My Blog

Consulations Are By Appointment Only!

January 24, 2024 by Matthew

Someone came to my office today without an appointment when I was not in my office.

It is foolish to go to a lawyer’s office without an appointment. You have no guarantee that the lawyer will be there or that the lawyer will be available if he is in the office. If I am doing work, I will not stop what I am doing to meet with a walk-in. I only meet with people who have appointments. If you come to my office without an appointment, I will not meet with you.

The “Contact Me” page of my website clearly states that consultations are by appointment only. I screen all of my consultations on the phone. I pick who I meet with. I am a solo practitioner with no staff. I have a heavy workload and my cases tend to be very complicated. I do not have the time to meet with everyone who wants to meet with me. With my workload, I have very limited time to meet with people. You cannot bypass my selection process by just showing up at my office without an appointment.

I consider it very inconsiderate for someone to think that they can show up at my office without an appointment. I have work to do. If I were to stop doing my work to meet with a walk-in, I would still have my work to do afterward and be stuck working late.

I also consider it disrespectful for someone to show up at my office without an appointment like it’s a Walmart. I have twenty-seven years of experience as an immigration lawyer. I am one of the few immigration attorneys who has argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. I am an adjunct professor at Brooklyn Law School. If you want me to be your lawyer, you have to show me the courtesy of calling to make an appointment to meet with me.

I am furious about the two men who came to my office today because not only didn’t they have an appointment, but they bothered my office neighbors when they discovered I wasn’t in my office. (That’s how I know they came to the office when I wasn’t there).

PLEASE DO NOT COME TO MY OFFICE WITHOUT AN APPOINTMENT!

My Amazing Experience with Justice Breyer

June 30, 2022 by Matthew

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer retired today. When I argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in Luna Torres v. Lynch, 136 S. Ct. 1619 (2016), I had the most amazing experience with him. When the Assistant to the Solicitor General began to speak, Justice Breyer made comments that appeared to indicate that I changed his mind with my opening argument. He cited one of the government’s arguments and said, “I agreed with that when I came in.” He went on to comment on my opening statement to my oral argument and said, “So now, if that’s right, I’m left with only half the problem I thought I was left with.” While I lost that case, Justice Breyer joined in Justice Sotomayor’s dissent. Since he said that he originally agreed with the government and he joined with Justice Sotomayor’s dissent, it appears that I changed his mind with what I said in court.

There is a lot of debate among lawyers about whether oral argument in appellate cases is for “show” or whether judges actually change their minds based upon what is said in court during an oral argument. There are a lot of attorneys who think that judges make up their minds from reading the briefs so that oral argument is not important. My personal experience is that what happened that day is very rare. Usually, judges (or justices) hide their positions. I have had cases where I’ve gone to court and it was clear that a judge was on my side or against me. However, it’s not very often when a judge indicates that he or she is against you that you can change their mind. It looks like I was able to change Justice Breyer’s mind. When he made those comments, it was one of the proudest moments that I have ever had in a courtroom.

I hope that Justice Breyer enjoys his retirement.

My 10th Anniversary of Teaching at Brooklyn Law School!

June 22, 2022 by Matthew

I have another anniversary post. I just finished teaching the spring semester at Brooklyn Law School. This was my tenth year of teaching at Brooklyn Law School as an adjunct professor. I created a course called, “Immigration Workshop: Deportation Defense.” It’s a different kind of law school class. It’s a “case simulation” course. I don’t just teach immigration law – I teach my students how to practice immigration law. I’ve created a legal problem about a lawful permanent resident who is facing removal because he was convicted of a crime. I teach my students about immigration law as we discuss how we would represent this imaginary client. We talk about the intake process, how to evaluate the issues in a case, what to do in immigration court, how to do an appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, and how to litigate a petition for review in the Court of Appeals. Instead of an exam, the final paper is to write a legal brief about why the “client” shouldn’t be deported.

I love teaching. I’m very concerned about the quality of the immigration bar. I regularly do consultations with people where I am shocked by what their previous lawyers have done wrong. There are a lot of people out there with horror stories about having hired bad immigration lawyers. I created my class because I want there to be good immigration attorneys out there that help people.