ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed

Immigration Law Blogs on ILW.COM

description

  1. Why downplay costs of illegal immigration if California is so sure of the benefits?

    Withdrawn.

    Updated 03-22-2018 at 09:25 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  2. USCIS Again Suspends H-1B Premium Processing. Will This Mean More RFE's Showing Hypocrisy of Trump's "Merit-Based" Immigration Claim? Roger Algase

    For the second year in a row, USCIS has announced that it is temporarily suspending premium processing for H-1B petitions as the new cap-subject filing season for FY 2019 fast approaches.

    http://discuss.ilw.com/content.php?9411

    The announced reason for these suspensions was to enable USCIS to finish processing long-delayed H-1B cases and to reduce processing times overall.

    But last year, the main effect of suspending Premium Processing was, very arguably, to give USCIS examiners more time to write burdensome, often unnecessary, and in some cases that I can attest to personally in my own H-1B practice and will discuss in detail in a forthcoming comment, openly biased or at least egregiously incompetent RFE's and denial decisions.

    As was widely reported last year, and as I also experienced in my own H-1B practice, there was an unprecedented number of H-1B RFE's issued last year. In my own experience as an H-1B practitioner, most of these RFE's dealt involved specious and unfounded claims by H-1B examiners that offered H-1B positions were not really "specialty occupations" according to the H-1B regulations, even in cases where the occupations has been traditionally recognized as an H-1B specialty occupation by USCIS and its predecessor INS for many years past.

    But regardless of the asserted reason for any specific RFE's, last year's experience indicates that many of them were issued only for the purpose of holding up or even ultimately denying approval of meritorious H-1B petitions.

    Over and above the issue of unnecessary H-1B approval delays or unfounded denial decisions, what does this say about Trump's stated push to limit legal immigration to so-called "merit based" applicants, while eliminating the family-based and diversity-based visas which have enabled tens of millions of immigrants, mainly from non-European parts of the world, to come to America legally over the past several decades?

    If the president is really so much in favor of "merit-based" immigration to the exclusion of most, if not all, other legal immigration, including the family "chain migration" (which he condemned as "horrible" in a December 29 2017 tweet) and the diversity visa lottery (which he also denounced as a danger to US security in his SOTU message) why is his administration throwing so many roadblocks in the way of approving petitions for well-educated, highly skilled H-1B professional immigrants who are clear examples of the "merit-based" immigration which he claims to support?
    __________________________
    Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 30 years, Roger has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from diverse parts of the world obtain H-1B and other employment and family-based work visas and green cards.

    Roger's email address is
    algaselex@gmail.com


    Updated 03-21-2018 at 06:01 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  3. Democrats Won't Stand up for Dreamers in Spending Bill, But They Seem OK With Torture. Will Enabling Trump's Agenda Help Immigrants? Roger Algase

    The latest news reports indicate that, once again, the Democratic leaders in Congress are apparently willing to give up the only leverage they will ever have in a Republican-controlled Congress to enact relief for the Dreamers, namely insisting that a DACA solution be included in an omnibus spending bill to avoid a government shutdown at the end of this week.

    The Hill reports that Democratic leaders in both Houses are apparently pulling back from insisting on a DACA solution in the spending bill.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/house/37...gration-demand

    This would leave Dreamers' protection from eventual deportation in the hands of the right wing majority Supreme Court, or up to the tender mercy of Donald Trump himself. LOL with that on both counts, Dreamers.

    However, while the Democrats may have a problem standing up for the Dreamers in Congress, they seem to have less difficulty in accommodating torture, as shown by POLITICO's report on their evident reluctance to block confirmation of an alleged CIA "black site" torture chief, Gina Haskel, as head of the CIA.

    https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...71532?lo=ap_f1

    Whether the notorious division between Democrats who are willing to stand up for principle and those who appear to be more attracted to the siren song of presumed political expediency was responsible for putting Donald Trump, along with his anti-immigrant agenda, in the White House in the first place is beyond the scope of this comment and not a subject for discussion here.

    But now we know many more details than we did in 2016 showing how serious Trump is in pursuing that agenda, which not only involves mass arrest and incarceration, if not yet an increase in deportation, of non-criminal immigrants (or those charged with minor crimes), but drastic cuts in legal immigration affecting mainly non-white parts of the world.

    Therefore, is it not time to ask whether Democrats' playing nice to Trump's agenda is really the best way to protect immigrants from having the race and religion neutral, non-discriminatory immigration system which America has had for the past 50 years dismantled bit by bit, and replaced by a 1924-style system in which only immigrants from "Countries like Norway" to use Trump's January 11 expression, are welcome?

    The argument that caving in to and playing along with Trump's agenda will help immigrants in the current environment is based on tortured reasoning, to say the least.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    algaselex@gmail.com

    Updated 03-20-2018 at 08:58 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  4. Trump Finds New Reason to Demonize, Scapegoat and Promote Animosity Against Latin American and Other Minority Immigrants - Opioid Crisis. Roger Algase

    Donald Trump has now found another excuse for promoting his agenda of building a wall against Mexico and attempting to persuade Congress to enact draconian restrictions against legal immigration - which would overwhelmingly impact Latin American and other non-European immigrants most of all - the opioid crisis.

    Against clear evidence from the National Institutes of Health, among other independent sources, that the opioid crisis is caused mainly by over-prescription on the part of large US pharmaceutical companies and not by immigrants, Trump gave a venomous, demagogic March 19 speech blaming the crisis on, among other things "releasing illegal immigrants...back into our communities."

    http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...pioid-epidemic

    In contrast, the latest expert US government agency analysis by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) dated March, 2018, gives the following reason for what it calls the "Opioid Overdose Crisis":

    "In the late 1990's, pharmaceutical companies reassured the medical community that patients would not become addicted to prescription opioid pain relievers, and healthcare providers began to prescribe them at greater rates. This subsequently led to widespread diversion and misuse of these medications before it became clear that these medications could indeed be highly addictive."

    https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abus...verdose-crisis

    Even Trump's White House recognizes the need to reduce opioid prescriptions. The above report in The Hill states that White House aims to reduce these prescriptions by one third over the next three years.

    What does apparent drug company profiteering from pain-killer abuse by Americans have to do with immigration?

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    algaselex@gmail.com

    Updated 03-20-2018 at 07:14 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

  5. Goodlatte's immigration reform bill has room for compromise. By Nolan Rappaport


    © Greg Nash

    Congressman Bob Goodlatte’s (R-Va.) immigration bill, the Securing America’s Future Act (SAFA) may be the last chance this election year to pass a bill that would help the Dreamers. It needs more support, but he should be able to get it from the Democrats.

    First, however, he needs to overcome the negative impression some Democrats have of him and his bill, which is expressed in this commentthe ACLU made when SAFA was introduced:

    “This bill should be viewed for what it is — an obvious attempt by longtime anti-Dreamer lawmaker Rep. Bob Goodlatte and his allies to derail a legislative solution for Dreamers.


    “The policies in the new legislation are a collection of hardline provisions designed to sabotage, rather than advance, the possibility of a bipartisan breakthrough.”

    The best approach may be to revise SAFA to include a statutory DACAprogram with a legalization program that would not become available until the bill’s enforcement measures are implemented. Also, Goodlatte should remove enforcement measures that are not needed to prevent a recurrence of what happened the last time the Republicans agreed to a legalization program.

    The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) legalized 2.7 million people, but 10 years later, there were 5 million new undocumented aliens. The enforcement measures that were supposed to prevent illegal immigration in the future were never implemented.

    Highlights
    from SAFA:

    Read more at http://thehill.com/opinion/immigrati...for-compromise

    Published originally on The Hill.

    About the author. 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.





Page 11 of 294 FirstFirst ... 9101112132161111 ... 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: