ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network




Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Immigration LLC.

View RSS Feed


Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29

Rating: 4 votes, 5.00 average.

Please email your letters to or post them directly as "Comment" below.

Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to Facebook Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to Twitter Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to Google Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to StumbleUpon Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to Reddit Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to Digg Submit "Letters of the Week: July 25- July 29" to

Tags: None Add / Edit Tags


  1. Joseph Whalen 's Avatar
    Western District of Washington Dismisses Sex Offender's Challenge to Denial of Alien Fiancee's Visa Petition [I-129F for a K-1 Visa, Disqualified Petitioner]]

    In Beeman v. Napolitan., No. 10-803 (W.D. Wash. May 17, 2011) (Jones, J.), the District Court dismissed a U.S. citizen's challenge to the denial of a visa petition filed on behalf of his alien fiancee. Plaintiff, a registered sex offender, alleged USCIS exceeded its statutory authority and violated his right to due process and equal protection when it applied the immigration provisions of the Adam Walsh Act to his adult fiancee. The court held that USCIS's statutory grant of "sole and unreviewable discretion" to determine whether a sex offender poses "no risk" to an intended beneficiary "could not be more specific or direct," and granted the government's motion to dismiss the case.

    Contact: Sherease Pratt, OIL DCS at 202-616-0063

    Above article from Immigration Litigation Bulletin (ILB) (see page 15):

    District Court Decision:

    USCIS Policy Memos:
  2. Grosvenor Anschell 's Avatar
    Washington State has canceled the non-lawyer immigration assistant profession after being authorized

    for more than twenty years. Handed a monopoly to the lawyers in Washington State.

    Reference: Senate Bill SSB 5023, effective October 20, 2011.
  3. Bruce R. Mulraney's Avatar
    I am glad to see that Immigration Daily published a blog entry stating that ICE should not tolerate insubordination from law enforcement officers who refuse to obey lawful instructions such as ICE's recent Prosecutorial Discretion Policy Memo when those instructions conflict with their personal beliefs. (ID 07/22/11: ICE Should Fire Insubordinate Agents by Jason Dzubow.)

    Will Immigration Daily now apply this viewpoint to all ICE employees who decline to obey lawful instructions that conflict with their personal opinions? Please refer to ID 09/15/08:
    "Conscience" May Thaw ICE-Cold Immigration Raids Strategy by Angelo Paparelli. This blog entry suggested that ICE agents should refuse to participate in immigration raids "in conformity with their faith and conscience." While I have a high opinion of Mr. Paparelli, I strongly disagree with this position. As I remember, the only other disagreement published in Immigration Daily came from David D. Murray.

    Does Immigration Daily endorse the position expressed in Mr. Paparelli's blog entry? If the answer is yes, what would Immigration Daily (and Mr. Paparelli) have to say if judges and other government officials refused to marry interracial couples "in conformity with their faith and conscience?"

    If we allow armed law enforcement officers and other government employees to pick and choose which lawful orders they will obey and which ones they will disobey "in conformity with their faith and conscience" we risk replacing the rule of law with rule by bureaucratic whim. I oppose doing so in all cases regardless of the outcome.

    Bruce R. Mulraney
    Marina del Rey, CA
  4. Joe Whalen's Avatar
    The City of Victorville, CA and its Regional Center has filed suit against DHS/USCIS/CSC challenging its Termination. The CSC Dismissal of the MTR as to the Final Termination was certified to AAO on May 24, 2011. The suit was filed in DC District Court on July 15, 2011. The Complaint, Exhibits, and Coversheet are available through PACER (everything so far costs less than $4). The big document is the exhibits at 223 pages (PACER max amount of $2.40 applies). I think it was filed prematurely but they argue an exception to exhaustion. As this the 1st of a kind, I am watching it. Individual investors have gone to court but Spencer Enterprises as a RC sponsor was denied standing back then. This differs from the Golden Rainbow and RLILP also. Check it out...I have not finished reading every last word yet.
  5. Joe Whalen's Avatar
    USCIS made a change to form N-565 instructions that it initially rejected and stated that it would not make. The change is on the new form posted on their website and the supporting statement and table of changes are well hidden on the lesser known website:

    The following has been added:

    NOTE: USCIS has no legal basis to change a name absent a legal document such as a marriage certificate, divorce decree, or a court ordered name change. In addition, USCIS is prohibited from making any changes to an incorrect date of birth if one has completed the naturalization/citizenship process and sworn to the facts, including the wrong date of birth.
  6. Abebe's Avatar
    I am very glad to get this information because I have a family in USA and if God help us we try to be together, thanks a lot
  7. Sara's Avatar
    Thanks for letting me know about other good stuff!
  8. Carol's Avatar
    I am writing on behalf of an actress friend who holds a green card. My friend, a Chinese immigrant with minimal English comprehension, was entering the US after visiting family in Mexico (via Alaska Air) on May 31st , 2012 arriving around 830PM. She was treated very poorly by the primary passport inspector. She was yelled at and given attitude and afterwards had her documents rudely slammed in front of her before being asked to leave. Initially, as she walked up to the officer behind the counter with her documents, she was greeted with fierce, unwelcoming eyes. He gave her instructions in English which she could not understand. She followed with " English little". He then resumed by pointing his index finger at her face and yelling out "Listen, listen!" while continuing on with more instructions which she had no clue of. The officer then turned on a Chinese recording asking her where she had been. She replied: "Mexico" As this interaction continues on, he again yelled at her "Why, why?" This continues on for several minutes with shaking of the officer's head proceeded with slamming of her documents in front of her on the counter before motioning for her to leave. At the end of this interaction, my friend was so appalled at how unpleasant this officer was that she stood there for seconds before realizing that she had been shooed off.

    My friend has been a law abiding green card holder over a decade. She visits the US every opportunity she has, at least twice a year and for the most part has been treated with the most courteous people while she is here.

    I believe my friend was being unfairly subjected to disparate treatment based upon illegal factors such as her race, she was intimidated due to her lack of the English language. Although she has limited English comprehension, she noted that there were yelling, shaking of head and lots of rolling of the eyes. All of which are universal signs of being unfriendly and rude. As a result, she felt very intimidated and violated. This officer who represents the very first face of the United States of America to incoming visitors should be ashamed of his behavior. He was rude, hostile and unprofessional. After all, America, with its beautiful flag and vast land, really represent equality, justice and a land of opportunity for all.

    We all realize that as passport inspectors, their job is to check and prevent the entry of any undesirables into our country. However, this is not an automatic license to be rude and arrogant. There's a huge difference between being efficient and doing a thorough job, and being rude and arrogant. I am fully cognizant that they have an important and stressful job to do but why must it be done in such an unpleasant way? Not only that, I am sorely disappointed and embarrassed that someone like him greets our foreign visitors who come in the US to spend money, helping with our economy. This officer is described to be a man in his 30s with black hair, thick black eyebrows, no glasses, no mustache weighing approximately 150 #.

    I sincerely hope that not another visitor has to endure such a terrible experience while entering my country.

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: