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

Recent Blogs Posts

  1. DOJ Settles Immigration-Related Discrimination Claim Against Themesoft Inc.

    By: Bruce Buchanan, Sebelist Buchanan Law

    The Department of Justice, through the Immigrant and Employee Rights Section (IER), has reached a settlement with Themesoft Inc., a Texas-based company that provides consulting and staffing services to technology clients. The settlement resolves the IER’s investigation into whether the company discriminated against a work-authorized immigrant by refusing to allow him to continue in the hiring process, in violation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).

    The investigation, initiated based on a worker’s complaint, revealed Themesoft engaged in citizenship status discrimination against an asylee by refusing to process his application because he was not a lawful permanent resident, U.S. citizen, or H-1B visa holder. Asylees have permanent work authorization, like U.S. citizens, refugees, and lawful permanent residents, so employers are generally prohibited from discriminating against them based on their citizenship status. The investigation also revealed Themesoft requested specific immigration documentation from the worker because of his citizenship or immigration status even though the INA’s anti-discrimination provision prohibits such conduct.

    Under the settlement agreement, Themesoft will pay $12,000 in back pay to the Charging Party and offer him employment; $4,543.25 in civil penalties for the alleged citizenship status discrimination and the unfair documentary practices; post notices informing workers about their rights under the INA’s anti-discrimination provision; train its Human Resources personnel on their legal obligations to not discriminate by viewing a free online IER Employer/HR Representative webinar presentation and reviewing the M-274 Handbook for Employers; review and revise, as necessary, any existing employment policies that relate to nondiscrimination based on traits or characteristics protected by law; for the next three years, provide the most current version of the Form I-9 Lists of Acceptable Documents to individuals in the same manner as it provides them with the Form I-9 to complete; and be subject to departmental monitoring and reporting requirements for three years.
  2. Immigration Court Cases Currently Involve More Long-Time Residents

    by , 04-23-2018 at 09:12 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    Via Syracuse University's TRAC:

    Over time, immigration enforcement priorities have varied, as have the ebb and flow of illegal entrants, visa over-stayers, and asylum seekers. Using the court's records on the date of entry of each individual, TRAC calculated the period of time between the entry date and the date of the notice to appear (NTA) that imitated the court case.

    The typical or median length of stay has varied a lot during the period from October 2000 through March of 2018. This typical length of stay - half were less, half were more - varied between almost 5 years down to 0.0 - this is, most had just arrived. Average lengths of stay was somewhat longer than median stays. This is because the average can be skewed upward by a small proportion of individuals who had been in the country for long periods of time.


    These results are plotted in the time series graph at Figure 2. Here the average length of stay is depicted by the bars, while the lower orange line that is superimposed on the bars represents the median years of stay. The upper dark line that usually appears above the bars shows how long the minimum length of time was for the top quarter of all cases. That is, 25 percent of the cases had been in the country this long or longer at the time their cases began.



    Figure 2. Length of Stay in U.S. before Immigrant Court Cases Began, October 2000 - March 2018

    Click here for the full report.
  3. Letters of the Week: April 23 - April 27

  4. SCOTUS to Hear Arguments on When Time Stops Cutting off Cancellation of Removal Eligibility

    by , 04-23-2018 at 08:48 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    Today the Supreme Court will hear arguments on the case of Pereira v. Sessions.

    The question presented is: "Whether, to trigger the stop-time rule by serving a“notice to appear under section 1229(a),” the government must “specify” the items listed in § 1229(a)’s definition of a “notice to appear,” including “[t]he time and place at which the proceedings will be held.”



    Click here for full SCOTUS Blog coverage.

    Updated 04-23-2018 at 08:52 AM by MKolken

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: