August Visa Bulletin Dates Are Out

[UPDATE: We've corrected an error in the summary of EB-3]/

Here is the quick analysis courtesy of Nicolette Davis on our staff -

August Visa Bulletin Summary:

Family 1^st - World numbers, China and India jumped five weeks to 01 August 05; Mexico stalled at 08 June 93; the Philippines regressed three years and 4 months to 01 March 94.

Family 2A – World numbers, China, India, and the Philippines jumped one month to 15 March 10; Mexico advanced one month to 01 March 10.

Family 2B - World numbers, China, and India advanced seven weeks to 22 June 04; Mexico jumped 8 months and three weeks to 22 August 92; the Philippines advanced a week and a half to 01 January 02.

Family 3^rd – World numbers, China, and India moved forward two weeks to 01 May 02; Mexico stalled at 22 January 93; the Philippines remains stalled at 22 July 92.

Family 4^th – World numbers, China stalled at 08 January 01; India advanced three and a half weeks to 15 February 01; Mexico advanced one week to 15 June 96; the Philippines stalled at 01 February 89.

 

Employment 1^st – still current in all categories.

Employment 2^nd – World numbers, Mexico, and the Philippines stalled at 01 January 09; numbers for China and India are unavailable.

Employment 3^rd: World numbers, Mexico jumped six weeks to 08 September 06; the Philippines advanced one week to 15 June 06; China jumped six weeks to 08 November 05; India advanced one week to 01 October 02.

Employment 3^rd Other Workers – World numbers, Mexico jumped two months to 08 September 06; the Philippines stalled at 08 June 06; China stalled at 15 June 03; one week advance for India to 01 October 02.

Employment 4^th – still current in all categories.

Employment 5^th – still current in all categories.

Comments

[Legal and no longer waiting]

gg, please read your comments again. Maybe there were badly written in the heat of discussion, but nowhere you state that other restrictions on EB filing should be lifted if the applicant has been working in the US for a certain period of time. You are positioning them in addition to the current requirement. And even though I have myself proposed the idea of self filing (no sponsorship needed) after an applicant has been working for a certain period of time (and no quotas for them either), I would never say something stupid like "NO ONE should be allowed to file for GC unless and until they have filed 6yrs of Federal Income Tax period". That is just wrong.

It also does not help your credit when you describe ROW-ers "sneaking" into the country. Let me remind you that there are not that many non-desi consulting companies to bring ROW-ers into the country in large numbers, and unlike some Indians, they had to convince bona fide American employers to hire them. That does not sound to me like "sneaking".

[gg]

@LNLW - First of all I neither am Indian or Chinese. Secondly I have no personal benefit in HR3012. But what I don't understand is that ROW folks feel entitled for Green Cards and they don't like to be discussed in the same breath with Indians or Chinese as though they are special. There are not more entitled for Green Cards than those who have worked for more years and paid more Federal Income Taxes in the US.

Well I am sorry that you don't like my idea. My intention was to basically make the GC process as simple as getting a drivers license with set criteria for all. Work 6yrs as non-immigrant - Pay your taxes for 6 yrs - Maintain a clean criminal record - Apply and receive your GC. Your employer is totally out of the picture and no backlogs since you already waited 6yrs. But I think you like the current system which is a complete mess and works for only a few.

[Legal and no longer waiting]

Oh, gg, you already have one taker for your seriously convoluted proposal.

Let's be clear - leave it to Indians mad at ROWs to make EB immigration worse to everybody.

Don't let up - come up with more bizarre restrictions. Grassley, Graham, and Sessions are counting on you!

[Legal and no longer waiting]

" No one should be allowed to file for GC unless and until they have filed 6yrs of Federal Income Tax period."

That makes no sense and is, quite honestly, against all intent of the current immigration law. The current immigration law assumes that the employee comes directly from abroad.

Give it to you, gg, to make immigration line WORSE for EVERYBODY. Truly, misery loooooooves company! How about just recommending that the H1 quota is slashed to 10K a year, spouses and children are counted in H1 quota, EB quota is reduced to 50K, EADs are not given to those waiting for the green card, AC21 is overturned, and people need to pay at least $50K into SS? It would of course be very fair to everybody, since there won't be per country limits, right?

[Sa]

"For far too long ROW have benefited by sneaking through and enjoying the benefits at the cost of highly backlogged countries."

Totally agree and now they complain saying their input was never considered. They have been rooting for killing of this bill from the start. ROW just behaved like GOP in healthcare reform.

[gg]

From my understanding there is going to be only a voice vote on HR3012 (so its going to be quick in the senate, whenever that happens). But the bill has to be reconciled with the one from the House, which is very different before it goes to the President for signature.

Anyway coming back to the actual issue of backlogs, though HR3012 will provide relief to the longest waiting in India/China queue, it is also going to effect the waiting time of everyone including INDIA/CHINA.

So it is important to move to a more transparent system. I think it should be made mandatory for everyone to complete 6yrs of H1-B non-immigrant status and then allowed to apply for GC. No one should be allowed to file for GC unless and until they have filed 6yrs of Federal Income Tax period. For far too long ROW have benefited by sneaking through and enjoying the benefits at the cost of highly backlogged countries.

[Sa]

"

Sa, you guess? How about evidence? Do you have any evidence that when the law was being worked on, immigrants from ROW countries were pushing for per country restrictions and what kind of concessions they made for that? If not, then it's just a baseless accusation.

P.S. And by the way, ROW is NOT current. So, your straw argument just went up in flames.
"

So what is your evidence in accusing Indians of pimping monthers and sisters.

[Legal and no longer waiting]

Sa, you guess? How about evidence? Do you have any evidence that when the law was being worked on, immigrants from ROW countries were pushing for per country restrictions and what kind of concessions they made for that? If not, then it's just a baseless accusation.

P.S. And by the way, ROW is NOT current. So, your straw argument just went up in flames.

[Sa]

"He probably just realized that he has great bargaining chip on his hands - certain people will sell their mother and daughter to get a green card faster, let alone fellow immigrant"

I guess ROW is current for the same reason.

[Greg]

3012 is just a proposal so it would have no impact on what Charlie Oppenheim is doing with regard to setting priority dates. If 3012 did become law, I am sure there are experts out there who have calculated the impact on priority dates, but I have not seen any analysis yet that I think is reliable. If others have seen it, I'm interested.

[yatra]

Hello Greg,
Is there any effect of HR 3012 on current PD of ROW?
Thank you

[Legal and no longer waiting]

He probably just realized that he has great bargaining chip on his hands - certain people will sell their mother and daughter to get a green card faster, let alone fellow immigrants.

[Now what]

Today Sen Grassley formally lifted his hold on HR 3012 today. What next? its a done deal? whats your take on this Greg?

[legal-immigrant]

Do you want GC? Please take off your shirt :)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303933404577505192265987100.html?google_editors_picks=true

[Jack]

"That suposes that ALL immigrants are dangerous criminals"

How? It does not.

"bad apples and most sane people understand that....."

I think most sane people do not want bad apples out on the street to potentially harm them and their families when alternatively they could be turned over to ICE for deportation. What Cook County is doing would strike them as nuts. At least you admit to the bad apples--so do you want them on U.S. streets or out of the country?

[Sa]

"No, it doesn't. It shows the need for legislation to get rid of the backlog. HR3012 won't do much for the backlog."

The Devil lifted his hold on the HR 3012 .

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/Article.cfm?customel_dataPageID_1502=41746

[JoeF]

"This bulletin shows the need for legislation like HR 3012."

No, it doesn't. It shows the need for legislation to get rid of the backlog. HR3012 won't do much for the backlog.

[Another Voice]

WRONG Jack

"First, from a legal perspective, who to turn over sounds like a distinct scheme from the federal government's enforcement policy which we are told is all that matters."

It just re-affirms the recent SCOTUS decision that Immigration is a federal matter and State and local government do not get to play that game....If places have agreements with the Feds then they can not unilaterally change them.

"Second, from a practical perspective, NO offenders? Open border ideology trumps all I guess--hope no one gets killed."

That suposes that ALL immigrants are dangerous criminals, quite contrary they have a low cdrime rate and the fact that they last thing they want is to deal with ANY authority keeps most of them out of trouble, like in any other group you will have a few bad apples and most sane people understand that.....

[Jack]

Sanctuary cities may be facing legal action
Obama’s county among targets

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/10/sanctuary-cities-may-be-facing-legal-action/?page=all#pagebreak

John Morton, director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said he’s asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to take legal action against Cook County, President Obama’s home county in Illinois, to force it to turn over illegal immigrants for removal. He said he’s now awaiting a final answer from the Justice Department.

“They wanted to see how certain pieces of court decisions came out. I expect to hear from them shortly, and I can tell you that resolving the issue in Cook County is very important for me,” Mr. Morton testified to the House Homeland Security subcommittee on the border.

"certain pieces of court decisions" I wonder what but it sounds like foot-dragging. Maybe someone will ask Holder about this.

----

“Right now, it’s not a question of Cook County releasing some individuals to us,” he said. “They are releasing no individuals to us, including very violent offenders, and I just don’t think that’s good policy.”

First, from a legal perspective, who to turn over sounds like a distinct scheme from the federal government's enforcement policy which we are told is all that matters.

Second, from a practical perspective, NO offenders? Open border ideology trumps all I guess--hope no one gets killed.

[Jack]

In the news:

Rahm Emanuel wants to make Chicago the most illegal immigrant-friendly city in the country

A brazen slap at rule of law:

"If you have no criminal record, being part of a community is not a problem for you," Mr. Emanuel said, speaking at a high school library in Little Village, a Latino neighborhood. "We want to welcome you to the city of Chicago."

Welcome you? Sends a great message, doesn't it: please violate our law. The era of lip service to the law is ending--they don't even bother any more. Whatever happened to "We must enforce the law, but..."? Now it's just "feel free to violate the law". My theory is that CIR seems so remote that they no longer feel the need to try to fool people that immigration law is taken seriously so just outright pander without qualification.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/11/us/obama-policy-on-illegal-immigrants-is-challenged-by-chicago.html?_r=1

Testifying before a subcommittee in the House of Representatives, John Morton, the director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said Cook County’s ordinance was “inconsistent with the terms of federal law.”

This is interesting because Obama Justice has been arguing that the Executive Branch enforcement policy trumps state assistance. They sued over it. Now we are seeing outright defiance to Secure Communities. Will they sue?

[Sa]

This bulletin shows the need for legislation like HR 3012.

[JoeF]

One correction:
EB3-I didn't retrogress, it moved forward one week, from Sep. 22, 02 to Oct. 1, 02.