Unsubstantiated Terrorism-Related Grounds of Inadmissibility (TRIG) Cases

These laws can be vague and broadly applied to noncitizens seeking immigration benefits, including American Muslims.

The Issue

The U.S. Congress has enacted laws to safeguard national security by preventing certain individuals from entering the United States. However, these laws can be vague and broadly applied to noncitizens seeking immigration benefits, including American Muslims. The Terrorism-Related Inadmissibility Grounds (TRIG) exclude individuals who have engaged in illegal or violent activities associated with terrorism. 

American Muslims and Unsubstantiated TRIG Cases:

Muslim noncitizens and their attorneys often face intimidation from government agencies through hostile questioning and vague accusations of supporting terrorist organizations. This tactic is aimed at pressuring Muslim applicants, many of whom may not be fluent in English, to agree to false information due to cultural misunderstandings. Despite no evidence linking these individuals to terrorism, the government’s approach unfairly targets Muslims, particularly males, and those from majority-Muslim countries. This is reminiscent of the USCIS’s discriminatory use of the CARRP program, which disproportionately delays and denies applications from Muslim noncitizens, especially those from Pakistan, Iraq, India, Iran, and Yemen. It appears that the government’s objective is to discourage Muslims from staying in the U.S.

How MLFA Addresses Discrimination Based on Unsubstantiated TRIG Cases:

MLFA combats the U.S. government’s discrimination against Muslim applicants based on unsubstantiated TRIG cases using various tools. These include Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, federal court litigation, and challenging the government’s narrative by presenting counterevidence and alternative interpretations of existing evidence. To effectively represent clients and the Muslim community, MLFA develops a comprehensive understanding of the case facts, applicable law, as well as the cultural and geopolitical factors that influence the government’s stance.

Expertise in Addressing Unsubstantiated TRIG Cases:

With decades of experience in immigration law, MLFA can identify potential patterns in TRIG inadmissibility cases. These patterns may include citizenship from a majority-Muslim country experiencing political or civil unrest, completion of religious higher education in Saudi Arabia, or refusal to become a government informant in the local Muslim community. MLFA selectively takes on cases where the government appears to be discriminating against a noncitizen by falsely alleging TRIG issues. A thorough analysis of the immigration record helps uncover valid explanations for the government’s concerns and common patterns that often lead to inaccurate conclusions about TRIG applicability.


Have Similar Issues?