Viewing entries tagged with 'immigration'
Top 10 fixes No. 6 – Apply Child Status Protection Act to aged-out children as it was intended
This is about the Child Status Protection Act, and why our courts, consulates, and the US Citizenship & Immigration Service need to start applying the law as it was intended to protect certain children’s rights in the immigration process. This blog entry is NOT about the “Dream Act” or about creating new visa categories for undocumented children.
Top Ten Immigration Fixes -- No. 7 End the distinction between someone who overstays and someone who enters without inspection.
One of the most illogical notions contained in our immigration laws is found within our “adjustment of status” statute. Pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1255(a), once an immigrant visa petition is approved and an immigrant visa is immediately available, any alien “inspected and admitted or paroled into the United States” is eligible to apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residency without leaving the United States. For example, if a man from Kenya enters the United States as a tourist and decides to overstay his visa, but later legitimately marries a United States citizen, he is eligible to apply for residency inside the United States. This is true no matter how long the person was here out of status. But, if a man from Mexico sneaks into the United States but later legitimately marries a United States citizen, he is ineligible to pursue legalization within the United States because he was not “inspected, admitted or paroled.” For purposes of legalizing one’s status within the United States, there should be no distinction between one who overstayed and one who entered without inspection. Each applicant has to go through a battery of security checks. The end result with each would be a documented alien and an intact family. President George H.W. Bush attempted to end the distinction when he signed into law 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i) -- also called § 245(i). The law allowed undocumented aliens otherwise eligible for residency the opportunity to apply within the United States upon payment of a fine. But the law had a sunset provision. The sunset date was extended three times through bills signed by President Clinton. But 8 U.S.C. § 1255(i) expired on April 30, 2001. President George W. Bush supported its renewal consistently, but the provision was never renewed. The result is more undocumented individuals in the United States who are otherwise eligible for residency but for the manner in which they entered out country. They cannot leave because of the unlawful presence bars (see our previous blogs) and cannot apply in the United States because of the manner in which our “adjustment of status” statute was drafted. So these individuals stay in our country illegally. This is another easy fix which continues to fails because opponents scream amnesty.
"Minor" Travel? Think Again!
One of the foundations of comprehensive immigration reform is fixing a problem that Congress created in 1996 - the creation of the 3 year, 10 year, and permanent bars. The bars have created a "Catch 22" where thousands of foreign nationals are ELIGIBLE for green cards but can't obtain the card in the USA due to unlawful presence and can't go home to obtain the card because our government won't let them back in. So they stay here and stay illegal. The U.S. Consulate in CD Juarez, Mexico and our Federal Courts have now made the problem worse by declaring that the permanent bar can apply to children!!
Military Offers Path to Citizenship for Nonimmigrants
The NY Times reports that the military is now so in need of soldiers that they are opening spots to nonimmigrants. The bonus -- U.S. citizenship in as little as 6 months.
NY Times Exposes Myth of ICE Enforcement
In an article published Feb 3, 2009, the NY Times exposed what Immigration Attorneys and Advocates have been screaming for months -- that ICE is focusing primarily on the low hanging fruit -- immigrants here without authorization who have no criminal record and no past deportations.
Top Ten Immigration Fixes -- No. 9 Expand Legal Immigration
Right now it takes four to five years for a permanent resident to sponsor a spouse or minor child (unless you are from Mexico, where it takes seven to eight years). It takes five to six years for a U.S. citizen to sponsor an adult child (unless you are from Mexico, where it takes over 15 years). It takes five to six years for an employer to sponsor a skilled worker for permanent residency. See Visa Bulletin.
Why so long? The reason is because Congress sets numerical caps on the number of immigrant visas which can be issued each year. None of us have a problem with providing a limit on legal immigration each year. The problem is that the current number is not realistic when compared with demand, and the visas are divided for all countries, although there is much more legal immigration with certain countries (like Mexico and India). Is it realistic to expect a Mexican permanent resident (or Mexican-American) in this country to be separated from his or her family for so long? Is it realistic to expect an American business to wait a half a decade to get a worker they need now? The result of the status quo is more undocumented family members and workers - a perpetuation of dangerous trips through the deserts of the Mexican-American border and our current black market of illegal workers building homes and landscaping business property.
Top Ten Immigration Fixes -- 10
In 1996, a new Republican Congress decided to take a stab at reforming our immigration system. The centerpiece of this misguided legislation (which President Clinton signed during his reelection campaign) was the introduction of a concept called “unlawful presence.” Every day a person is in the United States beyond the expiration of their authorized stay counts as one day of unlawful presence. Generally, if a person has 180 days of unlawful presence and then leaves the United States voluntarily, he or she cannot return for three years; if a person has a year or more of unlawful presence and then leaves the United States, he or she cannot return for ten years. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(9)(B). The unintended consequence of the “unlawful presence” bar is that it discourages illegal aliens from leaving. Many of these individuals have the ability to legalize their status through family members or employers but fear leaving to apply for the visa. So they stay. Furthermore, the ultimate irony is that if they are later caught and deported, the penalty is … a ten year bar - the exact same bar they would receive if they tried to do the right thing and leave voluntarily. The logical conclusion of any person unlawfully in the United States over a year is to stay until caught. Regardless of whether you want to build a fence around the USA or open the floodgates, none of us should encourage illegal immigration. Elimination of the unlawful presence bars encourages legal immigration and provides an avenue for people here without authorization but otherwise eligible for legalization to apply in their home countries.
