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

Greg Siskind on Immigration Law and Policy

BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK

Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average.

I've reported many times on how adjustment of status cases can be delayed for years because it is stuck in a queue waiting on a security clearance. In many cases, the only remedy that has regularly worked is taking the government to court.



A reader at Immigration Voice has scooped all of the normal sources for immigration news and posted a new USCIS memorandum that allows USCIS examiners to adjudicate adjustment cases pending more than 180 days without having the name checks completed. The reasoning behind this recognizes something that is pure common sense - adjustment applicants are already here in the US so the country is no safer just because the case is pending without adjudication. Instead, USCIS will institute removal proceedings against the very small percentage of adjustment applicants who would have had their cases rejected had the case been delayed until the security clearance was completed.



USCIS has indicated it will, along with the FBI, devote substantial resources to get all security clearances turned around in under six months so this is nothing but a rarely used option for an examiner to complete work on a case.



NOTE: Naturalization cases are not included. This is probably because revoking naturalization would be an extremely cumbersome process and might not even be legally possible. So don't count on this policy ever being extended to those cases.



Congrats USCIS on showing some pragmatism and enacting a policy that will end a lot of suffering.



Download Mocanu_New_USCIS_NC_Procedures.pdf


Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to Facebook Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to Twitter Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to Google Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to StumbleUpon Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to Reddit Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to Digg Submit "BREAKING NEWS: USCIS WILL ADJUDICATE DELAYED GREEN CARD CASES WITHOUT FBI NAME CHECK" to del.icio.us

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags

Comments

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
  1. Lagal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    Finally! I am surprised, there is no decision on naturalization cases.
  2. David's Avatar
    Great news! Thanks for sharing with us!
  3. Kalifornian's Avatar
    Amigo "Lagal and no longer waiting" ,

    The WOM attorneys have to survive.
  4. hmm's Avatar
    Hope this (very reasonable) policy is implemented. The real solution however is to hire extra FBI analysts, and perhaps adjust some name check criteria. As it is now lots of innocent people are checked manually for no reason other than being born in the wrong country (and I do not even talk of Muslim countries here).

    BTW, the policy will likely cause severe retrogression, I won't be suprised if in a few months worldwide EB2 (amd maybe even EB1) is unavailable.

  5. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    Hm... and I thought it had something to do with the fact that you can wisk an LPR to Guantanamo for security concerns with no questions asked, while that trick is not going to work with a citizen.
  6. CricFan's Avatar
    Greg,

    Give credit where it is due. It is a poster at Immigration Portal who broke the news. The reader at Immigration Voice simply linked to the memo at Immigration Portal. The post below also contains the attachment.

    http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?t=273740
  7. Bamba's Avatar
    Mr. Siskind:

    Would you kindly give your opinion on what this would do to availability of visa numbers and by extension, retrogression in categories with high demand for visa numbers. I am yet to see any possibility of increasing visa numbers. Thanks,
  8. Another voice's Avatar
    Finally these people get their act together and get this process moving!!!!!!!!!!
  9. WD's Avatar
    To legal and not waiting,

    Why am I not surprised that anything that helps legal immigrants gets a sarcastic response from you? what's the need to drag in Guatanamo here? do you consider 485 filers to be 'enemy combatants'?
  10. JAI-HIND's Avatar
    This is a great news & thank you for sharing with us..
  11. jamesVanderbeek's Avatar
    CricFan
    Who cares about the damn credits here !!! you can have all freakin the credits in the world ... On behalf of Greg , hope you dont mind, I give you all the credit that you need for this story ... happy ?

  12. 's Avatar
    This is good news for all those in limbo. Hope they do something about the retrogression & Schedule A recapture. But before that get the rebate bill passed without further bickering
  13. CricFan's Avatar
    James Vanderbeek.

    What is your problem? I pointed out a factual error in the blog. Did I ask for credit? No. Is it wrong to give credit where credit is due?

    Shouldn't we be thanking the original poster on Immigration Portal who found this incredible information and posted it?

    You are just an impolite ***.
  14. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    WD, well, I am not surprised that you judge any response from me as a snark response toward legal immigrants. Of course, why would it be any other way - if anything, I was not an EB immigrant stuck for almost two years in the namecheck... oh wait, I was!

    I am not dragging Guantanamo in here, I am just trying to understand the USCIS logic (perhaps, sinister logic) of not giving the same solution to the same problem to the two groups affected. The rumors of this rule were out for quite a while, and the logic behind it was described as "the purpose of the namecheck is not to deny immigration benefits, it is to weed out terrorsts and other criminals". So, my understanding that the USCIS was trying to assess the impact of the rule on both types of applications, particularly, in the unlikely case of a problem being found after the approval. As you probably do not know, it is quite easy to strip somone of a green card, but it is next to imossible to do with a citizenship. That's where Guantanamo comes in - and if you read the news, you would probably understand - any non-citizen legally residing in the US can be wisked away to Guantanamo or any other of their special prisons, and there is pretty much no coming back even if you are completely innocent.

    So, my conclusion is that the USCIS does not want to have the same solution for citizenship applications because they want to give other branches of the government opportunity an opportunity to keep people non-citizens with no habeas corpus rights.
  15. b's Avatar
    Treating the GC and citizenship namechecks differently would make sense depending on how hard (or not) it is to revoke someones citizenship based on a negative report from FBI.

    The current memo suggest GC will be revoked if something very negative turns up in the FBI report.
  16. Legal and no longer waiting's Avatar
    And it would also create an underclass of not-yet-citizens, those who paid their fees, passed the interview, but can't naturalize (and, possibly, get married, or adopt children from overseas). I don't think this will go well for the USCIS.
  17.            's Avatar
    "if you read the news, you would probably understand - any non-citizen legally residing in the US can be wisked away to Guantanamo or any other of their special prisons, and there is pretty much no coming back even if you are completely innocent."

    You must be really thick to make this into an immigration issue. Barring the citizens of a very short list of countries, the US can move any non-US citizen from *anywhere* to Guantanamo.
  18. Lou's Avatar
    Are you people are sick???

    Use a handle/name before you start ranting pages and pages..
  19. 's Avatar
    "And it would also create an underclass of not-yet-citizens, those who paid their fees, passed the interview, but can't naturalize (and, possibly, get married, or adopt children from overseas). I don't think this will go well for the USCIS."

    Life is not fair deal with it.
  20. 's Avatar
    "And it would also create an underclass of not-yet-citizens, those who paid their fees, passed the interview, but can't naturalize (and, possibly, get married, or adopt children from overseas). I don't think this will go well for the USCIS."

    There is nothing in the law that prevents permanent residents from getting married or adopting children abroad.
Page 1 of 2 12 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: