

Continued on page 6

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

5

Reflections from the Guest Editor Continued from page 5 have absolutely none to spare) to contribute to this issue. I also want to acknowledge and thank Flavio Carvalho, current president of the Immigration Section, for his leadership since the Section’s inception.

All are passionate advocates, and we seek to bring some measure of light to the realities of our immigration policies in these times.

11. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorneygeneral-announces-zero-tolerance-policy-criminal-illegal-entry 12. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usaimmigration-caravan/caravan-of-migrants-inmexico-starts-moving-towards-u-s-idUSKCN1R50XJ 13. https://www.newsweek.com/border-family-13. separation-child-death-democrats-investigate-1434591 14.https://www.ice.gov/death-detainee-report

Judges Night Sponsors

1. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/10/us/ immigration-judges-union-justice-department. html 2. https://www.npr.org/2019/07/24/744860482/ trump-administrations-new-asylum-rule-clearsfirst-legal-hurdle 3. https://www.aclu.org/blog/federal-judgeblocks-trumps-policy-gutting-asylum-peoplefleeing-domestic-and-gang-violence 4. https://www.wsj.com/articles/it-is-better-notto-have-a-daughter-here-latin-americas-violenceturns-against-women-11545237843

Peggy Bristol is an immigration attorney with offices in Walnut Creek and Oakland. Her practice focuses on deportation defense via humanitarian forms of immigration relief such as asylum, Special Immigrant Juvenile Status (SIJS) and the U visa, representing clients in probate and family law courts for SIJS matters as well as in immigration court. She is a graduate John F. Kennedy University College of Law and has served on the board of the CCCBA Immigration Section.

The CCCBA would not be able to offer the rich programs and events that it does without the help of generous sponsors. We would like to sincerely thank the two generous sponsors of Judges Night on August 22 for their generous support. It was a lovely evening!

5. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. org/tags/military 6. https://richmondstandard.com/richmond/2018/07/10/contra-costa-sheriff-endscontract-housing-ice-detainees/ 7. https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil. org/research/primer-expedited-removal 8. https://www.kshb.com/longform/immigrationjudges-defy-a-higher-court 9. http://immigrationimpact.com/2019/07/31/ barr-asylum-protections-families/#.XVJOKuhKjIU 10. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usatrump-congress-census/census-citizenship-question-fight-rages-in-u-s-congress-courtsidUSKCN1TQ16P

Joanna Barron joanna@ADRservices.com (415) 772-0900

MERGERS &

6

SEPTEMBER 2019

You handle the estate, we’ll do the contest

ACQUISITIONS

Wills/Estates Contests Conservatorships

Attorney At Law

oldest partnership in Contra Costa County (since 1955)

HUBERT LENCZOWSKI 1615 Bonanza Street #212 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 (925) 280-7788 hubert@lenczowskilaw.com www.lenczowskilaw.com

Michael Wapnick MichaelW@CourtCall.com (888) 882-6878 ext. 884

A Professional Corporation

Planning Exits and Growth Acquisition for Business Owners

Cases (except conservatorships) on contingent fee basis or hourly.

Referral fee where appropriate.

Pedder, hesseltine, walker & toth, llP 925.283-6816 • www.pedderlaw.com

3445 Golden Gate Way, Lafayette, CA 94549 aV Martindale-hubbell

Immigration Perspectives

Interview with Presiding Judge Barry Baskin

from the

President

by James Wu, CCCBA President When focused on the theme of Immigration in the Contra Costa County legal community, our own Presiding Judge Barry Baskin could be “Exhibit A” of a genuine success story. I would like to thank Judge Baskin for being so candid in sharing his background and experiences. Additionally, thank you to CCCBA Communications Director Carole Lucido who interviewed Judge Baskin and participated in the discussion below.

Lucido: Thank you Judge Baskin for sharing your personal experiences with the immigration process with all of us. Let’s start with where you were born.

Presiding Judge Baskin: I was born in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Lucido: How did you decide to be an attorney?

Presiding Judge Baskin: It was a foregone conclusion, my grandfather founded the law firm that I eventually became managing partner of, so I was the third-generation lawyer. Both my brother and I just took it for granted that we’d become lawyers. It was just in our family, it was what we’d do. During summer breaks we’d watch the great trial lawyers doing cross examining.

I watched the cross examination in the Steve Biko case - a famous trial where the government police had killed an anti-apartheid protestor and then tried to cover up that they had done so. There was an inquest and these famous trial lawyers were cross examining the police officers.

heid – I wasn’t even sure if it would be the end of apartheid. It might have been the beginning of some serious genocidal issues that were starting to develop in South Africa.

Presiding Judge Baskin: I was in my senior year in high school. I was so fascinated that they were able to get the truth out from the art of cross examination. It seemed like such a fabulous skill to be able to get at the truth, that I wanted to be a trial lawyer. I took a different path than my grandfather and father, we had different specialties. My grandfather was a criminal defense lawyer and my father was a nationally renowned family law lawyer.

Whites who were in custody were not dying, but blacks who were being arrested for protesting were mysteriously jumping out of windows, slipping on bars of soap in the shower and things like that. I didn’t think they’d ever reach a peaceful resolution, so in the early 1980s I made a decision soon after I had become the managing partner of my law firm to leave with my family and my children. That was a very tough decision, a very emotional one. Lifelong family and friends and ties to the law firm would be severed. In addition, South Africa doesn’t allow you to take out all your money.

Lucido: What kind of law did you want to practice?

Lucido: So you came without any money?

Presiding Judge Baskin: I wanted to be in a courtroom. I started off representing banks and corporations and insurance companies in South Africa and I got to do a lot of trials there. But while I was at law school, apartheid was entrenching itself and it became clear that there was going be a violent end to apart-

Presiding Judge Baskin: They allow you $30 or $40,000 to move out now. The rest has to be in a blocked account that the government controls and you can’t take it out.

Lucido: You were how old then?

Lucido: Could you give it to your family?

continued on page 8

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

7

From the President Continued from page 7

Presiding Judge Baskin: Of course, that’s what I ended up doing. That doesn’t solve the problem of arriving here virtually penniless.

The first thing I decided was to do was the Bar exam. I hadn’t been to a law school here, and couldn’t attend a bar course here because I had trials every week so it was very difficult. I flew out one week and took the Bar exam in Oakland and fell in love with San Francisco and the East Bay and decided if I were to pass that’s where I was going to settle. Fortunately, I passed the Bar the first time without attending a Bar course or anything. That was lucky, it was almost a fluke looking back on it.

The laws here are very different to how they are there. I then began the process of interviewing law firms for possible job offers. Pillsbury Madison & Sutro law firm ended up hiring me because of my trial experience. I went from managing partner to first-year associate.

It was very difficult for me, they put me in an anti-trust group. So for my first two years here I had to practice in an area that doesn’t exist in South Africa or most places in the world.

It’s really just an American concept.

The transition doing that was difficult, but it was worthwhile.

I was very conscious growing up that I was lucky to be born white. I was in a white family with servants who were black, in a position of privilege going to the best schools, and the best law school because I was white. I was very aware of the fact that if I had just been born black things would be very different.

My first lucky break was getting the job with Pillsbury and that’s where the immigration issue comes in. Because I was a South African citizen and of course didn’t have a work permit or a visa to come to 8

SEPTEMBER 2019

the U.S. When I wrote the Bar exam I came in on a tourist visa. When I interviewed for my job, I was still on that same visa. When they hired me the problem became you can’t hire a tourist. You have to have a work permit. My second break was that they wanted to hire me badly enough that they hired an immigration lawyer who did the necessary paperwork to get me a temporary work permit. It’s never ceased to amaze me the talent that the immigration lawyers have to get such a permit. You can only get the temporary permit when there is a shortage to get a certain kind of worker. My lawyers managed to convince the INS that there was a shortage of people of my particular skill set and I got the temporary work permit.

Lucido: Did it take long?

Presiding Judge Baskin: It did, it took about eight months. I had to wait in South Africa for about eight months while they processed that paperwork and then I could come out here. I shudder to think how long it would be today and even if it would be possible for my lawyers under this regime to get the temporary work permit I was able to get.

I did fairly well at Pillsbury and got recruited by the firm that I ultimately became a partner of – and that was my next lucky break.

When I became a partner at that law firm (Farrow, Bramson, Baskin & Plutzik), I hired an immigration law firm to convert my temporary work permit to a permanent work permit, a so-called green card. As soon as the five-year residency requirement was fulfilled, I became a U.S. citizen together with my family. It was a very proud day when we showed up in San Francisco to get sworn in by a U.S. federal judge who administered the oath to everyone. It was televised and my family to this day still has the clipping from the ceremony. We’ve always been very proud since to be U.S. citizens. For us it is a point of pride to fly the flag

on July 4th. It’s upsetting to us that some people see flying the flag as a partisan issue and upsetting to us now to observe that immigration and immigrants are under attack.

Reliving in a very similar way what was experienced during the Second World War by, in particular Asian immigrants, but now it’s focusing on all immigrants. While the campaign is being raged against illegal immigrants it’s clear that it’s targeting immigrants in general. Changes in policy; what kinds of people will get visas; clearly it’s being slanted away from minorities and favoring whites and white countries. It’s disturbing to me to see that trend developing.

Lucido: How did you determine you wanted to be a judge?

Presiding Judge Baskin: The judge part came, again, through some luck that I had in my career. In my law firm where I became a partner I was the lead trial counsel and I ended up having some fortunate trial results in front of some judges including judges from this county and they encouraged me to go down this path. I used to quip over the years ‘What are the chances of a Jewish, white man from South Africa without an American law degree making it to become a judge?’ They would chuckle and say, ‘You should have faith.’ Justice Ruvolo and Marchiano both actively encouraged me to seek a judgeship. It was much to my surprise that I became the first South African to be appointed and I’m proud of that. It’s always been a source of pride for me and the job has been a huge source of satisfaction.

Lucido: Is it a lot different from being an attorney?

Presiding Judge Baskin: It is. When you are a lawyer you are advocating for one side or the other and you aren’t too concerned about what the right thing is, you are always doing the best you can for one side or the other. When you are a judge you are concerned about both sides

and doing what the right thing is.

That is far more satisfying for me then being on one side. It is rare that one side is completely right and the other side is completely wrong. But the beauty of being a judge is you can figure out justice and where the truth lies. I like that part of being a judge the most.

Lucido: I know you spoke about the importance of judicial independence at the Installation lunch.

Presiding Judge Baskin: I experienced the undermining of judicial independence in South Africa and what it led to. It led to apartheid.

It worries me here seeing similar attacks that I witnessed as a teenager and as a law student on our tradition and I’m worried because I don’t think people realize how weak the judiciary is. The judiciary is not like the Executive branch and it’s not strong like the Legislature. The

Legislature has a strong presence in the public, people vote for legislators. But the judiciary on the other hand isn’t represented, it doesn’t have people to speak for it – only the Bar can speak for judges. Judges aren’t allowed to speak for themselves, the canons prevent that. It’s easy for politicians, it’s easy for the Executive branch, it’s easy for the Legislative branch to make attacks on judges. Judges cannot stand up for themselves, they count on Bar Associations to stand up for them.

of our community, my Assistant Presiding Judge, Hardie is the first openly gay judge that will become our Presiding Judge when my term ends at the end of 2020. The bench is evenly divided between male and female, which it never was when I was appointed. We also have a healthy number of minorities on the bench which wasn’t the case in the past. All of that is good news, our bench is strong and hopefully will be able to maintain our independence despite it being under attack.

Lucido: Is there anything else you would like the readers of Contra Costa Lawyer to know?

James Wu is honored to serve as CCCBA President in 2018 and 2019.

James is thankful that both of his parents left their native country to start a better life in the United States.

Presiding Judge Baskin: I think we are a diverse community and immigrants form a part of a diverse community and I am also the first immigrant Presiding Judge here. I am proud of that. I think our bench these days reflects the diversity

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

9

FEATURE

Asylum Seekers Need Not Apply Current Challenges at the Southern Border

By Marco Garzon Historically, asylum has been one of the most powerful life-saving legal options for thousands of individuals facing harm in their countries of origin, from Second World War refugees escaping persecution at the hands of the Nazi regime, to individuals facing persecution due to political opinion in recent years.

Unfortunately, some of the current U.S. policies related to asylumseekers at the southern border severely undermine the purpose of asylum: to protect individuals from harm and undue threats they face in their countries of origin.

The U.S. government justifies some of the policies implemented at the southern border as necessary measures to solve a crisis that was created by an alleged increase in the influx of individuals at the border seeking protection. The government also seeks to prevent the entry of individuals whose only interest in coming to the U.S. is for economic gain or to abuse the asylum process.

Current U.S. policies at the southern border include limiting the number of cases allowed to be processed 10

SEPTEMBER 2019

at the border; forcing individuals to turn around and wait in a third country while their cases are processed; separating families at the time they present themselves at the border and processing the children separately from their parents; indiscriminate criminal prosecution of individuals crossing the border; and undue prolonged detentions while the asylum case is adjudicated. Further, the U.S. has been seeking the implementation of a safe third country agreement with central American countries, similar to an agreement already in place with Canada, in order to force individuals seeking asylum to apply for asylum in the country where they first set foot, and preventing them from applying in the U.S. An overview of the reasons presented by asylum seekers at the border can point us as to the real situation in the countries where asylum seekers come from. At the southern border, we encounter mostly applicants from Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua. Recurrent reasons for seeking

asylum are due to harm or threats at the hands of criminal organizations or gangs in their counties, victims of domestic violence or abuse fleeing from romantic partners, victims of religious persecution, and individuals facing persecution due to their sexual orientation. Many of these individuals have a genuine fear of returning to their countries and make the decision to leave to protect themselves and their families. As such, implementing measures to keep these asylum seekers away from U.S. soil and borders puts many of them in a dangerous situation, and perpetuates the harm they are fleeing from since the countries south of the U.S. border are plagued by the same dangerous conditions.

Mexico and Guatemala, the closest countries to our southern border, do not have the economic resources nor legal structure to adequately protect asylum seekers remaining in their territory and it is especially disturbing that citizens from those countries are themselves seeking asylum in the U.S. Concerns in the U.S. rest in the social and economic impact of having thousands of asylum seekers entering the U.S., but these apprehensions are not necessarily supported nor warranted. The U.S. counts as one of the most organized and capable immigration legal systems around the world, and has vast experience in dealing with asylum cases in particular. Although screening and strict evaluation of the asylum claims is necessary, the current measures taken at the southern border do not ensure a meaningful consideration of the claims, and it creates undue hardship on the applicants, while also eroding their due process.

Allowing asylum seekers the opportunity to have their claims adjudicated by asylums officers following the proper previously established procedure, would not only ensure due process but also a proper analysis and consideration of the claims.

Additionally, it would also allow

the people applying for asylum to ease the fear that they have endured within a soothing environment. Under proper previously established procedure, individuals waiting for adjudication of asylum claims are not detained under harsh and inhumane conditions; they have the opportunity to gather meaningful evidence to support the claim; they can count on finding the legal representation necessary to present their case in a plausible manner; they have the opportunity to obtain further review if the claim is not favorably adjudicated; and most importantly, they can remain in this country protected from harm. All these guarantees will vanish for the individuals currently subject to the new policies at the southern border.

Elder Law is

Therefore, it is necessary to follow the established legal proceedings under U.S. law, without the imposed measures at the border, to assure that applicants can have their cases heard as any other cases in the country. To impose further restrictions on them is eroding fairness and due process for those at the border, but eventually for anyone from any country who seeks protection from persecution in the United States.

Marco Garzon is a partner at the Argumedo Garzon Law Group in San Francisco, where he specializes in asylum and deportation defense cases. He has represented numerous clients in removal proceedings in immigration courts. He also sits on the board of directors of the CCCBA Immigration Section.

The average survival rate is eight years after being diagnosed with Alzheimer’s — some live as few as three years after diagnosis, while others live as long as 20. Most people with Alzheimer’s don’t die from the disease itself, but from pneumonia, a urinary tract infection or complications from a fall.

Until there’s a cure, people with the disease will need caregiving and legal advice. According to the Alzheimer’s Association, 10% of the population age 65 and older has Alzheimer’s disease. Of the 5.5 million people living in the U.S. with Alzheimer’s disease, the majority live at home — often receiving care from family members.

Protect your loved ones, home and independence, call elder law attorney

LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL J. YOUNG, INC.,

Alzheimer’s Planning

a Professional Law Corporation Estate Planning, Asset Protection, Medi-Cal, Long-term Care & VA Planning

925.256.0298 lawyoung1@gmail.com www.WalnutCreekElderLaw.com 1931 San Miguel Drive, Suite 220 Walnut Creek, California 94596

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

11

“First Republic puts my needs first — and that was a game-changer for me.”

C A N DAC E N E A L

Attorney, San Francisco

(855) 886-4824 | firstrepublic.com | New York Stock Exchange symbol: FRC MEMBER FDIC AND EQUAL HOUSING LENDER

12

SEPTEMBER 2019

FEATURE

The Importance of the Need for an Independent Immigration Court in Support of Due Process and the Rule of Law and its Volatile Impact in the Courtroom

By Erika Portillo

In recent years, the significant structural conflict of interest of our immigration court has become readily apparent. The U.S. Attorney General, a member of the administrative branch of our federal government, is responsible for overseeing both the judges who decide immigration matters, the Department of Homeland Security/ICE trial attorneys who are opposing counsel, and the Department of Justice attorneys responsible for litigating those very cases at the circuit court level. Our immigration courts should certainly be independent judicial courts, unburdened by the potential for political mischief in order to administer all immigration cases in a fair manner.

ment (ICE), the Attorney General supervises the Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL) which defends immigration cases on behalf of the government in the circuit courts of appeal. This inherent conflict of interest is made worse by the fact that immigration judges are considered merely government attorneys, a classification that fails to recognize the significance of their judicial duties and puts them at the whim of the Attorney General. The judges do not enjoy many of the protections of Article III federal judges, such as life-tenure. In fact, immigration judges have no fixed term of office and can be fired by the Attorney General or be relocated to another court at any time.1

The Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), which manages the Immigration Court and the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), is currently housed under the Department of Justice. While triallevel immigration prosecutors are housed under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) within Immigration and Customs Enforce-

As immigration lawyers we have seen how the office of the Attorney General is aggressively working to make these courts instruments of the administration’s immigration agenda. As part of his powers the Attorney General may overrule immigration Court and Board of

Continued on page 14 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

13

Independent Immigration Court Continued from page 13

Immigration Appeals decisions on his own initiative.

In the past, Attorneys General have used this “self-certification” authority sparingly: under the Obama Administration, for example, this power was only used four times throughout both terms.

By contrast, under this administration, the former Attorney General Jeff Sessions self-certified cases six times in less than two years and issued five decisions. In the Matter of A-B- 27 I&N Dec. 316 (A.G. 2018), Sessions unilaterally undermined longstanding asylum protections for victims of domestic violence and gang violence. He claimed the authority to overrule decisions not only of the Board of Immigra-

14

SEPTEMBER 2019

tion Appeals, but also of federal courts of appeals. In the Matter of Castro-Tum, 27 I&N Dec. 271 (A.G. 2018), Sessions suspended decades of immigration court practice by holding that immigration judges lack the power to administratively close cases. Administrative closure allowed immigration judges to take cases off their dockets, when the foreign national, for instance, had a pending application or petition with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services pending adjudication. The government had the availability to request the judge to put the matter back on calendar when deemed necessary. It was a tool that saved much needed resources for the courts and didn’t prejudice any party. Now, as a result of that ill-advised mandate, the courts are again inundated with cases.

Even though many new judges have been hired, their ability to hear cases

is limited. On October 1, 2018, then Attorney General Sessions subjected all immigration judges to individual case completion quotas and timebased deadlines as a basis for their performance reviews. Under the requirements judges must complete 700 removal cases in the next year or face discipline which may result in termination of employment.2 Judges are pressured to rush decisions to protect their own jobs, at the same time compromising the foreign national’s right to due process and a fair hearing. Many foreign nationals have their individual hearing (trial) without legal representation, as judges refuse to grant continuances trying to rush a decision.

The administration has also repeatedly attacked immigration lawyers undermining the foreign national’s right to counsel. The administration has referred to them as “dirty immigration lawyers”3 accusing attorneys of engaging in fraud.4 Federal

law guarantees noncitizens facing removal the right to counsel but not at the government’s expense.5 The Department of Justice also attempted to end the Legal Orientation Program (LOP), a program that provides a basic orientation for immigrants in deportation proceedings. After universal condemnation, DOJ rescinded its proposed termination of LOP. However, some of the newly hired judges in the San Francisco area have adopted the administration’s position by not allowing pro bono lawyers to assist the unrepresented at their hearings. Prior to that, Judges welcomed the Attorney of the Day Program, offered by the Bar Association of San Francisco, which saved them time and resources by allowing a lawyer to speak with unrepresented individuals before their hearings about their obligations with the Court, deadlines and possible relief.

Of great concern is the fact that

individuals with valid claims, who do not have resources, either because they are newcomers or are unemployed and do not have the ability to hire a lawyer, end up with removal orders.

As one can readily see, the immigration court system as it is can be easily manipulated. Currently our immigration courts are being transformed based on political views of the controlling party, rather than being a fair and neutral arbiter. The creation of an independent immigration court system outside the control of DOJ would protect and advance America’s core values of fairness and equality by safeguarding the independence and impartiality of the immigration court, in the form of an independent Article I court.

ACUÑA ❖ REGLI ❖ Estate Planning ❖ Administration ❖ Conservatorship ❖ Inheritance Litigation

Ana M. Allec Joins Acuña❖ Regli’s Estate Planning Practice 



Erika Portillo is an immigration attorney and partner at Guichard, Teng, Portillo & Garrett, with offices in Walnut Creek and San Francisco and is a frequent contributor to the Contra Costa Lawyer. She previously practiced criminal law as a prosecutor for the State of Morelos in Mexico. Erika is admitted to practice in the State of California, the U.S. District Court Northern District and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

1. ABA Commission on Immigration, Reforming the Immigration System, Proposals to Promote the Independence, Fairness, Efficiency, and Professionalism in the Adjudication of Removal Cases (2010) 2. Memorandum from James McHenry, Director, Executive Office for Immigration Review on Immigration Judge Performance Metrics to All Immigration Judges, (March 30, 2018), See also Department of Justice, Immigration Judge Performance Measures Overview, June 7, 2018 3. OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Attorney General Jeff Sessions Delivers Remarks to the Executive Office for Immigration Review, (Oct. 12, 2017) 4. OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Attorney General Sessions Delivers Remarks to the Largest Class of Immigration Judges in History for the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), (Sept. 10, 2017) 5. 8 U.S.C § 1362 (West 2018)

Ana M. Allec, formerly a Judicial Fellow for Judge Sugiyama in the Contra Costa County Superior Court Probate Department, has joined Acuña ❖ Regli’s estate planning practice. A native from Peru, Ana is fluent in Spanish and is eager to help our Spanishspeaking clients.

Our practice is strictly limited to estate planning; probate and trust administration; conservatorship and special needs planning; and, inheritance litigation.



Referral fees are paid according to State Bar of California guidelines.



Our offices are located in Pleasant Hill, Oakland, and Fairfield.

Thinking of

Conservatorships? think

Matt Toth as in:

3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 300 5315 College Avenue Oakland, CA 94618 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523

(925) 906-1880

www.AcunaRegli.com

609 Jefferson Street, Suite C Fairfield, CA 94533

ContactUs@AcunaRegli.com

Pedder, hesseltine, Walker & Toth, LLP oldest partnership in Contra Costa County (since 1955)

925.283-6816 • www.pedderlaw.com

3445 Golden Gate Way, Lafayette, CA 94549 AV Martindale-hubbell

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

15

FEATURE

Justice by Injunction?

Recent Court Decisions

By Liat Romick The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court have recently issued decisions in two cases that impact current immigration practices and controversial policies of the Trump administration. The government’s authority to return asylum applicants to the contiguous territory and the authority to reprogram funds allocated to the Department of Defense

by Congress will now be resolved by the judicial branch.

In Innovation Law Lab v. McAleenan1, the court granted a stay to the preliminary injunction issued by the lower court enjoining the federal government from implementing the Department of Homeland Security’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP). The MPP directs the return of asylum applicants who arrive from Mexico where they must wait for an immigration judge to decide the merits of their asylum claim.

Previously, the practice was to allow immigrants seeking asylum who passed an initial “credible fear interview” to be paroled or detained inside the United States while an immigration judge decided their asylum claims. The court explained that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is likely to succeed on the merits of the appeal because 16

SEPTEMBER 2019

the DHS most likely has a statutory basis to issue the MPP which does not violate the Administrative Procedure Act. After interpreting the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA), the court stated that the statute allows the government to return applicants placed in regular removal proceedings to the contiguous territory where they came from even after a positive credible fear interview until a decision is rendered on their asylum claim.

The dissenting judge disagreed with the court’s interpretation, explaining that the IIRIRA of 1996 does not permit the government to return an asylum seeker, one who has a positive credible fear interview and has been placed in removal proceedings, to the contiguous territory. The judge expressed his regret that such a decision was issued and stated that he is hopeful that the regular argument panel hearing the appeal will realize that the arguments put forth by the government are baseless and the MPP is an illegal policy that will require immigrants with valid claims of asylum to wait in Mexico for many years until their application is decided by an immigration judge.

This unfortunate decision will allow

the Trump administration to remove thousands of asylum seekers in a streamlined manner without the benefit of having a judge hear their claims. An immigration officer, acting as both prosecutor and judge, will now make the decision to return the applicant to the contiguous territory. Moreover, this practice will curtail asylum applicants’ ability and right to have representation by a competent attorney. The asylum seekers will be in a foreign country with a greater obstacle to retain a legal representative to guide them through the process of finding a safe haven, and ultimately legal status, in this country.

In Sierra Club v. Trump2, the federal court temporarily blocked the Trump administration’s attempts to reallocate billions of dollars from the Department of Defense (DoD) budget to build a wall in the southern border. President Trump, after only receiving $1.571 billion dollars of the $5.7 billion dollars he requested to build a steel wall, declared a national emergency at the southern border and said that his administration could secure additional resources to build the wall from other sources in the DoD budget.

Immediately after proclaiming the national emergency, the executive branch commenced to allocate

those funds to build the southern wall. The Sierra Club, along with Southern Border Communities Coalition, filed a lawsuit alleging that the President abused his executive powers by spending money in excess of what Congress specifically allocated for border security; by not complying with the National Environmental Policy Act; and by acting without authority to divert funds.

The Sierra Club and the Southern Border Communities Coalition filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, requesting the district court to enjoin the reprograming of funds to build a wall in certain areas of the southern border. The plaintiffs alleged that as a private party they have standing to enforce Congress’ appropriation power, and that the building of the wall will injure their members because of noise, visual blight, and negative ecological effects. Once building commences, the parties will suffer an irreparable harm. The government, on the other hand, reasoned that if the injunc-

tion is not stayed, the government is the one that will suffer irreparable harm, since the government has to finalize any contracts with builders

by September 30, 2019 before the funds are returned to the Treasury.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the injunction and the government filed an emergency appeal with the Supreme Court requesting that a stay be issued. On Friday July 26, 2019, the Supreme Court3, in a 5-4 decision, stayed the injunction and temporarily allowed President Trump to allocate 2.5 billion dollars from the Department of Defense budget to commence construction of the wall.

The Supreme Court’s principal rationale for staying the injunction is that the government has made a sufficient showing that the plaintiffs have no cause of action at this stage to request a review of the government’s reprogramming authority.

Now that the injunction has been stayed, President Trump may be able to start erecting 100 miles of steel wall along existing border fences.

While reactions in Congress may remain primarily along partisan lines, a greater concern may well be whether the doctrine of separation of powers is being undermined, and what that means for the future of this country.

1. Innovation Law Lab c. McAleenan, 924 F.3d 503 (9th Cir. 2019) 2. Sierra Club v. Trump, 2019 WL 2865491 – citation currently unavailable.

3. Trump v. Sierra Club, 588 U.S. _____ (2019) – citation currently unavailable.

Liat Romick is lead immigration attorney at the Walnut Creek branch of the Law Office of Peggy J. Bristol.

A U.S. citizen from Colombia, she is licensed to practice law in New York, Mississippi, Texas and California.

Bruce Hahn Specializing in Valuations for: • Estate & Gift Purposes • Family Law • Diminution in Market Value • Dispute Resolution

Bruce Hahn, MAI, SRA Real Estate Asset Analyst Real Estate Broker 01118298 Certified General Real Estate Appraiser AG004370

www.brucehahn.com

(925) 932-4044

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

17

FEATURE

Trump Administration Aims to End Parole In Place (PIP) Program and Deportation Protection for United States Armed Forces Family Members Without Legal Status

This photo, from the U.S. Marines photo archive shows U.S. Marine Corps Sgt. Gustavo A. Arroliga, a native of Nicaragua, and his wife and mother at his citizenship cermenony on November 25, 2014.

(U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Amber Williams/ Released) “The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.”

By Spojmie Nasiri Pursuant to Immigration and Nationality Act § 245(a), an individual who was “inspected, admitted or paroled” into the United States is eligible to file for adjustment of status to obtain legal status (the “green card”) if they are an immediate relative (spouse, parent or unmarried child) of a United States citizen. “Adjustment of status” means that the individual can receive their green card without having to depart the United States.

An individual who entered the United States unlawfully cannot apply for lawful permanent resident status from within the United States through this adjustment of status process. In these particular instances, the undocumented individual must return to their home country for “consular processing,” waiting outside the U.S. while the overseas consulate processes their application for a visa so that they can return to the United States and enter lawfully. Only then can they receive

their green cards. However, in these instances, an individual who has illegally overstayed in the United States for an extended period of time will trigger a three- to ten-year bar upon departure from the United States as a penalty for the initial unlawful entry to the United States.

This policy has been heavily criticized because it makes it extraordinarily difficult to adjust status in the United States after an unlawful presence and thus separates families for long periods of time. For members of the United States Armed Forces with family members, having no legal status and facing the possibility of being separated from loved ones for extended periods of time, these situations can create stress and anxiety that adversely affects their ability to serve in the United States Armed Forces.

On November 20, 2014, the Obama Administration through executive action, expanded the “Parole in

Place” (PIP) program for members of the United States Armed Forces and their spouse, children (under age 21) and parents to alleviate these hardships. The current legal authority for the Department of Homeland Security’s parole power is a provision within the Immigration and Nationality Act § 212(d)(5)(A) which permits the Attorney General, at his or her discretion, to “parole” any noncitizen into the United States “temporarily under such conditions as [she or] he may prescribe only on a case-by-case basis for urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public benefit.” Without the status of Parole in Place, many would have to depart the country and consular process, thus triggering the unlawful presence ground of inadmissibility.

PIP beneficiaries are “paroled” for the purposes of applying for lawful permanent status inside the United States pursuant to §245(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

Continued on page 20

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

19

Parole in Place Program Continued from page 19

More importantly, this extended PIP allows certain undocumented family members of the United States military personnel who are either on active duty or veterans the right to reside and work legally in the United States, as well as provide protection from deportation. The program was designed to alleviate the hardship for military families and ensure that spouses and other close family members will not be removed from the country while their husband, wife, adult child, or parent is deployed. PIP thus far has been one of the only viable options available to undocumented family members of the armed forces and is an important way to protect military families.

On June 27, 2019, according to an NPR report, the Trump administration announced plans to terminate the PIP program, thus putting at risk for deportation many family members of the military. I and other immigration attorneys across the country, who represent military families applying for PIP see this as a catastrophic move on the part of the Trump administration.

The repeal of the PIP program is part of the Trump administration attempt to block immigrants from obtaining legal status in the United States through their military service family member. Thousands of PIP applicants will potentially lose the opportunity to obtain legal status in the United States through their military family member who have dedicated their lives to serving our country. Carlos Luna, founder and president of a green card veteran chapter of the League of Latin American Citizens, told NPR that this is just the latest tactic in Trump’s “war against immigrants.” “There are less and less opportunities for these people serving the country and their veteran family to go through the ‘legal channels’ and stay here in the 20

SEPTEMBER 2019

country, which for many is the only place they’ve ever known,” he said.

Margaret Stock, also an immigration attorney who represents recruits and veterans in deportation proceedings stated,“What I’ve learned in the last week or so from multiple military and government attorneys is that the Trump administration plans to roll back the remaining militaryrelated immigration benefits.” I, along with other immigration practitioners, have been advising clients to file an application as soon as possible if they are eligible for PIP. It is no surprise the Trump administration has been making drastic changes to United States immigration policies and nor are his attacks on immigrants, asylum seekers, refugees and military families. It seems no group of immigrants is safe under this administration.

While we continue to see Trump’s cruel and unjust policies at the border as well as an increase in deportations and ICE raids, this administration’s desire to transform legal immigration is unprecedented.

As administration officials and conservative commentators have said, “deportations alone may not halt the demographic changes taking place in the country – so the administration is aggressively reshaping the legal immigration

system.” The PIP program is one of the tools this administration is using to limit immigrants from obtaining legal status in the United States.

While the administration has not officially announced an end date for the PIP program, sources suggest that it may be repealed imminently, putting thousands of undocumented military family members at risk. If the program is cancelled, immediate relatives of United States citizens or lawful permanent resident military members will not have any protection from deportation or a path toward gaining legal status in the future. Once the PIP program is terminated by the Trump administration, the focus will be on Congress to pass laws and provide protection for military members and their families.

Spojmie Nasiri is an immigration attorney in private practice with offices in Pleasanton. She is a member of the board of the CCCBA Immigration Section.

She received her BA degree in Political Science from UC Davis and her JD from Golden Gate University.

Spojmie is admitted to practice before the California Supreme Court and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Candice E. Stoddard Personal Injury Real Estate Litigation Trust and Estate Disputes Mediation

n

Law Offices of Candice E. Stoddard 1350 Treat Blvd., Suite 420 Walnut Creek, CA 94597

925.942.5100 • fax 925.933.3801 cstoddard@stoddardlaw.com Practicing law in the East Bay for over 30 years

CCCBA Wins

ABA Partnership Award The CCCBA was recently honored for it’s Diversity Award Checklist at the ABA National Conference of Bar Presidents meeting in San Francisco. Congratulations to the Diversity Committee. Check the CCCBA website to learn more about how your firm can be recognized for its diversity efforts!

http://www.cccba.org/attorney/assistance-services/diversitycommittee.php

Theresa Hurley, Reneé Welze Livingston, Mika Domingo and James Wu celebrate the honor in August.

YOUR ATTORNEY SHOULDN’T BE YOUR

PRIMARY BENEFICIARY Brillant Law can help you with probate, estate planning, trust and real estate litigation, as well as business and real estate law.

CALL TODAY AT 925.274.1400 | BRILLANTLAW.COM

Probate Estate Pla n ni ng Tr ust Lit igat ion Rea l Estate Lit igat ion Civ i l Lit igat ion Busi ness L aw Rea l Estate L aw

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

21

Out to Play with the CCCBA

The weather was warm and the CCCBA went out to play! The A’s Game on June 18 and Family Fun Day at Pleasant Hill Park on July 21.

22

SEPTEMBER 2019

Women’s Section Annual Luncheon On June 27, Judge Wendy Coats was the featured speaker at the Section’s annual luncheon at the beautiful Smith’s Landing restaurant in Antioch.

Clockwise from Top Left: Judge Coats joins the Womens Section Leaders: Brittany Hendix-Smith, Judge Wendy Coats, Rachel Leonard, Crystal Van Der Putten, Patanisha Davis Jenkins Emily Nashband and Brittany Hendrix-Smith Leslie P. Marks and Maria Valencia Ericka Mckenna and Reneè Welze Livingston Judge Wendy Coats, Joel Harris and James Wu David Erb, Anne Wolf and Nicole Mills CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

23

FEATURE

The End of ICE Detention at WCDF:

Blessing or Burden?

Cary Bass-Deschenes [CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)]

By Nienke Schouten Since at least 2009, Contra Costa

it was ending its contract with ICE.

County has contracted with ICE (Immi-

While ICE officials stated that they

gration and Customs Enforcement) to

had to relocate detained immigrants to

house detained immigrants at the West

other facilities, mostly outside of the

County Detention Facility.

By July

Bay Area, many immigration advocates

2018 West County was housing about

argued that detained immigrants who

200 immigrants per day, generating

posed no threat to community safety

about $3 million in annual revenue.

and were not flight risks could have just

Sheriff David Livingston was quoted

as easily been released on bond.

as saying that the contract was not sustainable over the long term, as operating costs were rising but the amount of federal reimbursement remained the same. The growing number of protests, particularly the June 2018 rally that drew an estimated 1,000 people to the WCDF parking lot to protest ICE detention, also had an impact. In July 2018 Contra Costa County announced 24

SEPTEMBER 2019

I have mixed feelings about the Contra Costa County Sheriff ending its contract with ICE last summer.

For years, Contra Costa County housed ICE detainees who were in removal proceedings at the West County Detention Facility. The county, I’m sure, benefited from this contract financially. ICE was able to easily transport these folks for in-person appearances at the San Francisco Immigration Court.

I represented dozens of these detainees in court. I strove to represent these detainees in the most compelling way possible – we talked about children who were born here, their decades-long lives in the United States, their fears of returning to war-torn countries, and oftentimes errors that they have committed.

The facility was professional and accessible. And the detainees were able to participate in educational programs. I used to tell my clients there that they were lucky in a way – most ICE facilities provide no programs and were hours away from their communities and lawyers.

Although there have always been anti-ICE protests outside the facility, the protests picked up in strength and numbers last summer.

And I also saw an uptick in federal

court lawsuits naming Sheriff David Livingston as a respondent. At the end of the day, I just don’t think it was worth it anymore for the county, at least financially, to continue its contract with ICE. The hundreds of ICE detainees left at the facility were promptly transferred to other ICE facilities. Dozens were flown to Tacoma, Washington, and Aurora, Colorado. The detainees were given little notice and most counsel were not notified at all.

There was a lot of stress and pandemonium. Court dates were vacated, and jurisdictions were transferred.

Several successful lawsuits were filed which forced ICE to bring back detainees to San Francisco’s jurisdiction.

Several of my West County clients who were transferred ended up in Aurora. I ended up flying out

twice to Aurora because the first time I received last-minute news my hearing would not go forward because my client was quarantined due to a chicken pox outbreak.

Since this outbreak, there have been more quarantines. Multiple clients told me about the lack of medical care and one client was released in crutches. Another was two weeks in the infirmary and had no access to the telephone for its duration.

It was also stressful to prepare cases over the telephone. Sometimes I wouldn’t get through, or my client was in a room full of people. It’s awkward talking about sensitive topics like past abuse or criminal history over the line, and frankly, this practice is re-traumatizing.

I would usually end up arriving early to hopefully meet my client in person right before the hearing.

I understand that protests are important in stopping the inhumane ICE practice of immigration detention. I respect these protestors and if I weren’t fighting ICE everyday behind my desk or in the courtroom, I would be there with them. But the practical result of the county’s decision to end its contract with ICE is that many locally-based immigrants now cannot adequately prepare their cases because they can’t stand the conditions elsewhere and are far from their families and counsel.

Nienke Schouten is a solo practitioner based in Pinole, California. She specializes in detention issues, removal defense, appeals, and district court litigation.

She is a graduate of UC Davis School of Law, after completing a Bachelor’s Degree at UC Berkeley, and a Master’s at the University of Amsterdam. Nienke wrote her Master’s thesis on the militarization of the U.S./Mexico border.

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

25

SPOTLIGHT Securing Safety for Low-Income Immigrant Survivors in Contra Costa County: A Holistic Approach

By Juliana Morgan-Trostle, Esq., and Mélody Saint-Saëns, Esq.

Silvia,* a 26-year-old undocumented woman, walked into West County Health Center with a broken nose and two black eyes, her toddler trailing closely behind her. She was seven months pregnant, and her boyfriend had just hit her – again.

This time, Silvia called the police and he was arrested, but she was afraid that he would return upon his release. Silvia’s doctor treated her injuries and referred her to the on-site Medical-Legal Partnership attorney, who helped her obtain a domestic violence restraining order, maintain her housing, apply for a U visa for crime victims and qualify for public benefits, including fullscope Medi-Cal. Today, Silvia is receiving therapy and healing from the abuse she endured.

Every year, Bay Area Legal Aid provides free legal services to roughly 10,000 low-income individuals, many of whom are immigrants and survivors of interpersonal violence like Silvia. Our mission across our six offices is to provide 26

SEPTEMBER 2019

meaningful access to the civil justice system through quality legal assistance regardless of a client’s location, language or disability. Bay Area Legal Aid assists people who live in households with annual incomes at or below 125% of the federal poverty guidelines – a figure that in 2019 amounted to $15,613 for an individual and $32,188 for a family of four. Last year, our Legal Advice Line, Health Consumer Center, attorneys, advocates and volunteers helped more than 2,165 individuals and their families living in Contra Costa County with matters relating to family law, immigration relief, housing preservation, public benefits, consumer law, and health access. About 19 percent of these clients were noncitizens. In addition, our staff and volunteers prepared restraining order paperwork for 587 self-represented litigants, regardless of their legal status, at our three domestic violence restraining order clinics throughout Contra Costa County.

Many of our clients live in mixedstatus families. Our immigrant client population is diverse and encompasses lawful permanent residents, asylee- and refugee-status holders, naturalized citizens and undocumented survivors of interpersonal violence. The latter includes survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking and child abuse. Immigrant survivors come to Bay Area Legal Aid with a myriad of legal issues. Our clients may need help getting a restraining order against their abuser; representation in family law matters, such as custody, support, divorce, or establishing parentage; securing or preserving their immigration status; obtaining and maintaining public benefits and health access; and retaining their housing, among other legal needs. Each survivor’s situation differs and their needs often change over time. Our attorneys guide our clients through civil courts and state and federal administrative agencies, while providing them with wraparound services

Bay Area Legal Aid (BayLegal) ensures

to maximize their personal safety, stabilize their family and achieve economic security.

Obtaining immigration relief is critical to ensuring the safety of immigrant survivors. Congress created special immigration remedies with the explicit intent of protecting victims of interpersonal violence and reducing their reliance on abusers. The mere act of applying for immigration relief can result in survivors’ immediate eligibility for certain public benefits to meet their basic needs, such as food and shelter, and access to health care coverage to help them heal from the trauma they endured.

Once granted, immigration remedies stabilize families by making it possible for our clients to remain with their United States citizen children, and, in some cases, bring their family members from abroad.

Our clients are often able to obtain authorization to work lawfully in this country so as to reduce the likelihood of further exploitation.

Our immigration advocacy consists primarily of representation before United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. We help with Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) self-petitions for spouses of abusive United States citizens and lawful permanent residents; I-751 waivers for abused spouses to self-petition for the removal of conditions on their two-year green card and obtain their ten-year lawful permanent resident card; U Nonimmigrant Status applications (“U visas”) for survivors who have suffered substantial physical or mental abuse and who were helpful in the investigation or prosecution of the criminal activity of which they were a victim; T Nonimmigrant Status applications (“T visas”) for survivors of labor and sex trafficking; Special Immigrant Juvenile Status petitions for abused, unmarried young people; and related

fairness in the civil justice system for the most vulnerable members of our community.

Clients include the working poor, families with children, foster youth, seniors, immigrants, veterans, and persons with disabilities.

Through its regional county offices, mobile advocacy clinics, and its nationally-recognized Legal Advice Line, BayLegal prevents domestic violence and sexual assault, increases economic stability, protects consumers, expands access to healthcare, and prevents homelessness. For clients, BayLegal makes the difference between staying in poverty and thriving toward a brighter future.

How you can help:

There are pro bono opportunities to match all skills, interests, and availability: • Co-counsel – with BayLegal in high impact and affirmative litigation.

• Accept a Case for Representation – with BayLegal training and mentorship or within your specialty or experience (full-scope and limited scope opportunities available).

• Volunteer in a Clinic: Domestic Violence Restraining Order (DVRO) or Consumer Rights. BayLegal conducts DVRO Clinics in San Mateo and Contra Costa Counties, and Consumer Rights (Consumer Law) Clinics in San Francisco, Alameda, Contra Costa, Napa, and San Mateo Counties.

• Research/Investigation – assist with research, drafting, and investigation of systemic legal issues facing the indigent.

• Financial Support – your contribution builds BayLegal’s capacity to help more clients.

Opportunities are available throughout the year and throughout the Bay Area. Please contact ProBono@BayLegal. org to get involved!

Continued on page 28 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

27

Spotlight: Securing Safety for Immigrant Survivors Continued from page 27

applications for fee waivers and work authorization. Our attorneys and advocates continue to work with immigrant clients to help them adjust their status to become lawful permanent residents and eventually become United States citizens.

We also aid survivors in requesting replacement green cards and work authorizations stolen or destroyed by their abuser or trafficker.

Providing holistic services to immigrant survivors entails working in close partnership with other organizations and agencies, such as the Family Justice Center (“FJC”). The navigators at the FJC connect our immigrant clients to advocates for safety planning, counseling, shelter, and court accompaniment for emotional support at hearings; to Victim Witness Advocates for help in applying for victim’s compensation; and to volunteer doctors who offer free medical care. In turn, Bay Area Legal Aid attorneys conduct intakes and client meetings onsite, help train staff and community partners through the Family Justice Institute and participate in the multi-disciplinary teams on the prevention of domestic violence and human trafficking hosted by the FJC to address systemic issues.

Bay Area Legal Aid also collaborates with the private bar in advocating for immigrant survivors. Volunteer attorneys represent immigrant clients and their families in their U visas, VAWA self-petitions, and related adjustment of status cases, with technical and strategic support from Bay Area Legal Aid’s immigration experts. Bay Area Legal Aid’s Medical-Legal Partnership (“MLP”) at West County Health Center is another partnership with the private bar where the MLP attorney is an Equal Justice Works Fellow sponsored by Greenberg Traurig, 28

SEPTEMBER 2019

LLP. MLPs integrate healthcare and legal services to improve the social determinants of health. Rather than relying on patients to navigate complex referral networks, MLPs meet patients where they are and leverage the trusting relationships that patients already have with their doctors.

The West County Health Center in San Pablo, where the MLP is located, serves a particularly high-

need population: more than threequarters of its patients are eligible for Medi-Cal because they are extremely low-income. The MLP provides Spanish-speaking survivors of interpersonal violence like Silvia with free civil legal services to improve their health and well-being.

In less than two years, it has assisted more than 200 low-income patients with legal needs in the areas of immigration, family law, housing, consumer law and benefits.

Mediator Business Litigation & dissoLutions reaL estate & ConstruCtion defeCt aCtions PersonaL injury / tort aCtions ProfessionaL LiaBiLity eMPLoyMent z insuranCe 505 Montgomery St., 11th Floor | San Francisco, CA 94111 www.windsor-plc.com | Tel: 415.874.3800 Mediation and sPeCiaL Master serviCes in CaLifornia & Hawaii

Consider the story of Yesica,* a new mom whose request for emergency food stamps was erroneously denied. She and her newborn were hungry, and her breast milk was drying up due to stress and malnutrition. After the MLP attorney called the CalFresh office, Yesica’s benefits were approved the next day.

Elizabeth,* an undocumented pregnant woman seeking a divorce from her abuser, met with the MLP lawyer to sign the petition for dissolution while she waited in the exam room for a prenatal appointment.

could talk to a lawyer, in Spanish, for free, if my doctor hadn’t told me.”

Every day, our immigrant clients awe us with their resiliency. Their courage and steadfastness inspire us to advocate for them, in tandem with partner agencies, the private bar, and the medical community, and to help them stand up for their rights and dignity. To learn more about Bay Area Legal Aid and to get involved in our work, visit https:// baylegal.org/get-involved/.

Neylin,* who is undergoing treatment for cancer, said it best: “I spend my life traveling in a triangle: From my home, to the supermarket, to my health center. I never would have known that I

*Names changed to protect client confidentiality.

Juliana MorganTrostle is an Equal Justice Works Fellow in Bay Area

Legal Aid’s Contra Costa County regional office, where she established the MedicalLegal Partnership at West County Health Center.

Mélody SaintSaëns is Immigration Regional Counsel at Bay Area Legal Aid, where she oversees the immigration practice and provides technical assistance and mentorship to staff and volunteers.

They are both licensed to practice law in California.

h

Depositions – Court Trials, Motions, Hearings – Arbitrations – Statements/EUOs – AudioTranscriptions –Mediations

h

Video & Interpreted Depositions

h

Realtime / LiveNote Reporting

h

Video Depositions

h

Interpreters

h

Online Scheduling of Depositions

h

Complimentary Deposition Suites, Wifi and Parking

h

Document Depository

h

Subpoena for Production of Business Records Preparation and Service

h

Complete Document Copying Service (on-site and off-site)

Fax 925-685-3829

h

Scanning (on-site and off-site), Bates Stamping

“Yes, we can. No problem!”

h

Briefs – Copying, Binding & Filing

h

Online Requests - Transcripts, Depository Documents, Subpoena Preparation, Authorizations

Certified Shorthand Reporters Independently Owned and Operated

Serving the Entire Bay Area since 1958 Contra Costa, Solano, Alameda & San Francisco Counties 2321 Stanwell Drive Concord, CA 94520-4808 email: Contact@ZandonellaZRS.com www.ZandonellaZRS.com

925-685-6222 -John A. Zandonella

Just 1/4 mile from Buchanan Airport and near BART. JuST CAll AnD We Will PiCk you uP!

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

29

Immigration Acronyms Here are some commonly-used immigration acronyms.

DHS ����������� Department of Homeland Security ICE ������������� Immigration and Customs Enforcement, a branch of DHS (inside the U.S.)

CBP ����������� Customs and Border Patrol, a branch of DHS (at the border) OCC ����������� Office of Chief Counsel, a branch of DHS AO ������������� Asylum Office (or Asylum Officer), a branch of DHS USCIS ������� United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, a branch of DHS

DOJ ����������� Department of Justice EOIR ��������� Executive Office for Immigration Review (immigration courts), a branch of DOJ

BIA ������������� Board of Immigration Appeals, a branch of DOJ IJ ����������������� Immigration Judge NTA ����������� Notice to Appear (the charging document that initiates removal proceedings in immigration court)

MCH ����������� Master Calendar Hearing (preliminary hearings before an IJ) EWI ����������� Entered Without Inspection (immigrant who entered the U.S. unlawfully)

USC ����������� United States Citizen LPR ����������� Lawful Permanent Resident (someone who has a green card) UAC ����������� Unaccompanied Alien Child (immigration advocates prefer UC, unaccompanied child)

U VISA ����� Humanitarian crimes

form of relief for immigrant victims of serious

T VISA ������� Humanitarian form of relief for immigrant trafficking victims SIJS ����������� Special Immigrant Juvenile Status, another humanitarian form of relief

CFI ������������� Credible Fear Interview, conducted by asylum officers in cities and at ports of entry

RFI ������������� Reasonable Fear Interview, conducted by asylum officers after more than one unlawful entry

ORR ����������� Office of Refugee Resettlement, responsible for shelters for UCs, part of HHS

VAWA ������� Violence Against

Women Act, humanitarian relief for abused spouses, parents or children of USCs or LPRs

30

SEPTEMBER 2019

gratefully acknowledges its

2018-19 SUSTAINING LAW FIRMS Firms with 20+ attorneys: Bowles & Verna, LLP Littler Mendelson, PC McNamara, Ney, Beatty, Slattery, Borges & Ambacher, LLP Miller Starr Regalia

Firms with 15-19 attorneys: Brothers Smith, LLP Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci

Firms with 5-14 attorneys: Barr & Young Attorneys

Brown, Gee & Wenger, LLP

Casper, Meadows, Schwartz & Cook

Clapp Moroney Vucinich Beeman Scheley Craddick, Candland & Conti

Doyle Quane Freeman Family Law Group Edrington, Schirmer & Murphy Ferber Law, APC

Galloway, Lucchese, Everson & Picchi

Gillin, Jacobson, Ellis, Larsen & Lucey

Greenan, Peffer, Sallander & Lally, LLP Hartog Baer & Hand, APC

Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton Livingston Law Firm, PC Morison & Prough, LLP Morrill Law Firm

Whiting, Fallon, Ross & Abel, LLP

What Is a Sustaining Law Firm?

To qualify as a Sustaining Law Firm of the Contra Costa County Bar Association, law firms must have a minimum of five Contra Costa-based attorneys and maintain current CCCBA membership for all attorneys practicing under the same firm name.

CCCBA recognizes its sustaining law firms in the following ways: • Recognition in the CCCBA website, in the Contra Costa Lawyer magazine, and in the CCCBA Membership Directory • Displays at the CCCBA office in Concord and at all CCCBA sponsored events For more information, contact Jennifer Comages, CCCBA Membership Director at (925) 370-2543 or jcomages@cccba.org.

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

31

Event Benefactor

PROUDLY PRESENTS

25th Annual

MCLE Spectacular!

Friday, November 22, 2019

8:00 am – 5:00 pm Walnut Creek Marriott | 2355 N. Main Street Registration begins September 10 | Early Bird Pricing through October 15

Breakfast Kickoff Speaker

JAMS

Event Partners

HAnSon Bridgett LLP Event Patrons

ADR Services, Inc. Home Care Assistance

Justice Mark Simons

Event Partners

Scrambled Eggs with a Side of Evidence

CLIO

First District Court of Appeal, Div. 5

DLC Consulting Services, LLC Family Law Software

Luncheon Keynote Speaker

Erwin Chemerinsky Dean UC Berkeley School of Law

Current Events in Constitutional Law

John F. Kennedy University College of Law Mass Mutual of Northern California Spencer Legal Investigations, Inc.

Afternoon Plenary Speaker

Tirien Steinbach

For Sponsorship Opportunities Contact Anne K. Wolf (925) 370-2540, awolf@cccba.org

Chief Program Officer of the ACLU of Northern California

Just Belonging: Advancing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in the Legal Profession

Plus 6 morning and 7 afternoon breakout sessions to choose from.

COC

Back by Popular Demand

N TIO

AIL RECEP KT

Cocktail Reception, 5:15 to 6:30 pm Hosted by

Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP

32

SEPTEMBER 2019

Earn up to 8 MCLE Credits InCLudIng thE hard-to-gEt onEs!

Parking Sponsor

Thank you to JUDICATE WEST for covering the cost of parking for the Full-Day Package at the Walnut Creek Marriott this year.

The August Issue of Contra Costa Lawyer – Here’s What You Missed in the

85th Anniversary of the CCCBA Issue Thank you to Perry Novak, Guest Editor

Find it online at www.contracostalawyer.cccba.org

Features: • Contra Costa COMMUNUTY Bar Association,

by Nicole Mills • CCCBA’s Tradition of Pro Bono Community Service, by Theresa Hurley • CCCBA History, by Peter Mankin • Women Attorneys and Judges in Contra Costa County Over the Past 85 Years – We’ve Come A Long Way, Baby, by Lorraine M. Walsh, • 1934, by David Arietta • Forty Years and Still Smiling, an interview with Jennifer Comages, by Carole Lucido

Columns: • Inside: Think You Know All that the CCCBA Does? You’ll Be Surprised!, by Perry Novak, Guest Editor • From the President: Theresa Hurley, Guiding the CCCBA to Greater Heights, by James Wu, CCCBA President

Events • Judges Night • Second Annual Diversity Networking Mixer with Minority Bar Associations • BAR FUND Benefit

• Coffee Talk: Memories of the Bar

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

33

Searching for New Business?

Join the Lawyer Referral & Information Service Grow your practice with the CCCBA’s LRIS. We schedule over 5,500 client consultations with paying clients every year. We have immediate need for attorneys: • Who specialize in Tenant Rights or Juvenile Dependency • Spanish Speaking Attorneys (all specialties) • Moderate Means Attorneys Contact Barbara Arsedo, CCCBA LRIS Director at (925) 370-2544 barsedo@cccba or visit www.cccba.org/attorney/lawyer-referral-network.

Classifieds Probate paralegal to attorneys Joanne C. McCarthy, 3000F Danville Blvd., #257, Alamo, CA 94507 Call (925) 689-9244.

SPACE AVAILABLE IN WALNUT CREEK (SHADELANDS) Two single, furnished windowed offices; ground floor law office in Shadelands area, Walnut Creek, $850 & $1000/month.

Amenities Available: • Access to law library, conference room, copier • Small kitchen • Free parking Call Howard at (925) 932-0417.

CONFERENCE ROOM AVAILABLE CCCBA members receive a discount on renting the conference room at the CCCBA office in Concord. Rent by the hour or by the day for client meetings, negotiations or other small group sessions. Convenient location near Concord BART. For information contact Barbara Arsedo at (925) 370-2544 or barsedo@cccba.org.

notary service

Advertiser Index Acuna Regli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Lenczowski Law Offices . . . . . . . . . . . 6

ADR Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Morrill Law Firm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Barr & Young Attorneys . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Novak Wealth Management . . . . . . . . 2

Brillant Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Pedder, Hesseltine, Walker & Toth, LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6, 15, 28

Diablo Valley Reporting Services . . . 40 First Republic Bank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Bruce Hahn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 LawPay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Law Offices of Oliver Bray . . . . . . . . 17

34

SEPTEMBER 2019

Candice Stoddard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Jeffrey R. Windsor, Mediator . . . . . . 28 Michael J. Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Zandonella Reporting Service . . . . . 29

CCCBA members are eligible for free notary service at the CCCBA office in Concord.

Contact Carole Lucido at (925) 370-2542 or clucido@cccba.org for an appointment.

Calendar

Upcoming Events | Overview September 10

| CCCBA Diversity Committee

CCCBA Diversity Networking Mixer with Minority Bar Associations more details on page 36

September 17

| Elder Law Section

Elderly Evictions: The Trials & Tribulations When an Elder Must Act as a Landlord

October 15

| ADR Section

ADR Section Annual Dinner & Meeting: How to Calm an Angry Person in 90 Seconds more details on page 37

October 17 | Women’s Section Women’s Section Annual Awards Dinner 2019 more details on page 37

more details on page 36

September 18

| Employment & Litigation Sections

Spotting Employment Issues for the Non-Employment Attorney more details on page 36

September 20 | Real Estate Section Anatomy of a Title Exception – Negotiating Policy Coverages with the Title Insurer for Your Client more details on page 36

September 26

| CCCBA

2019 BAR FUND Benefit

more details on pages 36 and 39

September 27

| ADR Section

Mediation Boot Camp

more details on page 37

October 1

| Employment Law Section

Recent Developments in LGBTQ Employment Discrimination Law more details on page 37

October 4

| CCCBA, Criminal Law & East County Sections

Criminal Q & A – Bench/Bar Lunch 2019 – Pittsburg more details on page 37

October 18

| Real Estate Section

Opportunity Zone and Deferred Taxes in Real Property Investments more details on page 37

October 22

| CCC Superior Court

Why You Should Care About Keeping Courts Fair – A Forum on Judicial Independence more details on page 38

October 24

| Elder Law Section

Understanding the Entire Spectrum of the Aging Process to Better Connect and Serve Your Clients more details on page 38

October 24

| CCCBA

Happy Hour Gathering in Danville more details on page 38

November 22

| CCCBA

25th Annual MCLE Spectacular more details on pages 32 and 38

December 19

| CCCBA

CCCBA Annual Holiday Party more details on page 38

The Contra Costa County Bar Association certifies that the MCLE activities listed on page 35-38 have been approved for the specific MCLE credit indicated, by the State Bar of California, Provider #393.

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

35

September 10 | CCCBA Diveristy Committee

Law September 17 | Elder Section

2nd Annual CCCBA Diversity Networking Mixer with Minority Bar Associations

Elderly Evictions: The Trials & Tribulations When an Elder Must Act as a Landlord

Come learn more about the different minority bar associations in the Bay Area, network and build new connections!

Representatives from different organizations will speak about their organizations, upcoming events and networking opportunities.

Speaker: Samantha Sepehr The discussion will focus on eviction issues when elders are involved. Specifically Ms. Sepehr will look at elders in their capacity as landlords and what rights and options they have and when they should use such options. Lunch is included.

Join the CCCBA and a variety of Minority Bar Coalition organizations for free heavy appetizers and drinks. This event is open to all CCCBA members and guests.

Event Sponsor

JAMS

Time: 5:00 pm – 7:30 pm Location: JAMS, 1255 Treat Blvd., First Floor Conference Room, Walnut Creek Cost: Free, courtesy of our sponsors RSVP: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Theresa Hurley at (925) 370-2548 or thurley@cccba.org

Location: CCCBA Building Conference Room, 2300 Clayton Rd., First Floor, Concord MCLE:

1 hr. General

Cost: $10 Elder Law Section members, $5 Law Student Section members, $15 CCCBA members, $20 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

September 18 | Employment & Litigation

Estate September 20 | Real Section

September 26 | CCCBA

Spotting Employment Issues for the Non-Employment Attorney

Anatomy of a Title Exception – Negotiating Policy Coverages with the Title Insurer for Your Client

2019 BAR FUND Benefit

Title Expert Douglas Borchert will go over what led to the so-called Gion-Dietz exception and will give a general explanation of the most effective way of negotiating needed coverages with a title insurer.

For the past 30 years, Contra Costa County Bar Association’s BAR FUND has been proudly raising awareness of the need for pro bono legal services and assistance for low income members of our community. Each year, CCCBA members come together to learn about and support a worthy group. This year we will be fundraising for the Center for Youth Development through Law.

Time: 7:30 am – 9:00 am

Time: 5:00 pm – 7:30 pm

Location: Scott’s Seafood, 1333 N. California Blvd., Walnut Creek

Location: Lafayette Veteran’s Memorial Center, 3780 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Lafayette

Time: Noon – 1:30 pm

MCLE: 1 hr. General

Location: Scott’s Seafood, 1333 N. California Blvd., Walnut Creek

Cost: Free for Real Estate Section members; $30 CCCBA members, $40 non members

Cost: $45 for non-profit member attorneys, Barristers and Law Student Section members, $75 other CCCBA members and non members

Speaker: Yen P. Chau, Esq. This program is designed to assist attorneys understand and identify potential wage and hour and employment issues for their clients.

A brief overview of the most common employment issues in practice areas such as business, commercial litigation, franchise, immigration, real estate, construction and intellectual property will be presented. Both employee and management perspectives will be reviewed.

Speaker: Doug Borchert, Esq.

MCLE:

1 hr. General

Cost: $40 Judges and members of the Employment Sections, $30 Law Student Section members, $45 CCCBA members, $55 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar 36

Sponsors Cooper, White & Cooper M.S. Domingo Law Washington & Associates Law Offices of Jim W. Yu

Time: Noon – 1:30 pm

SEPTEMBER 2019

Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

RSVP: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

September 27 | ADR Section

Law October 1 | Employment Section

CCCBA, Criminal Law & October 4 | East County Sections

Mediation Boot Camp

Recent Developments in LGBTQ Employment Discrimination Law

Criminal Q & A - Bench/Bar Lunch 2019 - PITTSBURG

Speakers: David Nahmias, Esq.

Lindsay Nako, Esq.

Speakers:

Speakers: Benisa Berry, Matthew Collis, Margaret Grover, Robert Jacobs, Palvir Shoker, Lauren Tate, Alexander van Broek This is a 4 hour “boot camp” of ADR MCLE designed to satisfy the requirements of the Contra Costa County Superior Court ADR Panel. There will be three sections – each meeting one of the specific requirements of the Superior Court Panel Membership. Remember, this is an ongoing requirement, so everyone must replenish these credits every three years. Lunch is included.

