Connect to us
Make us Homepage
The leadingimmigration lawpublisher - over50000 pages offree
Copyright© 1995-ILW.COM,AmericanImmigration LLC.
BALCA recently determined that a minor typographical error in the name of an employer on a state-workforce agency job order did not discourage U.S. workers from applying when the employer was known by a different trade name. The employer submitted a labor certification for the position of “Food Service Manager.” In the job order, the employer listed its name as “SWOWII, Inc.” However, the employer’s actual name was “SWDWII, LLC.” The Certifying Officer denied the case on the basis that this error would harm the ability of U.S. workers to identify the employer and would result in the Office of Foreign Labor Certification being unable to confirm whether the employer appropriately engaged in recruitment. BALCA reviewed information submitted by the employer that showed that it was a franchise of Saladworks and generally conducted business as “Harmony Saladworks” or “Harmony Plaza Saladworks.” BALCA determined that “because the employer’s legal name has little to do with the employer’s public identity, . . . a minor typographical error . . . on the job order would do little to confuse potential applicants about the employer’s identity.” Consequently, the denial was overturned. While employer’s should ensure that they correctly identify their name on all recruitment documentation that is conducted as part of the labor certification process, this decision does provide support for the idea that an error in the spelling of a name must actually cause potential applicants to be unable to identify the employer. This post originally appeared on HLG's Views blog by Cadence Moore. http://www.hammondlawgroup.com/blog/.
Update, July 28, 1:41 pm:
In my list of Trump's immigration "enemies" described below, i omitted to mention members of two legal visa categories that were definitely on Trump's list of "friendly" ones while they were useful to his businesses, but are no longer so in terms of his current objective of winning the presidency.
I refer to skilled and professional green cards through labor certification and H-1B visas, the latter of which he has sponsored over 1,000 foreign workers for, mainly from Mexico.
Trump now wants to abolish both of these legal visa categories, which he now says are unfair to American workers, even though this issue never bothered before he started running for the presidency.
But I also want to be fair to Trump. Did he not also say that, in addition to the alleged "criminals" and "rapists", Mexico was also sending some "good people" to America as well? Now we know who those good people were - the ones who were working for Trump and, there is good reason to believe from his own statements, helping him keep his labor costs down.
My original post appears below:
What does Donald Trump's alleged support for purported Russian hacking into thousands of emails from the Democratic National Committee and their release to Wikileaks on the eve of the Democratic National Convention say about his immigration policies?
The short answer would be not very much, and this would justify asking whether this topic is even worth writing about in a blog devoted to discussion of immigration law.
Moreover, just as I previously argued that the charges that Trump was anti-Semitic, based on his use of a sheriff's badge image which happened to look like a Star of David in one of his attacks on Hillary Clinton were vastly overblown and with scant foundation in reality; there is no justification for the hystrical shouting that we have been hearing coming from some people on the Democratic side that Trump has allegedly committed "treason" by endorsing the purported hacking by Russia.
I respectfully suggest leaving the "treason" insanity to some of Trump's own supporters who have been calling for Hillary Clinton to be hanged in public. I say this even though no one who has been reading my posts could possibly mistake me for a Trump supporter myself.
But this is not to say that Trump's statement on July 27 about alleged Russian hacking of the DNC, as quoted in numerous media stories, is totally irrelevant to drawing some conclusions about what might be in store for immigrants in America under a Donald Trump administration.
First, let us look at Trump's actual statement, as quoted in POLITICO:
"It would be interesting to see, I will tell you this. Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing."
Trump has since tried to dismiss the above comment as merely being "sarcastic", and I do not see any reason not to give him the benefit of the doubt. While it is certainly reprehensible to give any support or endorsement, for whatever reason to an attempt by any foreign dictator, let alone one as dangerous as Putin, to manipulate America's electoral process, there is nothing in the above statement to indicate that Trump was encouraging or recommending the alleged Russian hacking, or that he bears any responsibility for it.
If the above is the case, then what relationship does Trump's statement about the DNC hacking incident have to how he might carry out immigration policies as president? As the ancient Greek poet Hesiod, who some scholars believe may have been a contemporary of Homer, wrote in the introduction to his Theogonia ("Theogony"):
alla tiei moi tauta peri dryn ei peri petrein;
("What is all of this to me any more than a tree or a rock?")
There is a good argument that the answer lies in what the above statement says about Trump's obsession which showing that Hillary Clinton, the only person who stands between him and his taking over control of the United States government and being able to impose his will on the entire country, if not the world, is allegedly a criminal who deserves to be locked up.
This is despite the fact that the FBI, after a lengthy and exhaustive investigation of her email activities as Secretary of State, one which led to its strong criticism of some of her practices, still found no basis to bring criminal charges against her.
But Trump is not willing to let this issue go - because Clinton is a political opponent. Therefore anything that can be done to get her out of the way must be done, just as Trump has shown he would like to do with other political and media opponents during this campaign; and, perhaps even more to the point, just as Putin has done with his political and media opponents in Russia by jailing and, allegedly, murdering some of them.
See: Fox News, May 29. 2015:
Putin opponent near death in suspected poisoning
This ruthless attitude applies to anyone whom Trump considers to be an enemy, and that is where his attitudes toward immigration come into the picture. Trump has made it clear in numerous speeches, over and over again, that he considers entire classes of immigrants as enemies, whether they may be Mexican "criminals", "rapists" and "drug dealers", or Muslims from around the world who are filled with "hatred" for America.
What does one do with "enemies"? One builds walls against them; one bars them from entering the United states from many, if not all, countries of the world; one carries out mass incarceration and expulsion against them on a scale unprecedented in US history, and one seeks to amend the US Constitution to deny birthright US citizenship to their American-born children.
This is why Trump's statement about alleged Russian hacking, and his statement's implied support for a ruthless dictator who has been accused of handling his political enemies the same way that Trump has recommended handling Hillary Clinton, while supporting neo-fascist anti-immigrant movements in Europe (see my previous post) should be of such great concern to those who care about immigration, and immigrant rights, in America.
Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants from different parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.
Roger believes that respecting and protecting immigrant rights is essential to preserving our democracy and keeping America great His email address is firstname.lastname@example.org
Updated 07-28-2016 at 03:30 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Update, July 26: 11:00 am:
A commentator below has posted a link to a news story about the latest apparent ISIS inspired atrocity, the beheading of an 86-year old priest in France. This gives rise to the question whether there is anyone on this planet who has done more to help ISIS recruitment efforts than Donald Trump's alleged good friend and supporter Vladimir Putin, who has been creating countless new jihadists by propping up the brutal Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad by military force and thereby putting the security of the American people in even greater danger.
My original post follows:
In the past day, there have been several news stories to the effect that Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, with whom Donald Trump reportedly has close ties, based on Trump's extensive business interests in Russia and some kind words he has had to say about Putin, may have tried to influence the US presidential election by arranging to hack into thousands of DNC emails and releasing ones which could prove embarrassing to the Hillary Clinton campaign to Wikileaks on the eve of the DNC convention.
The Hill which is not exactly a mouthpiece for the Clinton campaign and has arguably run more stories about Hillary's own email problems than any other single media outlet, reports as follows on July 25:
"The leak of 20,000 stolen emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is almost certainly an attempt by the Russian government to influence the presidential election, security experts say.
Such a maneuver would be unprecedented and is stirring speculation that Russia is trying to ensure that Republican Donald Trump wins the White House.
'I think we are probably in full scale, "Yes, this is Russia trying to influence the election so they can have the person they prefer at the top of the American government," said James Healy, a director at the Atlantic Council who has worked on cyber defenses at the White House."
Russia's fingerprints seen on DNC hack
Putin's Buddy Trump Is About To Get National Security Briefings. Intel Officers Are Worried.
Because of the conceivably great influence that Putin could have over US immigration policy if he succeeds in arguably helping to determine the results of the US election and installing a possible friend and supporter in the White House, it is instructive to look at Putin's record of backing extreme right wing, neo-fascist anti-immigrant politicians in Europe.
USA Today reported as follows about a year ago (on June 25, 2015):
Russia and Europe's extremist parties find common cause
"Russia and anti-immigrant extremist parties across Europe are forging an unlikely alliance over their shared antipathy for the European Union and NATO and admiration for President Vladimir Putin's strongman style of leadership."
Among right wing extremist leaders with well documented authoritarian, anti-immigrant positions who are mentioned in the above article as having received support from Putin are Viktor Orban of Hungary's Fidesz party and France's National Front party led by Marine Le Pen, as well as far right parties in Germany, Austria, the UK and other European countries.
See also Slate: (May 19, 2014)
Europe's far right and Putin
(I am sorry - finding reliable Slate links is not always as easy as one would wish: please go to Google for find this story.)
If Trump takes over our government with any degree of help from Russia's strongman, would Putin's support for right wing extremist anti-immigrant policies in Europe (though not necessarily in his own country, as will be discussed in a forthcoming post) be replicated in America?
Shouldn't our immigration policies be determined by the American people? Do we need help from a foreign dictator?
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 many parts of the world obtain work visas and green cards.
His email address is email@example.com
Updated 07-26-2016 at 11:51 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Update: July 25, 1:40 pm:
We should also remember Donald Trump's proposal to close down some or all of the Internet, America's main vehicle for free speech, using fear of terrorism as a pretext. Anyone who is not concerned about the survival of our democracy in a Trump presidency is simply wearing blinders.
Update, July 25, 12:24 pm:
The latest news report is that the Ansbach, Germany bomber who blew himself up and injured a dozen people had allegedly pledged allegiance to ISIS.
Update, July 25, 6:09 am:
A July 24 story in defenseone.com indicates Vladimir Putin may have arranged to hack into the Democratic National Committee email system in order to publish thousands of sensitive campaign related emails for the purpose of embarrassing Hillary Clinton.
If this is true, and if Donald Trump is elected as our next president due to the help and support of one of the world's most dangerous and powerful foreign dictators, one can be sure that this is one email hacking event that Hillary Clinton's opponents will not show very much interest in investigating or talking about.
Update, July 24, 11:08 pm:
Reuters reports that a Syrian man who had been denied asylum in Germany a year ago died on July 24 when a bomb he was carrying exploded in the city of Ansbach. The report states that 12 people were wounded in the attack. The report does not indicate any known terrorist connection.
Update, July 24, 3:52 pm:
Huffington Post reports on July 24 that a lone Syrian refugee, with no apparent terrorist connection, attacked some people in the Black Forest city of Reutlingen, Germany. witn a machete, killing one woman and injuring one or two other people.
In an independent development, POLITICO reports that, according to Trump's latest remarks, his switch from wanting to ban Muslims from immigrating to the US on the basis of religion to doing so the basis of country of origin is not a "rollback" of his previous worldwide Muslim ban, but an "expansion".
Many of Trump's detractors and opponents have accused him of being ignorant about U.S. immigration laws (and about our Constitution in general), but in this case, Trump's comments would appear to show a good deal of sophistication.
His comment is fully in the spirit of America's 1924 "national origins" immigration law which attempted to restrict unpopular immigrants, such as Jews, Italian, Eastern Europeans and Middle Easterners, on the pretext of country of origin, rather than ethnicity, which of course was the real reason as shown by the legislative history and other historical background of that law.
Let us hope that if Trump becomes president, we will not see a return to the bigoted, "Nordics" only policies of the 1924 law. There is every chance that we might.
My original post appears below:
Much of the nation is still trying to recover from the shock and horror of Donald Trump's July 21 acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in which he set forth a fear-filled, apocalyptic vision of an America under siege and threatened with violence, crime and terrorism at the hands of Latino and Muslim immigrants and other non-white minorities.
Here are some excerpts from Trump's speech, taken from the official version available on Trump's own campaign website, donaldjtrump.com (annotated with over 200 footnotes, not a few of which refer to items which appreared in openly pro-Trump media such as Fox News and breitbart.com, as well as some of Trump's own previous speeches):
First, about Muslims:
"The damage and devastation that can be inflicted by Islamic radicals has been proven over and over...
My opponent has called for a radical 550 percent increase in Syrian refugees on top of existing massive refugee flows coming into our country under President Obama. She proposes this despite the fact that there's no way to screen these refugees in order to find out who they are or where they come from."
The latter paragraph above is an egregious use of the well known authoritarian Big Lie technique - President Obama has so far admitted only a few thousand Syrian refugees - nowhere near his own tiny target of 10,000 total compared to one million in Germany alone. Refugees are also subject to a screening process that is at least as intensive, if not more so than those for any other immigrants to the US.
See:The United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) Consultation & Worldwide Processing Priorities
Next, Trump attacked Mexican and other Latino immigrants with by now familiar scare tactics:
"On Monday, we heard from three parents whose children were killed by illegal immigrants...
We are going to build a great big border wall to stop illegal immigration, to stop the gangs and the violence, and to stop the drugs from pouring into out communities.
Again, the fact that independent studies have shown that immigrants have lower crime rate that US citizens did not seem to bother Trump.
See Cato Institute: Higher Immigration: Lower Crime (David Griswold, December 2009)
(Link not available; please use Google.)
"Tonight, I want every American whose demands for immigration security have been denied - and every politician who has denied them- to listen very closely to the words am about to say...
My plan is the exact opposite of the radical and dangerous immigration policy of Hillary Clinton.
Americans want relief from uncontrolled immigration. Yet Hillary Clinton is proposing mass amnesty, mass immigration, and mass lawlessness."
While Trump's exercise in stigmatizing and demonizing Muslim and Latino immigrants as terrorists and criminals won praise from some sources, such as former KKK leader David Duke, see:
more rational commentators, however, were appalled at the threat to America's democracy inherent in Trump's dark warnings of violence, terror and lawlessness at the hands of non-white immigrants.
They were also concerned about Trump's charge that Hillary Clinton was supporting violence and terror, and that she was therefore a criminal herself, if not actually guilty of treason - a charge that some of Trump's followers have, reportedly, shouted enthusiastic support for at the convention and at some of Trump's rallies.
Commentator Fareed Zakaria, writing in the Washington Post, compared this to the practice of locking up political opponents in Latin American "banana republics" of 30 years ago, see:
Meanwhile, human rights activist and chess champion Gary Kasparov, also writing in the Washington Post, compared Trump's fear tactics to those of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. For a link to that article, see:
"Donald Trump's dark and frightening sppech at the Republican National Convention on Thursday had pundits and historians making comparisons ranging from George Wallace in the 1960's to Benito Mussolini in the 1930's. As suitable as those comparisons may be, the chill that ran down my spine was not because of Trump's echoes of old newsreel footage. Instead, I saw an Americanized version of the brutally effective propaganda of fear and hatred that Vladimir Putin blankets Russia with today."
The Washington Post itself published an editorial called:
Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy
(July 22 - please go to www.washingtonpost.com or Google to access.)
And here is what Isaac Chotiner has to say about Trump's acceptance speech, writing in Slate:
See: July 22, The Next Trump
(If the above link doesn't work, please go to www.slate.com or search Google.)
"Trump's speech left no doubt that he is an uninhibited authoritarian who would wreak havoc on the country and the world if elected. When the text of Trump's speech leaked Thursday afternoon, pundits focused, correctly, on how dark it was, and how terrifying a picture it painted of present day America. And, indeed, the written speech was gloomy and apocalyptic. But it was nothing compared to the speech as delivered by a red-faced, angry madman."
Chotiner also writes:
"Trump's plan for the country became clearer Thursday night. He is painting the United States as essentially a country on the verge of a breakdown, and thus a country that needs to take extraordinary measures to be rescued. Hence the focus on crime, terrorism and social decay; hence the misleading statistics and dark warnings about the future...A state of emergency calls for extraordinary measures."
The above is already scary enough. But for anyone who has been following Trump's campaign, and especially his immigration proposals, there is nothing new or surprising about the essentially authoritarian nature of Trump's "vision" for America.
It began last year when Trump first proposed his police state "deportation task force" to expel up to 12 million mainly Latino and Asian unauthorized immigrants from the United States. This will be described in detail in a forthcoming post. See:
New York Times: Donald Trump's Police State, Timothy Egan, November 27, 2015
Roger Algase is a New York lawyer and graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants obtain work visas and green cards.
Roger's practice focuses primarily on H-1B specialty occupation and O-1 extraordinary ability work visas, J-1 trainee visas, and green cards though labor certification, extraordinary ability and opposite sex or same sex marriage.
Roger believes that a functioning legal immigration system depends on maintaining the health of our democracy; and that attempts to demonize and exploit prejudice against immigrants based on ethnicity or religion can undermine democracy and destroy the freedoms that all Americans now take for granted.
Roger's email address is firstname.lastname@example.org
Updated 07-26-2016 at 03:44 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs
Rep. Steve King (R - Iowa), an anti-immigrant hard-liner and member of the Subcommittee on Immigration of the House Committee on the Judiciary, and who has in the past called DREAMERS "drug mules", has recently drawn intense criticism for recent comments during a televised discussion allegedly implying that Western, i.e. white, civilization is, and always has been, superior to all others. Is this criticism fair or accurate?
Let us look at Rep. King's exact words, as reported in the New York Daily Mews on July 19. They were as follows:
"I would ask you to go back through history and figure out where are these contributions that have been made by these other categories of people that you are talking about. Where did any other [non-white] subgroup contribute more to civilization?"
It is worth noting that King was not referring just to recent history or any specific historical time. Instead he said:
"...go back through history..."
History, for most people, means the past 5,000 years, ever since the invention of writing. To argue that only white people have contributed to civilization during this period and that the great civilizations of ancient Egypt, China, India, Sumer, Babylonia and many other places either did not exist or were not worth talking about shows either appalling ignorance about world history or an equally appalling lack of regard for the reality of that history.
Of course, this does not mean that non-white civilizations were only important in ancient times. They have been so at all times throughout all of recorded history, right up to the present. Did Gandhi, Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King contribute nothing to modern world civilization?
Later, according to the same news report, Rep. Steve King tried to "clarify" the above statement as follows, telling ABC:
"What I really said was 'Western Civilization' and when you describe Western civilization that can mean much of Western Civilization happens to be Caucasians. But we should not apologize for our culture or our civilization."
Yes, Western civilization was in large part the product of white people, because most Westerners happen to be white. But, while there can be no question that Western civilization has made great contributions to human civilization in general, does that mean it is a superior civilization compared to the other great civilizations of the world in Asia, the Middle East, Africa and the Americas? ? And who is asking anyone to apologize for Western civilization?
Rep. King also appears not to have the slightest knowledge of the enormous contributions that other parts of the world have made to specifically Western civilization, such as the great scientific inventions in China including gunpowder, without which that shining example of American culture, the NRA, would not exist.
Of course, it would be expecting too much to think that Rep. King, who was quoted in the Washington Post on October 12, 2015 as saying the following:
"But I can't find models of the folks that, say, do the hajj to Mecca, I can't find models where they've assimilated into the broader culture of civilization wherever they've gone"
would know anything about how medieval Muslim scholars preserved ancient Greek philosophy and transmitted it to Europe at a time when this very great product of Western civilization had been almost entirely lost in the West. See:
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Greek Sources in Arabic and Islamic Philosophy (2009, 2013)
But in one sense, Rep. Steve King has done all of us a favor. He has clearly shown the real motivation behind Donald Trump's draconian immigration proposals, which are now owned by the Republican party itself, including the Wall with Mexico, mass expulsion of 12 million mainly non-white immigrants who lack legal status in America, and a ban on entry by most, if not all, of the world's Muslims - namely that the "civilizations and cultures" of non-white countries and areas throughout the world are allegedly "inferior" to those associated with white people in Western countries.
How someone with such bigoted views could have been chosen by the House Republican leadership to serve on a committee responsible for immigration policy is something that only those same leaders might be able to explain.
But the above immigration proposals are the same ones which are now being so enthusiastically put forward by Republican standard-bearer Donald Trump and supported by his screaming shouting, white supremacist followers at the Republican National Convention.
Roger Algase is a New York immigration lawyer and a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. For more than 35 years, he has been helping mainly skilled and professional immigrants obtain work visas and green cards.
Roger's practice is focused primarily on H-1B specialty occupation and O-1 extraordinary ability work visas, J-1 training visas, and on green cards through labor certification and opposite sex or same sex marriage. His email address is email@example.com
Updated 07-21-2016 at 08:53 AM by ImmigrationLawBlogs