Check out our latest edition of Subscription Lawyer News: Chicago! – “U.S. Federal Government t is looking to imprison Michael McClain for up to six years”
Check out our latest edition of Legal Definition of the Week! This week’s legal definition: “Arriving Alien”
**Disclaimer: **Recent efforts have been made by individuals and groups to change the official U.S. Immigration legal term from “alien” to “noncitizen”**
¡Echa un vistazo a la última edición semanal de Subscription Lawyer News! – “Juez de Distrito de en Los Ángeles emite dos órdenes de restricción temporal contra el Servicio de Inmigración y Control de Aduanas (ICE)”
Check out out latest edition of Subscription Lawyer News post of the week! – “U.S. District Judge in Los Angeles issues two temporary restraining orders against the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)”
Check our latest edition of Subscription Lawyer’s Chicago News Post of the Week! – “Chicago is Set to Join Lawsuit Against the Trump Administration”
On July 9., 2025, The Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) released a decision in the case of Pascacio Gonzalez Jimenez.
According to the decision:
“ (1) Use of false or stolen Social Security numbers and providing false information on tax returns are negative considerations that weigh against a favorable exercise of discretion. (2) When a respondent seeks to excuse conduct by claiming to have relied on professional advice, the respondent should submit evidence of the specific advice given and explain why it was reasonable to rely on such advice.”
On December 19., 2024, an Immigration Judge found Jimenez ineligible for cancellation of removal and voluntary departure. The judge cited several factors including a DUI Jimenez had committed, the use of false and stolen Social Security numbers and filing false tax information to show that Jimenez did not demonstrate good moral character.
Jimenez appealed the December decision, claiming that his attorney gave him the false Social Security number, but the appeal was dismissed today, July 9., 2025. The BIA determined that Jimnez’s use of false Social Security numbers and tax information outweigh any possible positive equities he may have (such as his children being US citizens).
The BIA has now stated that using false or stolen Social Security numbers can weigh against someone seeking to cancel their removal. The BIA also emphasized that if someone claims a trusted professional provided or influenced their use of false or stolen Social Security numbers, that they must submit proof of what the trusted professional said and why they relied on it.
On June 23., it was announced that Sean “Diddy” Combs will not testify in his ongoing criminal trial in Manhattan, New York. Combs, 55, was initially charged with one count of racketeering conspiracy, one count of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion and one count of transportation to engage in prostitution in September 2024.
In April 2025, prosecutors added two more charges: an additional charge of sex trafficking by force and another count of transportation for purposes of prostitution. Combs pleaded not guilty to all five charges. Combs has also been accused of physical and sexual violence towards women and others, bribery, arson, kidnapping, illegal drug distribution and other crimes.
Opening statements for the trial began on May 12. Since then, the prosecution has had 34 witnesses take the stand against Combs, each recounting their traumatic experiences with Combs and his alleged criminal enterprise. The prosecution has also presented a wide range of evidence, consisting of videos, photos, receipts, phone records, text messages and other forms of evidence to confirm the accusations against Combs.
John Heiderscheidt, Criminal, Immigration and Civil Law attorney of Subscription Lawyer shares his input on Comb’s decision to not testify:
“The question of whether to testify as a defendant at your own trial is often one of the most important decisions that you will have to face before the case proceeds to the jury. Each case is different and sometimes there can be a benefit to a defendant testifying. However, in my experience, unless there are close factual questions that can only be resolved for the jury through defendant testimony, often the risk is not worth the reward.
We saw this to be the case in a very popular criminal defense trial recently against former Speaker Madigan in Illinois. After the jury returned a guilty verdict, at the sentencing hearing, the judge specifically referenced Madigan’s testimony as an aggravating factor that led to a more extensive sentence than we saw in the Ed Burke case.
The lawyers representing Mr. Combs may feel that his testimony would not be helpful to the jury in resolving the limited factual questions before them, and they may not have wanted to risk a more harsh sentence in the event of a conviction on some or all charges,” said Heiderscheidt.
The trial is being presided over by United States District Judge for the Southern District of New York, Arun Subramanian. He has stated that he hopes the trial will be concluded by July 4. Further updates on the case are expected as the trial continues.
Subscription Lawyer is a Chicago-based law office, ready to go to work for you. We offer legal services to all interested clients.
You do not need a subscription to work with us.
However, a subscription can be a wise investment if you foresee spending time in court for immigration, criminal, or civil matters in the future.
Make your initial deposit of
and become a Subscription Lawyer client. Contact us to sign up!
Receive Benefits:
Receive discounts on select legal services, sometimes up to 50%!