Time: Noon – 4:30 pm Location: CCCBA Building Conference Room, 2300 Clayton Rd., First Floor, Concord

This training will describe the current state of federal and California law protecting LGBTQ workers and workers with HIV/AIDS. In order to better advise their clients, attorneys will learn how to recognize and eliminate explicit and implicit biases that harm LGBTQ people in the workplace, including inappropriate name and pronoun usage, unlawful invasions of privacy, and lack of access to gender-consistent facilities.

Lunch is included.

Time: 11:45 am – 1:15 pm

MCLE: 1 hr. Elimination of Bias, 2 hrs.

General, 1 hr. Legal Ethics

Location: CCCBA Building Conference Room, 2300 Clayton Rd., First Floor, Concord

Cost: $40 ADR Section members, $55 CCCBA members, $65 non members

MCLE:

Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar

1 hr. Elimination of Bias

Cost: $15 Employment Section members, $15 CCCBA members, $25 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar

Judge Wendy McGuire Coats Judge Lewis Davis Judge Judy Johnson Judge Leonard E. Marquez Judge Mary Ann O’Malley

Attend a meeting with Criminal Division Supervising Judge Mary O’Malley and the other Pittsburg Criminal judges to discuss issues of general interest or concern.

Lunch is included.

Time: Noon - 1:30 pm Location: CCC Superior Court, 1000 Center Drive, Dept. 4. Pittsburg MCLE:

1 hr. General

Cost: $15 CCCBA members, $20 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

October 15 | ADR Section

October 17 | Women’s Section

October 18 | Real Estate Section

ADR Section Annual Dinner and Meeting: How to Calm an Angry Person in 90 Seconds

Women’s Section Annual Awards Dinner 2019

Opportunity Zone and Deferred Taxes in Real Property Investments

Speaker: TBD

Speaker: Kevin Wilson, C.P.A.

Speaker: Doug Noll, Esq.

Please join CCCBA Women’s section for this very special evening as we honor the 2019 recipient(s) of the Honorable Patricia Herron and the Honorable Ellen James Scholarship, and present the 2nd Annual Women’s Section Outstanding Woman Lawyer Award (OWL).

This month’s presentation will discuss the potential benefits to investors from deferral of taxes through properties or businesses located in opportunity zones.

6:00-6:30 pm - Registration and cocktails 6:30 pm - Dinner begins 7:00-8:15 pm - Introductory remarks and presentation by Doug Noll, who will teach us how to calm and angry person quickly and efficiently with his innovative and counterintuitive listening skills.

Time: 6:00 pm - 8:15 pm Location: Zio Fraedo’s, 611 Gregory Lane, Pleasant Hill MCLE:

1 hr. General

Cost: $40 ADR Section members, $35 Barristers Section members, $50 CCCBA members, $60 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar

Time: 5:30 pm – 8:30 pm Location: Scott’s Seafood, 1333 N. California Blvd., Walnut Creek MCLE: TBD Cost: $50 for Judges and members of the Women’s or Barrister’s Sections, $55 CCCBA members, $65 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar

Time: 7:30 am – 9:00 am Location: Scott’s Seafood, 1333 N. California Blvd., Walnut Creek MCLE:

1 hr. General

Cost: Free for members of the Real Estate section, $25 CCCBA members, $40 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION CONTRA COSTA LAWYER

37

October 22 | CCC Superior Court

October 24 | Elder Law Section

October 24 | CCCBA

Why You Should Care About Keeping Courts Fair – A Forum on Judicial Independence

Understanding the Entire Spectrum of the Aging Process to Better Connect and Serve Your Clients

Happy Hour Gathering in Danville

The evening will consist of a PowerPoint presentation with some discussion, followed by an interactive courtroom dispute. Sponsored by the Contra Costa County Superior Court and the Judicial Fairness Coalition of the California Judges Association.

Speakers: Douglas Housman

Jan D. Somers—MSW, LCSW, BCD

Time: 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm Location: John F. Kennedy University College of Law, 100 Ellinwood Way, Room S304, Pleasant Hill Cost: Free and open to the public More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

The presentation will include the medical/physical/emotional/social/familial and environmental factors that occur during the aging process, including normal vs. abnormal aging and dementia. The speakers will highlight examples of interventions to mitigate family squabbles, reduce excessive phone calls and generally protect your your clients’ overall well being. Lunch is included.

Join us for our last casual, no-host happy hour of the year, where CCCBA board members and section leaders gather together with CCCBA members in a relaxed setting to socialize.

Don’t expect anything formal like name tags or check-in tables. Instead come when you can, grab a beverage, and find us on the patio or in the bar area. A gathering of the CCCBA, big or small, is typically hard to miss.

We can’t wait to see you.

Time: 4:30 pm – 7:00 pm

Time: Noon – 1:30 pm

Location: The Vine and Spirits, 480 Hartz Ave., Danville

Location: CCCBA Building Conference Room, 2300 Clayton Rd., First Floor, Concord

More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

MCLE: 1 hr. General Cost: $10 Elder Law Section members; $5 Law Student members, $15 CCCBA members, $20 non members Register: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar

November 22 | CCCBA

December 19 | CCCBA

25th Annual

CCCBA Annual Holiday Party

MCLE Spectacular

BREAKFAST KICKOFF Speaker : Justice Mark Simons, First District Court of Appeal, Div. 5 LUNCHEON KEYNOTE Speaker: Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean UC Berkeley School of Law Afternoon PLENARY Speaker: Tiren Steinbach, Chief Program Officer, ACLU of Northern California Location: Walnut Creek Marriott Hotel Sponsorship Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org See page 32 for details.

38

SEPTEMBER 2019

Thank You to Our SPONSORS: Event Benefactor: JAMS Event Presenters: Hanson Bridgett LLP Event Patrons: ADR Services, Inc. | Home Care Assistance Event Partners: CLIO | DLC Consulting Services, LLC | Family Law Software | John F. Kennedy University College of Law | Mass Mutual of Northern California | Spencer Legal Investigations, Inc. Event Reception Sponsor: Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP Parking Sponsor: Judicate West

Join us to celebrate the holiday season! Enjoy festive hors d’oeuvres and drinks with your CCCBA colleagues. Please bring one nonperishable food item (or more) for donation to the Contra Costa Food Bank and/or toys for donation to the 27th Annual Toy Drive for homeless children, sponsored by the Juvenile Section of the CCCBA. Time: 5:00 pm – 7:30 pm Location: CCCBA Building Conference Room, 2300 Clayton Rd., Concord, First Floor RSVP: Online at www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar More Info: Contact Anne K. Wolf at (925) 370-2540 or awolf@cccba.org

proudly presents:

Bar Fund Benefit in support of

Inspiring Youth Through Law Thank you to our sponsors

“...Everyone from the Program inspired me and changed my mind for college!”

“Honestly, now I feel I am capable of pursuing a career no matter how hard it gets.”

“This program opened my mind to new things and new ideas.”

Platinum

Hartog, Baer & Hand APC CCCBA’s Estate Planning & Probate Section GOLD

Acuña Regli Brothers Smith Casper Meadows Schwartz & Cook silver ADR Services, Inc. Bramson Plutzik Mahler & Birkhaeuser Brown Gee & Wenger Budde Law Group Clapp Moroney Vucinich Beeman Scheley Evan R. Cox Donahue Fitzgerald Ferber Law

Gagen, McCoy, McMahon, Koss, Markowitz & Fanucci Horner Law Group Horvitz & Levy JAMS Littler Mendelson McNamara, Ney, Beatty, Slattery, Borges & Ambacher LLP Miller Starr Regalia

Mullin Law Firm David Ratner Law Firm CCCBA’s Real Estate Section Robert Half Legal Santaella Jahangiri LLP Whiting Fallon Ross & Abel The Hon. Danielle Douglas -andThe Hon. Joni Hiramoto

Other Section Sponsors ADR Appellate Criminal Elder Law

Employment Family Immigration Intellectual Property

Juvenile Solo Women’s

In Kind SpONSorS Cybercopy (programs and posters) Alicia Jaramillo, Independent Ambassador, Boiset Wine Collection

Thursday, September 26, 2019

Lafayette Veterans Memorial Center | 5 - 7:30 pm 3780 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Lafayette Learn about the important work the Center for Youth Development through Law does as you mix and mingle with CCCBA colleagues, judges and agency representatives, including those who have benefitted from CYDL programs.

Enjoy delectable appetizers and drinks.

Tickets

RSVP

$45 Non-profit attorneys,

by September 20 Use the Enclosed RSVP Card Barristers, Law Students or Online at $75 other CCCBA members www.cccba.org/attorney/calendar and non-members

Deposition Reporting in Contra Costa County since 1986

Trusted with the Bay Area’s most complex cases, Diablo Valley Reporting Services has been part of the legal landscape for more than 30 years.

Contra Costa County attorneys have come to rely on DVRS as a firm that is large enough to handle the most challenging cases, but small enough to provide the utmost in personal and professional service.

• • • • • •

Proud to Partner with Some of the Area’s Best Certified Shorthand Reporters Leading Technology Personal Service and Delivery Deposition Suites and Conference Rooms Available Centrally Located in Downtown Walnut Creek, near BART A Loyal Supporter of the Contra Costa County Bar Association for Three Decades

2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 290, Walnut Creek, CA 94596 • dvrs2121@yahoo.com

40

DIABLO VALLEY REPORTING SERVICES

SEPTEMBER 2019

925.930.7388