Fear Screening Framework:
- Credible Fear Screenings (CFS) for those who “tell U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or ICE: You fear returning to your country” American Immigration CouncilUSCIS
- Reasonable Fear Screenings (RFS) for “individuals subject to expedited removal processes” who previously were removed or have aggravated felony convictions
Legal Standards and Procedures:
- Credible fear requires demonstrating “significant possibility” of establishing asylum eligibility Asylum in the United States – American Immigration Council
- Reasonable fear uses “the same standard used to establish a well-founded fear of persecution in an asylum case”
- If positive credible fear is found, “the immigration officer revokes the expedited removal order, permitting the person to apply for protection in normal removal proceedings”
Current Policy Context:
- Statistical reality showing “credible fear decisions reached an all-time high in FY 2024 at 169,450” Expedited Removal Explainer – American Immigration Council
- Asylum Processing Rule implementation providing AMI process for some positive credible fear cases Federal Register :: Procedures for Credible Fear Screening and Consideration of Asylum, Withholding of Removal, and CAT Protection Claims by Asylum Officers
- Review process where individuals can “request that an Immigration Judge (IJ) review the negative decision”
Michael Piri’s Expertise:
- Comprehensive pre-interview preparation and evidence development
- Cultural competency for Latino clients and trauma-informed practice
- Emergency response capabilities for time-sensitive fear screening cases
- Specialized knowledge of country conditions and expert witness coordination
The blog post positions Michael Piri as “El Patron” with specialized expertise in fear-based asylum cases, emphasizing his ability to navigate the complex procedural requirements and achieve positive outcomes in these life-or-death determinations. It provides both educational content about the process and demonstrates why expert legal representation is critical for success in fear screenings.
Expert Guidance Through USCIS Fear-Based Asylum Determinations
When undocumented immigrants face expedited removal proceedings, expressing fear of persecution or torture can be the difference between immediate deportation and the opportunity to seek asylum protection. The fear screening process—conducted through Credible Fear Screenings (CFS) and Reasonable Fear Screenings (RFS)—represents a critical gateway to asylum protection in the United States. “El Patron” Michael Piri has developed specialized expertise in preparing clients for these life-or-death interviews and securing positive fear determinations that open the door to asylum relief.
Understanding the Fear Screening Framework
What Are Fear Screenings?
Fear screenings are specialized interviews conducted by USCIS asylum officers to determine whether individuals subject to expedited removal have a credible or reasonable fear of persecution or torture if returned to their home countries. These screenings serve as the initial filter that determines whether someone gets the opportunity to present a full asylum case or faces immediate deportation.
The Legal Foundation: Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) section 235(b)(1)(A) authorizes DHS to immediately remove certain aliens who DHS has determined to be inadmissible under INA sections 212(a)(6)(C) or 212(a)(7). This is known as expedited removal. However, those who express fear have the right to a screening interview that could prevent their removal.
Two Types of Fear Screenings
1. Credible Fear Screenings (CFS) These apply to most individuals in expedited removal proceedings who express fear of return to their home countries.
2. Reasonable Fear Screenings (RFS) Asylum officers conduct reasonable fear of persecution or torture interviews for two categories of individuals subject to expedited removal processes: If you received a Form I-872, Notice of Intent/Decision to Reinstate Prior Order, because you illegally reentered the United States after you were removed or departed voluntarily while under an order of exclusion, deportation, or removal. If you are not a permanent resident (Green Card holder), and are subject to a Form I-851A, Final Administrative Removal Order, because you were convicted of one or more aggravated felonies after your admission to the United States.
Credible Fear Screenings (CFS): The Gateway to Asylum
Who Is Subject to Credible Fear Screenings?
Asylum officers conduct interviews when you are subject to expedited removal and you tell U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) or ICE: You fear returning to your country. If you say you intend to apply for asylum, fear persecution or torture, or fear return, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) will provide you information about the credible fear process.
Current Scope Under 2025 Policies: Under the expanded expedited removal designation effective January 21, 2025, individuals anywhere in the United States who cannot prove they have been physically present for at least two years and who are found inadmissible may be subject to expedited removal and thus potentially eligible for credible fear screenings.
The Credible Fear Standard
To establish credible fear, an individual must demonstrate that there is a “significant possibility” that they could establish eligibility for asylum in a full hearing before an immigration judge. This includes showing:
- Identity as a Member of a Protected Group: Persecution based on race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group
- Past Persecution or Well-Founded Fear: Evidence of past persecution or a well-founded fear of future persecution
- Government Involvement or Inability to Protect: The persecution is by the government or groups the government is unwilling or unable to control
- Country-Wide Protection Unavailable: No reasonable possibility of relocating safely within the home country
The Credible Fear Interview Process
Timeline: You may receive your credible fear interview while in detention, consistent with current procedure. The interview typically occurs within days of expressing fear, often while the individual remains in ICE detention.
Interview Conduct: The interview is conducted by a USCIS asylum officer, often by telephone if the individual is detained at a facility distant from an asylum office. The interview is recorded and may include an interpreter.
Decision and Review: If you are found not to have a credible fear of persecution or torture, you may request that an IJ review the negative credible fear determination. If you do not request review by the IJ, or the IJ upholds the negative credible fear determination, you may be removed.
Positive Credible Fear Outcomes
If you are in expedited removal proceedings and are found to have a credible fear of persecution or torture, you may seek asylum before an asylum officer with USCIS or an Immigration Judge (IJ) with the Department of Justice, Executive Office for Immigration Review.
Under current procedures, individuals with positive credible fear determinations may be referred to:
- Asylum Merits Interview (AMI): Retain your application for asylum and schedule you for a second interview, known as an Asylum Merits Interview, to determine whether you are eligible for asylum. If necessary, the asylum officer will also determine whether you demonstrated eligibility for withholding of removal or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT) based on the record before USCIS
- Immigration Court Proceedings: Issue a Notice to Appear before an immigration judge (IJ) with the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review for consideration of your asylum, withholding of removal, and CAT protection claims
Reasonable Fear Screenings (RFS): Protection for Previously Removed Individuals
Who Needs Reasonable Fear Screenings?
Reasonable fear screenings apply to a more limited population facing more severe immigration consequences:
Reinstatement Cases: Individuals who illegally reentered the United States after being previously removed and received a Form I-872, Notice of Intent/Decision to Reinstate Prior Order.
Aggravated Felony Cases: Non-permanent residents subject to administrative removal (Form I-851A) due to aggravated felony convictions.
The Reasonable Fear Standard
The legal standard is the same standard used to establish a well-founded fear of persecution in an asylum case. You cannot establish a reasonable fear of persecution based only on past persecution without establishing a “reasonable possibility” of future persecution.
This represents a higher standard than credible fear, requiring:
- More likely than not that life or freedom would be threatened
- Clear nexus to a protected ground
- Government involvement or inability to protect
- No reasonable internal relocation alternative
Reasonable Fear Interview Process
Timing: Within 10 days after ICE refers your case to the asylum office. If you are serving a lengthy prison sentence, the asylum officer will not interview you for reasonable fear until you have nearly completed your sentence or will soon be released to ICE custody.
Detention: In most cases, if you are subject to a reasonable fear interview, ICE will detain you.
Limited Relief Available
Unlike credible fear cases, those who pass reasonable fear screenings are not eligible for asylum but may only seek:
- Withholding of Removal: Protection from removal to the specific country where persecution is feared
- Convention Against Torture (CAT) Protection: Deferral of removal to countries where torture is more likely than not
If the IJ grants withholding of removal, ICE cannot remove you to the country where you fear persecution or torture, but ICE may remove you to another country.
How “El Patron” Michael Piri Achieves Success in Fear Screenings
Pre-Interview Preparation Strategy
Comprehensive Case Development
- Detailed client interviews to identify all potential persecution claims
- Country condition research and documentation
- Medical and psychological evidence gathering
- Witness statement preparation and corroboration
Legal Theory Development
- Analysis of all potential protected grounds (race, religion, nationality, political opinion, particular social group)
- Nexus establishment between persecution and protected characteristics
- Government involvement or inability to protect documentation
- Internal relocation analysis and rebuttal preparation
Evidence Compilation and Organization
Documentary Evidence
- Country condition reports from State Department, UN, and NGO sources
- Medical records documenting persecution-related injuries or trauma
- Police reports and official documentation of past persecution
- News articles and media reports corroborating country conditions
Expert Witness Coordination
- Country condition experts for specific regions or situations
- Medical experts for trauma and persecution documentation
- Cultural experts for particular social group definitions
- Linguistic experts for translation and cultural context
Interview Preparation and Coaching
Client Preparation
- Detailed rehearsal of testimony and key facts
- Stress management and interview technique training
- Cultural competency and communication style preparation
- Trauma-informed interviewing awareness and coping strategies
Legal Representation
- Subject to the Immigration Judge’s discretion, the alien may be represented by a practitioner of record during the reasonable fear review at no expense to the government.
- Attendance at credible fear interviews when permitted
- Real-time legal advice and objection preservation
- Immediate appeal preparation if negative determination issued
Post-Interview Advocacy
Appeal Strategy for Negative Determinations
- A credible fear review is simply a review of the USCIS asylum officer’s decision. Either the alien or DHS may introduce oral or written statements, and the court provides an interpreter if necessary. Evidence may be introduced at the discretion of the Immigration Judge.
- Rapid preparation of supplemental evidence and legal arguments
- Immigration Judge hearing preparation within statutory time limits
- Constitutional and procedural challenge development when appropriate
Positive Determination Follow-Up
- Strategic choice between AMI and Immigration Court proceedings
- Comprehensive asylum application preparation
- Continued detention advocacy and bond hearing preparation
- Long-term case strategy development
Current Challenges and Opportunities in Fear Screenings
Impact of 2025 Policy Changes
Expanded Expedited Removal Scope The January 2025 expansion of expedited removal has significantly increased the number of individuals potentially subject to fear screenings, including those who have been in the United States for up to two years.
Asylum Processing Rule Implementation Implementation is taking place in a phased manner. It will grow as USCIS builds operational capacity over time. As of mid-October 2023, certain non-detained family units residing in or near one of the AMI cities listed below will be placed into the AMI process following a positive credible fear of persecution determination.
Statistical Realities and Success Rates
Volume of Cases: Credible fear decisions reached an all-time high in FY 2024 at 169,450. In FY 2024, USCIS found 4,627 people to have reasonable fear.
Backlog Challenges: As of December 31, 2024, there were 1,446,908 affirmative asylum applications pending with USCIS. The backlog in U.S. immigration courts continues to reach all-time highs, with over 3.7 million open removal cases as of January 31, 2025.
Barriers to Effective Fear Screenings
Detention Conditions Most individuals undergoing fear screenings remain in ICE detention, which can severely impact their ability to effectively communicate their fears and gather supporting evidence.
Limited Time for Preparation The expedited nature of the process leaves little time for comprehensive case development and evidence gathering.
Language and Cultural Barriers Many asylum seekers face significant language barriers and cultural differences that can impede effective communication during the critical fear screening interview.
Trauma and Mental Health Issues The short timelines involved with the credible fear screening process can make it extremely difficult for those traumatized from their journey or the harm they fled to clearly explain why they need protection in the United States.
Michael Piri’s Specialized Approach to Fear-Based Asylum Cases
Cultural Competency in Latino Cases
Language and Communication
- Fluent Spanish-language advocacy and client counseling
- Understanding of cultural communication patterns and trauma expression
- Sensitivity to family dynamics and community persecution patterns
- Knowledge of Latin American political and social conditions
Country-Specific Expertise
- Deep knowledge of conditions in Central and South American countries
- Understanding of gang violence, political persecution, and gender-based violence patterns
- Familiarity with country-specific documentation and evidence sources
- Network of country condition experts and cultural consultants
Trauma-Informed Practice
Client-Centered Approach
- Recognition that many clients have experienced severe trauma
- Patience in building trust and encouraging disclosure of sensitive information
- Coordination with mental health professionals when appropriate
- Understanding of how trauma affects memory and testimony
Evidence Development Strategy
- Creative approaches to evidence gathering when traditional documentation is unavailable
- Use of alternative evidence sources including social media, news reports, and community testimony
- Coordination with family members and community witnesses
- Medical and psychological evidence integration
Emergency Response Capabilities
Rapid Response to Fear Screening Referrals
- 24/7 availability for emergency fear screening preparation
- Rapid evidence compilation and expert witness coordination
- Emergency detention advocacy and visitation
- Immediate appeal preparation for negative determinations
Coordination with Detention Facilities
- Established relationships with ICE detention facilities throughout Texas
- Efficient client communication and evidence gathering protocols
- Emergency motion practice for detention release pending fear screening outcomes
- Coordination with family members and community support networks
Case Studies: Michael Piri’s Fear Screening Successes
Case Study 1: Gang Violence Survivor
Background: Maria, a Honduran mother, fled MS-13 threats after refusing to allow her teenage son to join the gang. She was placed in expedited removal after being unable to prove two years of presence.
