The AAO seems to have paid attention to our amicus arguments on U visa crimes as "categories" in their decision in the case in the case underlying our amicus, see attached redacted decision and the amicus. We will beed to keep pushing this is framework, however, so please continue using the arguments in the amicus when arguing crime categories. We do not, for instance, agree that the DV category contemplates only the facts involving decision relationships; many crimes are DV depending on the facts of the crimes, not just the relationships. One step at a time, thought! Note that the amicus strategy seems to work (gets their attention), so if you have a case that is likely to go up to the AAO on that issue that seems intractable at VSC, please let us know early in the process so we can round up a firm and organize the arguments we should all be using. Congratulations and thanks to Yasmine Farhang (and Deisy) who worked on the brief in chief, to ICWC for joining and helping us craft the arguments, and to Jennifer Colyer & Daniel Fishbein at Fried, Frank, Harris, Shover & Jacobson for their excellent work on the amicus brief!
