photo by: Nick Krug

Lawrence resident Syed Jamal talks with media members immediately after his release from the Platte County Jail on Tuesday, March 20, 2018 in Platte City, Missouri.

That the next scheduled immigration hearing for Lawrence scientist Syed Jamal and his wife won’t occur for more than three years does not surprise the Jamals’ attorney, who cited an ever-increasing logjam in the federal court system.

On Tuesday, a judge in Kansas City Immigration Court set the Jamals’ next hearing for April 27, 2022, three years and five months from now. One of the Jamals’ attorneys, Rekha Sharma-Crawford, said that because of a case backlog it was already common for an immigration judge to schedule a hearing one to two years into the future, but recent changes have further exacerbated delays.

She said a September decision by then-U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions — President Donald Trump forced him to resign earlier this month — limited the discretion of judges and has resulted in more cases going through the immigration court process and in some cases being reopened.

“It used to be that the immigration court could terminate cases or continue cases or administratively close cases,” Sharma-Crawford said. “But at this point, because all of that discretion has been taken away and they have started to re-calendar a lot of the cases that were previously closed, it’s just a logjam at this point.”

Sharma-Crawford noted that because an immigration proceeding is an administrative civil matter, as opposed to a criminal matter, speedy-trial requirements do not apply.

Like all U.S. immigration courts, the Kansas City Immigration Court falls under the Department of Justice, which is led by the attorney general. Under Sessions’ ruling, immigration judges can no longer decide to terminate or dismiss a deportation case. Instead, a case can only be resolved if the Department of Homeland Security decides not to pursue the case or the case proceeds until it’s determined that the immigrant has a legal right to remain in the U.S. The ruling goes on to specifically state that immigration judges have “no inherent authority to terminate removal proceedings even though a particular case may pose sympathetic circumstances.”

Jamal has been living in the U.S. for more than 30 years, and his case received national attention after he was nearly deported earlier this year. Both Jamal and his wife, Angela Zaynub Chowdhury, are originally from Bangladesh and in the process of applying for two forms of deportation relief, cancellation of removal and asylum, either of which would ultimately be a path toward citizenship.

The timeline for their cases does mean that Jamal and his wife, who have three school-aged children who are U.S. citizens, can stay in the U.S. at least until the next hearing date in 2022. However, Sharma-Crawford said that having a court date so far in the future does present a variety of unknowns, especially since the Trump administration has been making decisions that affect immigration and has been taking steps to limit asylum claims.

“Every day is a new day with the world of immigration,” Sharma-Crawford said. “So if there are other changes that come along that are not known at this point, then, obviously, those can impact the case.”

If immigrants have already been living in the United States for 10 years with no disqualifying convictions, they can qualify for cancellation of removal. Asylum is a process that applies to refugees from a foreign country who can demonstrate they have been persecuted or fear they will be persecuted on account of various qualifying factors.

Chowdhury previously told the Journal-World that her husband is a member of an ethnic minority in Bangladesh known as Biharis and that he may face prejudice, violence or even death if he is sent back.

Some court proceedings will occur before the next hearing in 2022. During the joint hearing Tuesday for the cases of Jamal and his wife, Judge Glen Baker said he is not sure whether the Jamals are eligible for the cancellation of removal form of relief; he will be reviewing the matter and issuing a written decision. Sharma-Crawford said she anticipates that whatever the decision, either her firm or the Department of Homeland Security will appeal it. If it’s determined that the Jamals are not eligible for cancellation of removal, the asylum application would still be reviewed at the hearing in 2022.