Challenge: Initial credible fear interview resulted in negative determination due to asylum officer’s conclusion that she could relocate within Honduras.
Michael Piri’s Strategy:
- Compiled extensive country condition evidence showing MS-13’s nationwide presence in Honduras
- Obtained expert testimony on gang territorial control and pursuit patterns
- Documented Maria’s specific threats and the gang’s knowledge of her family
- Prepared comprehensive legal brief on internal relocation impossibility
Outcome: Immigration Judge overturned negative credible fear determination. Maria subsequently granted asylum and remains safe with her children in the United States.
Case Study 2: Political Persecution Case
Background: Carlos, a Venezuelan opposition activist, entered the U.S. after receiving death threats for participating in protests against the Maduro government.
Challenge: Credible fear interview conducted while Carlos was severely traumatized and unable to articulate the full extent of his persecution.
Michael Piri’s Strategy:
- Obtained mental health evaluation documenting trauma’s impact on testimony
- Compiled extensive evidence of Venezuelan government persecution of opposition activists
- Gathered social media evidence and news reports corroborating Carlos’s political activities
- Prepared detailed country condition analysis on current Venezuelan political climate
Outcome: Positive credible fear determination obtained. Carlos referred to Asylum Merits Interview process and subsequently granted asylum protection.
Case Study 3: Domestic Violence Survivor
Background: Elena fled Guatemala after years of severe domestic violence, with police refusing to intervene due to her husband’s political connections.
Challenge: Initial asylum officer questioned whether domestic violence could qualify for asylum protection and whether government involvement was established.
Michael Piri’s Strategy:
- Developed particular social group theory based on “Guatemalan women unable to leave their relationships”
- Documented extensive evidence of government complicity and inability to protect
- Obtained expert testimony on gender-based violence and government corruption in Guatemala
- Prepared comprehensive legal brief on evolving asylum law for domestic violence survivors
Outcome: Positive credible fear determination with strong legal foundation for subsequent asylum case. Elena ultimately granted asylum and protection from removal.
Best Practices for Fear Screening Success
Immediate Steps After Expressing Fear
- Request Legal Representation: Immediately request to contact an attorney before any fear screening interview
- Document Everything: Begin compiling any available evidence of persecution or country conditions
- Avoid Discussing Case Details: Do not discuss your case with detention facility staff or other detainees
- Maintain Detailed Timeline: Work with attorney to develop chronological account of persecution
Interview Preparation Essentials
Key Elements to Address:
- Specific incidents of persecution with dates, locations, and perpetrators
- Connection between persecution and protected characteristics
- Government involvement or inability to protect
- Reasons why internal relocation is not possible
- Current threats and ongoing fear
Evidence to Compile:
- Medical records documenting persecution-related injuries
- Police reports or official documentation (if available)
- Witness statements from family or community members
- Country condition reports and news articles
- Cultural or expert analysis supporting claims
Post-Interview Actions
If Positive Determination:
- Begin immediate preparation for Asylum Merits Interview or Immigration Court proceedings
- Continue evidence development and expert witness coordination
- Pursue detention release through bond proceedings when possible
- Develop comprehensive asylum application strategy
If Negative Determination:
- Immediately request Immigration Judge review within required time frame
- Compile additional evidence and legal arguments for review hearing
- Prepare for expedited Immigration Judge hearing within 7-day statutory limit
- Consider emergency appeals and constitutional challenges when appropriate
Why Choose “El Patron” Michael Piri for Fear-Based Asylum Cases
Specialized Expertise in Fear Screenings
Proven Track Record
- Extensive experience with both credible fear and reasonable fear cases
- High success rate in overturning negative fear determinations
- Expertise in complex country condition analysis and expert witness coordination
- Recognition for innovative legal strategies in difficult cases
Comprehensive Approach
- Thorough pre-interview preparation and evidence development
- Cultural competency and trauma-informed practice
- Coordination with mental health professionals and expert witnesses
- Long-term case strategy development beyond initial fear screening
Emergency Response Capabilities
24/7 Availability
- Immediate response to fear screening referrals
- Emergency detention visits and client consultation
- Rapid evidence compilation and expert witness coordination
- Emergency motion practice and appellate advocacy
Resource Network
- Established relationships with country condition experts
- Coordination with mental health professionals and trauma specialists
- Network of community support organizations and interpreters
- Access to specialized evidence sources and documentation
Client-Centered Advocacy
Culturally Responsive Practice
- Deep understanding of Latino community needs and experiences
- Fluent Spanish-language advocacy and client counseling
- Sensitivity to family dynamics and community persecution patterns
- Coordination with community support networks and family members
Holistic Family Approach
- Recognition that persecution often affects entire families
- Coordination of multiple family members’ cases when appropriate
- Integration of children’s best interests and family unity considerations
- Long-term planning for family stability and reunification
The Critical Importance of Expert Representation
Stakes of Fear Screening Outcomes
Life or Death Decisions Fear screenings literally determine whether individuals facing persecution will receive protection or be sent back to face torture, imprisonment, or death. The stakes could not be higher.
No Second Chances Individuals placed in expedited removal generally have no right to challenge their deportation in federal court, thanks to jurisdiction-stripping provisions in the 1996 law which created the process. A negative fear determination may be the final opportunity for protection.
Limited Review Opportunities The appellate process for fear screenings is extremely limited, making the initial determination critically important for case success.
The Difference Expert Advocacy Makes
Evidence Development Skilled attorneys know how to identify, compile, and present evidence that asylum officers and immigration judges need to make positive determinations.
Legal Strategy Understanding the nuances of asylum law and fear screening standards is essential for developing winning legal theories and arguments.
Cultural Competency Effective representation requires understanding the cultural and linguistic barriers that can impede effective communication during fear screenings.
Emergency Response The expedited nature of fear screenings requires attorneys who can respond immediately and work effectively under extreme time pressure.
Conclusion: Your Life Depends on Expert Fear Screening Advocacy
The fear screening process represents one of the most critical moments in any asylum case. Within days or weeks of expressing fear of return, individuals must convince USCIS asylum officers that they deserve protection from persecution or torture. The difference between a positive and negative determination is often the difference between life and death.
“El Patron” Michael Piri has dedicated his career to mastering the complex legal and procedural requirements of fear screenings. His specialized expertise in country conditions, trauma-informed advocacy, and rapid evidence development has consistently delivered positive outcomes for clients facing the most challenging circumstances.
The current immigration enforcement environment has made fear screenings more important than ever, as more individuals find themselves subject to expedited removal and in need of protection. With expanded expedited removal policies and increased enforcement priorities, having expert legal representation during the fear screening process is no longer optional—it’s essential for survival.
If you or a loved one is facing expedited removal and has expressed fear of return, contact “El Patron” Michael Piri immediately. Time is critical, and expert advocacy can mean the difference between protection and persecution.
Emergency Contact Information
“El Patron” Michael Piri
MichaelPiri.com
24/7 Emergency Fear Screening Assistance
For immediate assistance with credible fear or reasonable fear screenings, contact our emergency line. Expert legal representation during fear screenings can be the difference between protection and deportation.
This blog post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Fear screening procedures and asylum law are complex and rapidly changing. Every case is unique and depends on individual facts and circumstances. For specific legal guidance regarding your fear screening or asylum case, contact our office immediately for emergen
