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


Chinese Immig. Daily




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

View RSS Feed

All Blog Entries

  1. CBO: Immigration Bill Would Cut Deficits Substantially

    by , 06-18-2013 at 01:27 PM (Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy)
    Hot off the presses:

    On balance, the economic impacts not included in the cost estimate would
    have no significant net effect on federal budget deficits during the
    coming decade and would reduce deficits during the following decade.
    Taking into account a limited set of economic effects, the cost estimate
    shows that changes in direct spending and revenues under the
    legislation would decrease federal budget deficits by $197
    billion over the 2014-2023 period and by roughly $700 billion over the
    2024-2033 period. The cost estimate also shows that implementing the
    legislation would result in net discretionary costs of $22 billion over
    the 2014-2023 period and $20 billion to $25 billion over the 2024-2033
    period, assuming appropriation of the amountsauthorized or otherwise
    needed to implement the legislation. According to CBO's central
    estimates (within a range that reflects the uncertainty about two key
    economic relationships in CBO's analysis), the economic impacts not
    included in the cost estimate would have no further net effect on budget
    deficits over the 2014-2023 period and would further reduce deficits
    (relative to the effects reported in the cost estimate) by about $300
    billion over the 2024-2033 period.
    *****
    S. 744 would boost economic output. Taking account of all economic
    effects (including those reflected in the cost estimate), the bill would
    increase real (inflation-adjusted) GDP relative to the amount CBO
    projects under current law by 3.3 percent in 2023 and by 5.4 percent in
    2033, according to CBO's central estimates.

    By the way, when some of the anti-immigrant folks try to discredit the Congressional Budget Office, consider this quote:


    "I say all the time that CBO is God around here, because policy lives and dies by CBO's word." -- Sen. Chuck Grassley [3/6/2006]

  2. Landrieu and Tester Amendments Pass in Senate

    by , 06-18-2013 at 12:52 PM (Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy)
    Poison pill amendments on the enforcement triggers introduced by Senators Thune and Vitter were soundly defeated. But less controversial amendments introduced by Senators Landrieu (D-LA) and Tester (D-MT) passed easily.
    The Landrie 1222 amendment does the following:

    Adds a new Section 2554 to the end of Title II of the bill.
    Section 104 of the original Child Citizenship Act of 2000 applied that bill's language conferring citizenship to certain children born abroad to US citizen parents. The original bill only applied the law to people who qualified at the time the law was changed. The new language would make the bill apply to people who meet the requirements regardless of when they qualify for the new benefit.
    The requirement that both members of an adopting couple do a pre-adoption visit to the child abroad is also modified. Under the amendment, only one child would have to visit.
    The requirement that for a child to get automatic citizenship, the child has to be present in the US pursuant to a lawful admission is modified to simply say that the child must be in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent without reference to the mode of entry.




    Senator Tester's amendment would add tribal representatives to the DHS Border Oversight Taskforce.
  3. Landrieu and Tester Amendments Pass in Senate

    by , 06-18-2013 at 12:35 PM (Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy)
    Poison pill amendments on the enforcement triggers introduced by Senators Thune and Vitter were soundly defeated. But less controversial amendments introduced by Senators Landrieu (D-LA) and Tester (D-MT) passed easily.
    The Landrie 1222 amendment does the following:

    Adds a new Section 2554 to the end of Title II of the bill.
    Section 104 of the original Child Citizenship Act of 2000 applied that bill's language conferring citizenship to certain children born abroad to US citizen parents. The original bill only applied the law to people who qualified at the time the law was changed. The new language would make the bill apply to people who meet the requirements regardless of when they qualify for the new benefit.
    The requirement that both members of an adopting couple do a pre-adoption visit to the child abroad is also modified. Under the amendment, only one child would have to visit.
    The requirement that for a child to get automatic citizenship, the child has to be present in the US pursuant to a lawful admission is modified to simply say that the child must be in the legal and physical custody of the citizen parent without reference to the mode of entry.




    Senator Tester's amendment would add tribal representatives to the DHS Border Oversight Taskforce.
  4. USCIS Memo on RFE's and NOIDS ! Cause for Concern ?

    Recently, the USCIS issued a new memo regarding the issuance of Request for Evidence (RFE's) and Notice
    of Intent to Deny (NOID's). The stated purpose of the memo was to replace a
    prior memo that gave guidance that RFE's "should be avoided if possible".
    This new memo seems to encourage not only the issuance of RFE's but, also
    reminds the Service examiners that they can deny cases without even issuing an
    RFE if in the examiner's judgment, they believe that "there is no
    possibility that additional information or explanation will cure the deficiency".
    This last reminder is what scares many of us who routinely deal with Service
    Center examiners. The legal knowledge that they must possess in reviewing a
    variety of types of petitions for countless types of companies and
    positions is often overwhelming. Regularly it seems that RFE
    responses are necessary to educate the examiner on the law, point out
    facts already included in the evidence or explain common practices of American
    business. In the past 2 weeks alone, we have had RFE's : questioning
    the expiration of MSA's with automatic renewal clauses and a current SOW
    referencing the MSA; requesting a tax return when a 10k was submitted in the
    context of questioning the ability to pay a 65,000/yr.  wage by a Fortune
    500 company with revenues in excess of  3 Billion dollars per year;
    requesting a foreign educational evaluation for an individual with a Master's
    degree from a well known Pac 10 University; challenging whether an IT project
    manager being offered a salary of 135,000/yr was the type of position that
    really needed a Bachelor's degree ; and lastly, questioning how a degree
    in Computer Science and Engineering qualified an individual for a position
    as a .Net Applications Developer.  A lot of money and time is
    wasted each week in responding to RFE's that frankly, should've never been
    issued in the 1st place but, with that being said, an RFE and an opportunity to
    respond and provide an education, is much less expensive and than having to
    file a motion to re-open or re-consider after the issuance of a denial. In
    addition to the cost factor, when an RFE is issued, for example, in the context
    of an H-1b transfer, the individual can continue to work, however, if a denial
    is issued, the employment authorized under the portability provisions of AC21
    are terminated. We are hopeful that this memo will not encourage those
    examiners who are already deeply entrenched in the "culture of No" to use their
    discretion to ignore the law and the facts and start issuing denials before
    issuing an RFE. Frankly, I am hopeful that the Service Centers ignore this HQ
    memo like they ignore so many others.
    This post originally appeared on the Hammond Law Group Views blog.
  5. ICE Director John Morton Resigns

    by , 06-18-2013 at 10:15 AM (Matthew Kolken on Deportation And Removal)
    It appears John Morton has tendered his resignation.
    From the L.A. Times:

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement Director John Morton announced his resignation Monday after more than four years at the head of the agency.

    A senior Department of Homeland Security official familiar with the matter said that Morton's departure was voluntary but acknowledged that the Obama administration was surprised by the timing as Congress is in the middle of debating a comprehensive overhaul of immigration laws.

    Morton has been hired as Senior Vice President of Capital One Financial Corp. heading compliance starting this August.
    I will always remember him as the man that was "pleased" to report that in a six month period in 2011 his office deported 46,486 parents of United States citizens.
    More rats from a sinking ship.
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: