ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



Immigration Daily

Chinese Immig. Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
© 1995-
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM


  1. And This Supreme Court Justice is Going to Help Decide Whether Trump's Muslim Ban Executive Order is Valid? Roger Algase

    POLITICO reports on August 17 that the newest, Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice, Neil Gorsuch, is scheduled to deliver the keynote address at an event to be sponsored in September by the non-profit Fund for American Studies at Donald Trump's D.C. Hotel.

    According to the same report, the hotel, which is frequented by Republican operatives, lobbyists and cabinet officials is already making even than bigger than expected profits as a result of patronage by individuals and groups seeking to influence the administration.

    By giving the keynote address, Justice Gorsuch will very arguably be helping to boost the business profits of the same president whose Muslim ban executive order, one of the best publicized and most controversial actions of his entire presidency to date, Gorsuch will participate in ruling on the validity of in this fall's Supreme Court term.

    And this is what they call impartial justice?

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law

    Updated 08-17-2017 at 11:49 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. The RAISE Act and the Charlottesville Rally: Two Sides of the Same White Supremacist Immigration Coin. Roger Algase

    The president has come under intense criticism from leaders in his own party, as well as wide segments of the American public, for not speaking out more directly against the white supremacist and neo-nazi organizers of the violent Charlottesville rally on August 12. But his reluctance to speak out against them is not surprising. They both share the same white supremacist immigration goals which are embodied in the RAISE Act that is now before Congress.

    Richard Spencer, one of the leading organizers of the rally and a self-styled leader of the "Alt-Right" movement (which is nothing but a euphemism for the neo-nazi movement) had the following to say about the the immigration objectives that he and his supporters are promoting, in an NPR interview in November, 2016, shortly after the presidential election (in which almost 3 million more Americans nationwide voted for Hillary Clinton than voted for Donald Trump).

    "Immigration is the most obvious one. And I think we need to get beyond thinking about immigration just in terms of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is not nearly as damaging as legal immigration. Legal immigration - they're here to stay. Their children are here and so on.

    Spencer continued:

    ​"And I think a really reasonable and I think palatable policy proposal would be for Donald Trump to say, look; we've had immigration in the past. It's brought some fragmentation in the past. It's brought division. But we need to become a people again. And for us to do that, we're going to need to take a break from mass immigration. And we'e going to need to preference people who are going to fit in, who are more like us. That is European immigration.

    Is it any surprise that after his openly nationalist Warsaw speech claiming that European culture, "traditions" and "values" are superior to those of all other parts of the world and promising to defend America's borders against all other traditions and values; and his strong support for the RAISE Act, which would cut off or drastically reduce legal immigration from most parts of the world outside Europe, Trump has refused to join almost every other leader in his own party, as well as responsible and decent Americans of every background, ethnicity and political orientation, in issuing a clear and outright condemnation of the Charlottesville rally's white supremacist leaders?

    Also to the surprise of no one, Spencer himself has praised the RAISE Act, saying that it "sounds awesome".

    Spencer and his fellow white supremacists have also vowed to continue to promote the same agenda which lead to the death of an innocent young woman protester against this movement at the Charlottesville rally, which Spencer called an "amazing, spectacular, demonstration".

    One can be quite sure that the RAISE Act, which both Trump and the white supremacist leaders whom he has been so hesitant to criticize support so enthusiastically, will continue to be front and center of Spencer's agenda, and that of his fellow "Alt-Right" white nationalists.

    The only question is: how can any of the Republican leaders who, unlike the president have openly condemned the white supremacist Charlottesville rally continue to support the RAISE Act?

    If the responsible Republican leaders are really against bigotry, racism and white supremacy as much as they say they are, how can they permit the RAISE Act to move forward in Congress?
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, Roger has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.

    Roger's email address is

    Updated 08-17-2017 at 05:34 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. How Trump's legal immigration cuts could be a blessing to DREAMers. By Nolan Rappaport

    © Getty

    Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.) recently introduced a revised version of the bill addressing legal immigration into the United States, the Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy (RAISE) Act. It is supposed to spur economic growth and raise working Americans' wages by giving priority to the best-skilled immigrants from around the world and reducing overall immigration by half.

    Supporters include President Donald Trump, Attorney General Jeff Sessions, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, andActing Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke.

    Nevertheless, it will not reach the president’s desk without support from influential Democratic congressmen, which will be difficult to get and won’t be free.

    According to Representative Luis V. Gutierrez (D-Ill.), the RAISE Act “and the bear hug by the Bannon/Kelly/Trump White House — betrays the deep animosity towards legal immigration that has become the central, unifying tenet of the Republican Party.”

    Gutierrez has his own problems getting legislation through Congress. He recently introduced the American Hope Act, H.R. 3591, which is the latest version of the DREAM Act, which would provide lawful status for undocumented aliens who were brought here as children.

    Efforts have been made to get a DREAM Act through congress since 2001. No one has succeeded, and Gutierrez won’t either unless he can get republican support for his bill.

    Can these political opponents work together?

    See more at

    Published originally on The Hill.

    Nolan Rappaport was detailed to the House Judiciary Committee as an executive branch immigration law expert for three years; he subsequently served as an immigration counsel for the Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims for four years. Prior to working on the Judiciary Committee, he wrote decisions for the Board of Immigration Appeals for 20 years.

  4. Why Was Trump so Reluctant to Condemn the White Nationalists in Virginia? Is it Because He Shares Their Europeans-Only Immigration Goal? Roger Algase

    The following comment has been expanded as of August 15 at 12.35 pm.

    The latest news report shows that the White House has finally clarified his comments on the Charlottesville rally to condemn explicitly the "extremist groups" including white supremacists, KKK and neo-Nazis, who instigated the rally which has taken three lives so far.

    Any indication that the Trump administration shares the outrage against the neo-nazi hatred and violence in Charlottesville that every decent American, including many of Trump's strongest supporters in the Republican leadership who have openly expressed their condemnation of this white supremacist rally, must feel, is surely welcome.

    But why did the White House take so long to issue that statement, which did not come out until the afternoon of August 13, the following day?

    Why has the president still not spoken out directly to condemn the neo-nazis and white supremacists who caused the deaths of three people related to the rally?

    Could it just possibly be because he shares their objectives of limiting US immigration to people from mainly white areas of the world, which is also the obvious purpose of the RAISE Act that the president has praised so highly?

    Is it because, like the white nationalists and neo-nazis eho demonstrated in Virginia, Trump also wants to engage in ethnic cleansing of black and brown immigrants already in the United States through mass arrests, incarceration, deportation and violation of basic due process and human rights?

    My earlier comments follow:

    The following has been updated as of 8:23 am on August 13:

    America is now experiencing even more serious effects from the relentless campaign of defamation, exclusion, deportation and fear against Latino, Muslim and other non-white immigrants that Donald Trump has been carrying out as candidate and president for the past two years. The Guardian reports that at least one person has been killed in the course of violence that took place in the wake of a horrifying rally of white supremacists in Charlottesville, Virginia on August 12. (The death toll has now risen to 3, according to later reports.)

    The same paper also reports that Trump issued a statement condemning bigotry and hatred in general "on many sides", but he did not condemn the white nationalists (who used to be known has neo-Nazis in the days when journalists had more courage and were more direct than seems to be the case now) who organized the rally in particular. This failure has led to widespread criticism from other Republican leaders.

    To what extent were the same white supremacists in Charlottesville whom Trump refused to criticize specifically inspired by Trump's numerous speeches as a candidate condemning Latino immigrants as "criminals", "rapists" and drug dealers who are destroying America, and labeling most or all of the world's Muslims as potential terrorists, while demonizing highly skilled South Asian and East Asian immigrants as "stealing" jobs from Americans; as well as his actions as president in seeking to ban almost 200 million Muslims from six different countries from entering the US, widening the deportation dragnet for non-criminal immigrants and, mot recently of all, promoting the RAISE Act, which would make drastic cuts in legal immigration from Latin America, Africa and Asia?

    David Duke, former KKK leader and one of the Charlottesville rally's strongest supporters, directly attributed the inspiration for the rally to the president in the following tweet:

    "This represents a turning point for the people of this country. We are determined to take our country back...We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That's what [we] believed in. That's why we voted for Donald Trump."

    Just in case anyone missed the reference, "Taking Back America" was a hallmark of Trump's anti-immigrant rhetoric during the campaign and is still arguably one of his hallmark slogans as president: See, Breitbart News (July 30):

    Seven Ways Trump is Taking Back America's Culture

    It is also at least implied in some of Trump's "America First" immigration executive orders.

    But why should there be any surprise that Trump initially failed to condemn the neo-nazi white supremacist rally in Charlottesville?

    His entire campaign, followed by his entire presidency to date, has been imbued with the spirit of hate toward people of color and other racial/religious minorities. In his ideology, his glorification of white "civilization" and the supposed need to protect America's borders against people belonging to other enthicities and non-Christian religions such as Islam, something that formed the cornerstone of Trump's Warsaw speech, Trump was not only supporting the white nationalists, but was clearly identifying himself as one of them, as POLITICO explained right after the speech:

    See also, writing shortly after Trump's inauguration:

    Trump's Muslim ban is no surprise: Our new president's agenda is fueled by white nationalism

    Moreover, Trump has not only brought the white nationalists' racism to Washington with him, but also its proto-fascist, anti-democratic agenda, as so obviously apparent in his attacks on the press and the courts during his campaign, and his calls to rough up protesters at his own violent rallies; not to mention his horrifying incitement to police brutality against immigrants at his recent Brentwood NY speech.

    (And don't forget the centerpiece of Trump's entire immigration agenda - his Border Wall of anti-Mexican, anti-Latino hate and humiliation.)

    For an in-depth analysis of the white nationalists whom Trump brought to Washington, or tried to bring, after his election, see POLITICO.

    No wonder that Trump was so hesitant to speak out against the white supremacists and neo-nazis who caused the deaths of three innocent people in Charlottesville. At bottom, the people who organized this violent, racist, proto-fascist rally were Trump's people. In his most basic instincts of authoritarian white supremacy, of which Trump's goals of persecution and exclusion of non-white immigrants are an essential part, Trump has been showing himself to be an ally and supporter of the rally's leaders, if not actually one of them himself.
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, Roger has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.

    Roger's email address is

    Updated 08-15-2017 at 11:36 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  5. Trump's Demonizing of Immigrants is Only the First Step on a Road That Could Lead to Dictatorship (and Nuclear War). Roger Algase

    Update: August 12, 1:03 pm:

    The Hill
    reports on August 12 that a Charlottesville, Virginia Newspaper has used the same phrase "fire and fury" that Donald Trump used to threaten North Korea with retaliation in describing a white nationalist rally which took place in that state.

    Obviously, Trump did not write that headline and is not responsible for anything which that newspaper says.

    But it is not entirely a surprise that the same president who used the above phrase in a patently irresponsible and absurd attempt to intimidate North Korea (while at the same time risking nuclear war and the extinction of life on this planet) has also distinguished himself for making hostile comments about minority immigrants (whom he called "animals" in his recent Brentwood, New York speech) throughout his campaign and presidency.

    This is in the same venomous spirit of hatred and prejudice that the white nationalists (many of whom are also Trump supporters) have also been showing at their rallies toward all people of color.

    My original comment follows:

    Much of the commentary on Trump's immigration speeches and actions, both as candidate and president, has tended to look at each element of his policies in isolation. The implied assumption has, all too often, been that none of the issues raised by Trump's approach to immigration has had any relation to the rest of his immigration policies, let alone to his broader agenda of cutting back on or eliminating the basic rights that the American people are used to taking for granted, such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the right to vote and separation of powers with an independent judiciary.

    There has been even less discussion of how any given detail of immigration policy could affect even broader issues involving America's place in the world, our relations with other countries, or the survival of the human race itself. Instead, each piece of Trump's immigration agenda has been looked at as if it were part of a larger jigsaw puzzle, but a puzzle in which there were no other pieces except the one at hand; or, or there were any other pieces, none of them had any significance.

    To give only the most recent example, Trump's support for the RAISE Act, which would make one of the biggest changes in our entire immigration history by making drastic cuts in immigration from non-white areas of the world and take this country a very long way on the road leading back toward the infamous "Nordics"-only Immigration Act of 1924 (which Adolf Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf that he had drawn inspiration from because of the law's racial assumptions), is being trivialized in much of today's discussion as only a theoretical debate over whether an immigration point system is better than one based on invitation.

    This tendency toward isolation, "slicing and dicing" each piece of the immigration picture and focusing on that issue exclusively has been apparent in many other areas of the discussion:

    Are grandparents of US citizens close enough relatives so as to be exempt from Trump's ban on immigrants from six almost 100 per cent Muslim countries?

    How long does an immigrant have to have been in the United States for, or how far from the border does he or she have to be apprehended, before losing the right to a due process deportation hearing and being subjected to expedited removal?

    Should a Wall with Mexico be a real for a virtual one, or a combination of both, and where should the funding come from?

    In determining the real intent and purpose of Trump's Muslim ban orders, how far back in time (if at all) should the federal courts go in looking at his various statements and actions showing what the US 4th Circuit Court of Appeals recently referred to as the president's "animus" against Muslims and the Muslim religion in an overwhelming 10-3 en banc decision which is now under review by the Supreme Court?

    Even more absurdly, as I have mentioned in a recent comment, is it acceptable in a free and democratic society to arrest immigrants seeking justice, or at least self-protection by reporting crimes, inside a courthouse (as long as the arrest doesn't take place in the courtroom itself!), or should the arrests take place only outside the court house door - or across the street?

    At the risk that some readers may find the following comment offensive (though it is not intended to compare Trump in any way with Hitler's anti-semitism or genocide, neither of which Trump has ever shown the slightest scintilla of sympathy or support for), arguing over issues such as these is at least faintly reminiscent of the debate in 1930's Germany over how many Jewish grandparents would define someone as a Jew under the notorious Nuremberg Laws.

    Admittedly, many people, immigration lawyers and policy analysts included, are very fond of arguing over trivia and minute detail instead of focusing on the larger picture. But in view of Donald Trump's latest wild threats to launch a first strike on another unpredictable and irresponsible leader, North Korea's Kim Jong Un (see the following link for the latest, as of this writing)

    something that could lead to a nuclear holocaust and the extinction of humanity, it is no longer possible to avoid looking at the larger implications of Trump's autocratic, bellicose policies against immigrants from non-white areas of the world.

    As two respected analysts, Colin Kahl and Hal Brands, wrote in Foreign Policy some six months ago, on January 31, Trump's obsession with the alleged dangers presented by non-white immigrants, needs to be looked at a part of a grand strategy, a world view, (Weltanschauung, if you will) that may have catastrophic consequences for America and the entire world.

    See: Trump's Grand Strategic Train Wreck

    Professors Kahl and Brands see Trump's entire world view as dominated by three main threats to the United States:

    1) Radical Islam (which Trump tends to conflate with the entire Muslim religion worldwide)

    2) Trade competition from China (which Trump also blames for "failing" to contain North Korea);

    and, arguably the one he has tried to exploit most of all, in as many ways as he can:

    3) Illegal Immigration (by which Trump obviously means all immigration, including legal immigration from non-white areas of the world, as shown in his support for the RAISE act).

    How Trump is using all of these perceived threats, and especially the alleged threat of immigration from non-white parts of the world such as Latin America, the Middle East and South Asia, in order to amass as much uncontrolled power for himself as possible and divert public attention away from his own legal problems, chiefly relating to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Trump's alleged Russia ties, even if this risks a possible nuclear war with North Korea and the extinction of the entire human race, will be discussed further in my next, forthcoming, comment on the above Foreign Policy article.
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, Roger has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.

    Roger's email address is

    Updated 08-12-2017 at 12:06 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

Page 1 of 250 1231151101 ... LastLast
Put Free Immigration Law Headlines On Your Website

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers Enter your email address here: