VIP Lawyer Network
Services 4 LawFirms
Connect to us
Make us Homepage
The leading immigration law publisher - over 50000 pages of free information!
Copyright © 1995-ILW.COM,American Immigration LLC.
« Letter of the Week: Jan 21 - Jan 25 |
| Letters of the Week: Feb 4 - Feb 8 »
Posted at 06:43 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834521fa969e2017c3657546f970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Letters of the Week: Jan 28 - Feb 1:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
No one has mentioned the "forgotten ones". The individuals that were caught and expeditiously removed at the border or were ordered deported but did not leave the U.S. Hundreds of thousands in the last twenty five years. These are the cases that are clogging the Immigration Courts , the B.I.A. and the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals. If these "illegal aliens", most of them taxpayers, parents of U.S. citizen children and with fairly clean records, are not specifically included for relief in any new Immigration Reform statute, such "reform" would be a hollow gesture.
Alexander N. Lopez |
Feb 01, 2013 at 06:41 AM
Greg Siskind's blog has a January 29 post summarizing the Senate's Immigration Innovation Act of 2013. That summary indicates that under the IIA, family members will no longer count against the relevant EB cap. If this "principals only" provision applies to EB-5, then the category will automatically effectively increase to around 25,000 annually.
Also, Greg's blog summary indicates that EB rollover would apply from FY 1992 to the present. Since I understand FY 2012 had roughly 7500 EB-5 IV's issued, and was the
EB-5 IV issuance high water mark, such rollover would surely put over 100,000 unused EB-5 numbers "in the bank."
If in turn "principals only" applies to these 100,000+ unused EB-5 visas, then we would have 250,0000+ EB-5 numbers "in the bank."
On the other hand, perhaps at least some of these unused EB-5 visas have already "spilled up" to EB-1 since the big winter 2005 retrogression, have been used, and cannot rollover.
Christopher A. Teras |
Jan 31, 2013 at 06:49 AM
Greg Siskind's blog has a January 29 post summarizing the Senate's Immigration Innovation Act of 2013. That summary indicates that under the IIA, family members will no longer count against the relevant EB cap. If this "principals only" provision applies to EB-5, then the category will automatically effectively increase to around 25,000.
Christopher A. Teras |
Jan 31, 2013 at 06:48 AM
I am not an immigration lawyer, but I am deeply involved with local undocumented immigrants who are seeking legal status. Many of them have been in our country for ten, fifteen years, or more. Most have a mixture of American-born children and older ones who could be eligible for the "Dream Act." I am eager to support Comprehensive Immigration Reform that will enable these families, and others like them, to stop living in fear and move fully into the American mainstream.
These families already have demonstrated their commitment to the United States of America. Their children are enrolled in our schools or have successfully graduated. Many of them have gone on to college, despite having to pay the high cost of "out-of-state" tuition. They are quite capable of making significant contributions to our society, and they are eager to do so.
I agree with your premise and believe that these families deserve to move to the head of the line. I look forward to learning more from ILW about how that can be done. Thank you!
Elizabeth Martin |
Jan 30, 2013 at 07:07 AM
CIR should consider those who are here in Temporary Protected Status, Deferred of Removal status, political asylees who don't win or get fully granted asylee status but get Witholding of Removal status instead without the possibility to adjust to Permanent Residency and also those who are currently applying for political asylum in our court of laws to benefit from the CIR in higher priority and consideration over those who jump the border without inspection and papers at all. CIR must also pardon those who have applied political asylum and pursued their cases through the courts of laws and have exhausted all their appeals and must go into hiding because they may have credible fear to be sent back to their home countries. There are hundred of thousands of people in this category, most of them had been given Work Authorization while their cases were pending and paid taxes, they have been fingerprinted.
It's a complete mockery of common sense and justice if those who just jump the border without papers at all can benefit from the planned CIR while those who have some kind of legal status or limbo may never have a chance to get the same. Many have spent so much money, sweat and tears to go through the courts of laws with incompetent immigration lawyers who can't effectively assist them with their political asylum and many fall into unsympathetic immigration judges who never consider the merits of many cases that actually have good chance to win the political asylum and simply dismiss the cases. These folks must be given a chance in the CIR to benefit.
For readers who have same opinion like mine please pass this on to our respective Representatives and Senators while they're working on the details on the current on going CIR legislation plan.
Richard Yang |
Jan 28, 2013 at 09:06 PM
The combination of U.S. developer appetite for EB-5 venture capital and the “highest bidder” mentality which has become the norm with many Chinese migration agencies is indeed creating a complex series of challenges for those of us trying to present legitimate EB-5 projects within the Chinese market. Investment-based immigration is nothing new in China, and for many years similar (albeit government-operated, risk-free) programs from Canada and Australia have been successfully marketed in China without the chaos we are seeing today. Historically, these other government programs, with their set agent compensation and standardized protocols, have been relatively immune to the greed we are seeing these days with EB-5. Perhaps it is the current combination of too many dishonest U.S. project offering undisclosed incentives and too many unscrupulous Chinese immigration agencies which is the greatest “at risk” reality for would-be Chinese EB-5 investors. Whatever the explanation, one thing is for sure: prospective investors in China continue to be bombarded with mediocre EB-5 offerings and grow more jaded every day.
Jose Latour |
Jan 28, 2013 at 06:50 AM
Your last two articles have been beyond good. They are brilliant. Your understanding of markets and the honesty of "black markets" prices is a concept that very few economists understand. Further your explanation of the necessity to allow the market to work will hopefully be a part of the new immigration policies. (Am I too much of an optimist?)
Before I could get a note to you on that article, here is another regarding Einstein. Your logical explanation of the deeply individualistic and moral aspects of anyone person or even a group of people (and certainly not a bureaucratic entity) attempting to predict what any human will accomplish is a concept that, though the country is far from accepting, is the most important idea of all.
I am curious if you have studied Austrian Economics? You write as if you have.
Thank you for a job well done,
Lynn Bloxham |
Jan 28, 2013 at 06:49 AM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
(URLs automatically linked.)
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address