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

Immigration Daily

 




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. Letters of the Week: January 23 - January 29

  2. GOP's 'sanctuary city' crackdown bill takes meat-cleaver approach. By Nolan Rappaport


    © Getty


    President Donald J. Trump’s 10-point plan to put “America First” includes a pledge to end sanctuary cities, cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration officers who are seeking to apprehend and remove undocumented immigrants, by threatening to cut off their federal funds.

    ....

    On Jan. 3, 2017, Representative Lou Barletta (R-Penn) introduced, the Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act, with six Republican cosponsors.

    According to Barletta, too many city mayors think that they are above federal law and place their own ideology ahead of the safety of their residents. His bill will stop that practice by cutting off their federal funding if they continue to refuse to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.

    Read more at --
    http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blo...eaver-approach

    Originally published 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 the 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 twenty years. He also has been a policy advisor for the DHS Office of Information Sharing and Collaboration under a contract with TKC Communications, and he has been in private practice as an immigration lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson.






  3. Trump Pledges to Work with Congress to Help DREAMers

    by , 01-23-2017 at 03:59 PM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    Via NPR:

    "Earlier today, the new White House Chief of Staff offered a hint of what the Trump administration has planned for thousands of immigrants who now have temporary legal status. Reince Priebus told Fox News this morning that the Trump administration would work with House and Senate leaders to find a long-term solution for immigrants who now have temporary legal status under the so-called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals known as DACA."

    Tags: congress, daca, trump Add / Edit Tags
  4. VISA BULLETIN: "CONSISTENT FORWARD MOVEMENT” EXPECTED FOR PHILS EB-3

    by , 01-23-2017 at 11:52 AM (Chris Musillo on Nurse and Allied Health Immigration)
    by Chris Musillo

    The Department of State’s Visa Bulletin guru, Charlie Oppenheim, hosts monthly meetings with the American Immigration lawyers Association. Charlie Oppenheim is the Department of State’s Chief of the Control and Reporting Division. He is the officer who is responsible for producing the Visa Bulletin each month. This month’s Check In With Charlie featured predictions about EB2 and EB3 in most of the popular categories for readers of this Blog. Here are some highlights:

    Philippine EB3 – Charlie again offered his most optimistic predictions for this category. He said that he expects “consistent forward movement” in the EB-3 Philippines category. While he does not expect the Philippines EB-3 to catch up to the Worldwide date, he expects Philippines EB-3 to “recover significantly”. This is consistent with internal MU Law analysis, which sees this category progressing at least into 2013 by the Summer of 2017.

    India EB2 and EB3 – Unfortunately the news is not so rosy for Indian nationals. Neither EB2 nor EB3 is expected to progress to any significant degree.

    Worldwide EB-2 and EB-3 – EB-2 will remain current for the foreseeable future. It is our expectation that Worldwide EB-3 will continue to see a slight retrogression, consistent with the recent past. The Worldwide EB-3 date may stall in the Spring/Summer of 2017, as the full allotment of numbers gets used. It will then move quickly again into the next fiscal year.

    China EB-2 and EB-3 - These categories are the most difficult to predict. The DOS is trying to be conservative in the forward progression of these dates in an effort to stop the see-saw progression and retrogression of dates that we have seen in the recent past.


    Please read the Musillo Unkenholt Healthcare and Immigration Law Blog at www.musillo.com and www.ilw.com. You can also visit us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.
  5. "Are you anti- or pro-Trump?" Could "extreme vetting" of immigrants destroy free speech rights for Americans as well? Roger Algase

    Only one or two days into the new Trump administration, there are already some very disturbing indications that the new president's campaign promise to conduct "extreme vetting" of immigrants seeking to enter the US on the basis of their overall ideology and adherence to "American values" not just security concerns, may already be moving America in the direction of thought control and one-man rule over American citizens as well.

    The Guardian reports that on January 19 (the day before Trump's inauguration) as a reported 3 million Americans were getting ready to exercise the free speech rights on which this country was founded and which are the essence of America, by taking part in women's marches demonstrating against our new president in US cities coast to coast on January 21, a group of 8 foreign citizens, six Canadians and two French nationals, was prevented from entering the US from Canada by the US Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP) at a crossing near Champlain, New York, for refusing to support Donald Trump.

    https://theguardian.com/world/2017/j...enied-entry-us

    The following is from The Guardian's story:

    "The group was up front with border agents, Dyck [one of the group members] said. 'We said we were going to the women's march on Saturday and they said: "Well, you're going to have to pull over."'

    What followed was a two-hour ordeal. Their cars were searched and their mobile phones examined. Each member of the group was fingerprinted and had their photo taken.

    Border agents first told the two French citizens that they had been denied entry to the US and informed them that any future visit to the US would now require a visa.

    'Then, for the rest of us, they said, "You're headed home today,' Dyck said. The group was then warned that if they tried to cross the border again during the weekend, they would be arrested."

    No, the above news story is not about people seeking to enter Vladimir Putin's Russia or Kim Jong Un's North Korea. It is about people coming to the United States of America in order to engage in free speech that is protected by the US constitution.

    But these eight foreign citizens were not the only ones turned away at that same crossing that day. The Guardian continues with a report about two foreign citizens, one from the UK and one from Canada who were seeking US entry to join the demonstrations:

    "After being questioned, fingerprinted and photographed Kroese [the UK citizen] and his Canadian companion were refused entry because they were planning to attend what the border agent called a 'potentially violent rally'. he said. The pair was advised not to travel to the United States for a few months, and Kroese was told he would now need a visa to enter the US."

    And this is not all. The same story relates the experience of Joseph Decunha, another Canadian who tried to enter the US to join the women's march against the new president, along with two American friends:

    "The group was brought in for secondary questioning, where the border agent asked about their political views. Decunha told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: 'The first thing he asked us point blank is, "Are you anti- or pro-Trump?"'

    The two Americans were allowed to enter, but the Canadian was turned back.

    "ARE YOU ANTI- OR PRO-TRUMP?"

    Will this be the new test for foreign citizens seeking to enter the United States from now on?


    Yes, of course, America is a sovereign nation. If Congress wants to pass a law (or the president wants to issue an INA 212(f) decree, as he has the right to do) saying that only foreign citizens who hold their right arms straight up, click their heels and pledge undying personal loyalty to our new president can be allowed into the United States, there is nothing in our laws or constitution that would give a non-US citizen the right to challenge this.

    The Supreme Court has consistently reiterated this point in a long line of cases beginning with the Chinese exclusion law cases in the late 19th Century, as reaffirmed in Kleindienst v. Mandel (1972), about which I have written previously in some detail.

    But if the United States adopts rules for foreign citizens coming into this country which are more consistent with an authoritarian society than the democratic standards which the founders of this country intended for America, how long will we, the American people, be able to maintain our own free speech rights?

    A chilling answer to this can be found in the charges filed against demonstrators who were actually arrested during the women's march. alternet.org (not to be confused with the Alt-Right!) reports about the unusually severe felony charges, carrying up to 10 years in prison, that were filed against demonstrators who were arrested, and the abuses they received at the hands of the police.

    http://www.alternet.org/trumps-ameri...ave-repression

    It is easy to make excuses for Trump. Yes, foreign citizens do not have a constitutional right of their own to come to the United States. Yes, violence of any kind at rallies, whether for or against Trump (and there have been both kinds) is impermissible.

    But the signs that repressing the freedom of speech (or religion) of foreign citizens who want to come to America go hand in hand with doing the same to the rights of American citizens are unmistakable.

    If we turn the other way in the face of abuses against the basic human rights of immigrants or foreign visitors, we should not be surprised if the freedoms we take for granted as Americans soon begin to disappear as well.

    Roger Algase
    Attorney at Law
    algaselex@gmail.com


    Updated 01-23-2017 at 01:53 PM by ImmigrationLawBlogs

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: