Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

RSS feed

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Seminars

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Classifieds

Advertise

VIP Lawyer Network

EB-5

High Net Worth

Custom Content

Dubai Events

Find HNW People

Custom Events

Custom Services

Professional Services

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Careers

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE




ilw.com VIP


The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of
free information!
Copyright
© 1995-2014
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

  • Articles RSS Feed

    Published on 05-06-2013 05:52 PM

    Bloggings on Nurse and Allied Health Immigration

    Chris Musillo

    WHAT CIR WILL HAVE IF WE HAVE CIR

    by Chris Musillo

    Comprehensive Immigration Reform is heating up.  The Gang of Eight published a bill in April that is the first significant step in immigration legislation. MU Law has been to Washington to discuss the bill with Congressional staff. 

    The bill is 850+ pages and will be amended many times before it ever come up for a vote.  While the final version is still a work in progress and it is still an open question as to whether CIR will ever pass, several things are becoming clear.  If CIR becomes law it will have these characteristics.

    Greater H-1B visa numbers.  Current law allows 65,000 new “regular” H-1B visa approvals every fiscal year and an additional 20,000 for graduates of American Master’s degree programs.  American businesses have regularly asked Congress to raise this H-1B quota.  Congress is hearing the call.  Most potential legislation calls for increased H-1B numbers.

    Increased H-1B Enforcement.  The trade-off for the greater H-1B numbers is greater enforcement regulation.  All versions of CIR step up funding for H-1B enforcement.

    Special Third Party Placement Rules for H-1B Employers.  Since January 2012, USCIS has held staffing ...

    Published on 05-06-2013 05:38 PM

    Del Boy vs. The Overworked Bureaucrat: California's Misguided TEA Policy

    by Brandon Meyer and Jennielyn Alcarion

    vs.

    The EB-5 Investor Program allows immigrants to obtain a green card for investing $1,000,000 into a new commercial enterprise and creating ten full time jobs within two years. The minimum investment requirement is lowered to $500,000 when the investment is made within a Targeted Employment Area ("TEA"), where the unemployment rate of the area is at least 150% above the national average, or when the investment is made in a rural area.[1]

    Effective April 30, 2012, the State of California modified its policies for certifying TEAs pursuant to 8 CFR Section 204.6(j)(6)(ii)(B), which allows state TEA designation, given a letter from an authorized body of the government of the state in which the new commercial enterprise is located which certifies that the geographic or political subdivision of the metropolitan statistical area or of the city or town with a population of 20,000 or more in which the enterprise is principally doing business has been designated a high unemployment area.[2] Under California's modified TEA certification policies, designated TEA areas include Metropolitan Statistical Areas ("MSAs"), counties and cities with qualifying unemployment rates. California additionally, made changes in June 2012 designating individual census tracts with above a 150% unemployment rate, following an outcry from the California EB-5 community calling for less rigidity in the California TEA certification policies. If a project is not within a qualifying MSA, county city or individual tract designated as a TEA by California, one may apply directly to United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS") providing evidence showing that the project is located in an area with the qualifying unemployment rate.

    The State of California claimed that these changes in TEA designation procedures were necessitated by the enormous number of TEA requests submitted by interested parties and by the ridiculous nature of some of these requests, such as the request for a designation of a 100-census tract area![3] The poor bureaucrats were being overworked, unable to keep up with the barrage of requests. In the battle between Del Boy and the overworked bureaucrat, there was only going to be one winner, and it was not Del Boy. Unfortunately, Del Boy did not get the message and is in the process of being taught this lesson again by USCIS, as the program remains effectively on hold while a silent cleansing of the EB-5 program takes place.[4]

    California's tightened TEA designation procedures followed several major publications criticizing the EB-5 investor program in the previous year. Among these publications included a feature on the EB-5 program by the New York Times in December of 2011.[5] The article exposes the ever-present practice among developers ...

    Published on 05-06-2013 04:48 PM

    Blogs on Immigration Law and Policy

    by Greg Siskind

    NYT: US Silicon Valley Companies Responsible for Anti-Indian Staffing Company Rules in Senate Bill

    The Times has an interesting piece about the background of the H-1B provisions in the Senate immigration bill. In particular, the role that some of the largest American tech companies played not only in getting the H-1B cap raised, but in making it much more difficult for IT staffing companies - particularly the big Indian IT staffing firms - to be able claim numbers in the cap. To some extent, this seems to be a little payback. A few Indian IT staffing firms have filed massive numbers of applications and America's employers have been squeezed out of having access to these vital visas. They're also blamed fairly or unfairly for various abuses that have damaged the reputation of the H-1B program. And they're finding few friends rushing to their defense.

    Silicon Valley lobbyists told Senate negotiators they agreed that the H1-B visa system had been subject to abuse. Go after the companies that take advantage of guest worker visas and give us the benefit of the doubt, they told the Senate staff members, according to interviews with several lobbyists.

    “You know and we know ...

    Published on 05-06-2013 04:38 PM

    WORKABLE OR UNWORKABLE? THE H-1B AND L-1 VISA PROVISIONS IN BSEOIMA, S. 744

    by Gary Endelman and Cyrus D. Mehta


    The Senate Immigration Bill, S. 744, entitled the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act (BSEOIMA) has been applauded by immigration advocates for bringing much needed changes to the broken immigration system. Although the bill does not have everything that everyone wants, S. 744 offers a pathway to legalization for the 10 million undocumented, a new W visa to allow for future flows of lower skilled immigrants and attempts to clear up the backlogs in the employment and family preferences. It also reforms the existing system in many ways by removing the 1 year bars to seeking asylum, creating a startup visa for entrepreneurs, clarifying a contentious provision under the Child Status Protection Act, providing greater discretion to both Immigration and Judges to terminate removal proceedings,  among many other beneficial provisions. We refer readers to David Isaacson’s insightful blog post, SOME PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS REGARDING THE PROPOSED "BORDER SECURITY, ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY, AND IMMIGRATION MODERNIZATION ACT.

    Unfortunately, the H-1B visa, and accompanying L-1 visa proposals in BSEOIMA have not been received with the same jubilation as other parts of S. 744. The main concern on everyone’s mind is how the bill would deal with the shortage of H-1B visa numbers. For FY14, which commences on October 1, the H-1B cap was reached on April 5, 2013. S. 744 increases the H-1B cap undoubtedly, but this increase ...

    Published on 05-03-2013 02:13 PM

    Blogs on Immigration Law and Policy

    by Greg Siskind

    LA Times and Denver Post Drop "Illegal Immigrant" Term

    The dominoes continue to fall on this issue.

    Here is the LA Times explanation.

    And the Denver Post.


    About The Author

    http://www.visalaw.com/gregpic2.jpg

    Published on 05-03-2013 12:55 PM

    Padilla for AILA Treasurer Campaign Statement

    by Annaluisa Padilla

    ...

    Published on 05-03-2013 12:19 PM

    AILA NEEDS RINZLER

    by Kenneth Rinzler

    Dear AILA Colleague:

    I know this is incredibly long, but if you have a real interest in how AILA is governed you will read it. It is the only way I can effectively campaign, as the national office has banned me from the InfoNet Message Center because I have embarrassed them. This will become my record, my words, not what the ExCom falsely claims I have said and done. And whether I win or lose the election, at least this way I will have gotten my story out without distortion.

    On Friday, May 17, electronic balloting will commence for the election for officer positions for AILA’s Executive Committee (the “ExCom”). The ExCom is the handful of people who really run AILA; the Board of Governors (BOG) is primarily window dressing. And a key person on the ExCom is AILA’s Executive Director, Ms. Crystal Williams, who is the real power behind the AILA throne (and who received a compensation package of $276,792 in 2011 according to AILA’s Federal tax return for that year; it probably approaches $300,000 as of now).

    Under Article III, Section 7B of AILA’s Bylaws, the ExCom consists solely of the elected offices of the President, The President-elect, First Vice President, Second Vice President, Treasurer, and Secretary, plus the Executive Director as an ex officio non-voting member. The bylaws do not allow for any other persons to be members of the ExCom, even as non-voting members, but as with all things AILA the ExCom decided to ignore the bylaws and made the Immediate Past President and General Counsel non-voting members of the ExCom as well. This gross violation of the bylaws is keeping with similar violations, such as last year’s nominating fiasco with Ms. Annaluisa Padilla, our current Secretary who is now the leadership’s pick for Treasurer (the only contested position on the ExCom ballot). ...

    Published on 05-03-2013 11:55 AM

    Hirsch for AILA Board of Governors Campaign Statement

    by Matthew I. Hirsch

    ...

    Published on 05-03-2013 11:41 AM

    Peterson Stensrud for AILA Board of Governors Campaign Statement

    by Sarah K. Peterson Stensrud

    ...

    Published on 05-02-2013 04:22 PM

    False Translations on the Rise: Lawyer Beware

    by Professor Sheila Danzig, EdD and Professor John Kersey, EdD, PhD

    Translation firms are specialists in translation, not educational evaluation of foreign credentials.

    Some translation firms have started to advertise educational evaluation services. The public should be careful about engaging such firms. Sheila Danzig, EdD., said, "We have been seeing more dubious translations recently. While an expert in these matters can easily spot them, an employer or other receiving party might be misled. The complex nature of international credentials, and the use of similar terms to mean quite different things, gives ...

    Published on 05-02-2013 03:19 PM

    Bloggings on Nurse and Allied Health Immigration

    Chris Musillo

    US EMBASSY - MANILA TEMPORARY CLOSED


    The US Embassy - Manila Immigrant Visa Unit will be temporarily*closed on Monday, May 13, 2013. *Applicants with appointments scheduled for May 13 will be contacted to reschedule their appointments. *Alternatively, applicants with appointments scheduled for May 13 may contact the Embassy’s call center at (632) 982-5555 or (632) 902-8930 from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. (Monday through Friday) to reschedule their appointments.

    Also, the American Citizens Services unit in Manila will be*closed on Wednesday, May 8, 2013*for a regular training day.* Regular services will resume on May 9.

    Read the Musillo Unkenholt Healthcare and Immigration Law Blog at*www.musillo.com*or*

    Published on 05-02-2013 03:04 PM

    Bloggings on Deportation and Removal

    by Matthew Kolken

    Suggestions for what can be done to ensure Due Process in Immigration Court Proceedings

    The true obstacle to due process and fundamental fairness in civil removal proceedings is the harsh consequences of mandatory detention, and the administration's overtly castigatory immigration hold and detention policy that removes aliens from their support network vitiating both their ability and will to fight removal.

    Current detention policies are penal in nature, and erode an individual’s ability to obtain counsel where an individual may be detained for months if not years while challenging removal. The elimination of the mandatory detention provisions ...


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: