How's this going to go down from now im in regards to the court system? I'm assuming whatever judge heard their case today basically just waved it through because it's more or lessa preliminary thing and they just released her on bond until they can get to a new court that will ultimately decide what's going happen?
Which federal court would this case be assigned to, the one closest to where Pajeet lives or the one in the district where childwife was in custody?
She's in immigration court which is under the Dept. of Justice. She got out today because this was nothing more than a simple bond hearing and she's didn't have any issues that caused automatic denial of bail (like a felony, being an arriving alien, past deportation, etc..) The judge today didn't look at anything else besides the matter of bail and flight risk - nothing else. (I do wonder what her bail was they had to post. When my husband got to spend a few days in immigration detention he was released on his own recognizance, no money was required for him to be released.)
Immigration Courts (IC) are a specific type of court and they have them across the country, some states have two or three some have none, depends on the need. You can see where the various IC are by googling it.
The asylum claim and case will first be assigned to the IC at Elroy because that's where she was detained. I'm assuming they will request to have the case transferred to Chicago IC since that is where they live. (You can get your case moved to the court closest to your registered permanent residence and they will usually grant that no problem but you can't just get it moved to any random IC in the country because you think your chances are better with a certain IC or judge.) There are a number of judges in each IC and which judge is assigned the case is totally random.
The next step will be (if it hasn't already happened) a credible fear interview, which is just done by a USCIS officer (not a judge). If she is found to have credible fear she will be then be allowed to petition for asylum, if they find she doesn't have CF she will not be allowed to apply for asylum and be deported (She can appeal the CF finding to a IJ, but good luck with that).
It's not terribly difficult to be granted a credible fear finding, it's just basically the govt. agreeing that their is a reason to review your asylum claim and they tend to play it safe/ give people the benefit of the doubt if there isn't an obvious red flag or reason not too.
Once CF is found, then the actual defensive asylum claim begins where your lawyer starts guiding you through the process and court appearances where you submit a long form (forget the #) that details all persecution you experienced in your home country, evidence about your governments treatment/persecution/lack of protection, witness statements (if any), etc.. Besides your personal narrative you need to attached documentation to back it up. Asylum claims based solely on the word or claims of the defendant are not good cases. It's pretty important to provide evidence to support at least some of the claims you make.
This form will be given to the prosecutor to review and pick apart. The prosecutor will start an investigation, based on the info you provided, to fight your claim. After the submission of your official asylum claim a Individual Merit hearing will be scheduled.
An Individual Merit hearing is probably what most people here think of when you say you are defending an asylum claim in court, it is similar to a criminal trial where you have a prosecutor and defendant. Since this is a defensive asylum claim the burden of proof is solely on Nina to prove it. She will go before a judge to be questioned about the testimony/evidence she has submitted, a prosecutor will also be there to actively fight against her claim, cross examining and present evidence against your claim or statements she made. At the end of the hearing the IJ will then rule on the matter on whether to grant the claim of asylum or not. (Generally it is a written decision issued weeks after the actual hearing)
If the judge find the claims has merit, she's now legally allowed to remain and work in the USA. If the judge denies her claim she will be ordered to leave the country within a certain amount of time. You can appeal the ruling if the judge finds against you, but it's extremely rare for such a ruling to be reversed. These cases have occasionally been appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, but that's extaordinarily rare.
In many cases an asylum claim is used to stay in the country, get bail and buy extra time. Most people try to get married or have a kid to get another avenue to legality - and that's because defensive asylum claims are so difficult to win, take years and are very expensive. You can spend tens of thousand of dollars pursuing a defensive asylum claim with no guarantee of wining or becoming legal. It's far better to claim asylum while you are here legally and then it's not a defensive process, but Nina let ICE get her so she just put herself in a very difficult, expensive corner with only a small chance of success.
If Nina has no other avenues of relief (like being able to become legal via marriage) the asylum claim will proceed much faster. If she's got another avenue for relief, then the judge may grant a lot of continuances to give her time to get legal that way. But marriage is the only other option for relief she has and that's why it will be very interesting if she sticks with the asylum claim - showing Greta is really fucking her over and has some major reason to stay in the shadows and let Nina hang out to dry fighting a defensive asylum claim.
