ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily


Chinese Immig. Daily




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

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Good News

  1. #1
    Guest
    I heard the U.s has abolished the law which would have limited people on tourist visas to just 30 days stay. Now, they can stay for 60 days (just like before. (Good news!)

    But what really baffles me is the Child Status Protection law. The congress passed the cHILD status protection Act (C.S.P.A,) because they wanted to end the ill treatment of immigrant children who lose immigration benefits as soon as they turned 21, while waiting for the I.N.S to process their case. These children used to lose immigration benefits, they were previously entitled to, as soon they turned 21. President Bush kindly signed the law (C.S.P.A) ABOLISHING the ill treatment of these immigrant children (regarding immigration benefits when they turn 21.)

    However, there is a particular immigration benefit (the V. visa) which children still become ineligible for as soon as they turn 21. I believe this is very unfair. The C.S.P.A was passed by congress, because the good men and women there recognised that it was unfair to deny children benefits, they are otherwise entitled to, just because they are now 21. Aging is only a normal process, and no one deserves to be punished for this. The c.s.p.a was designed to rectify this, but I don't know why V.VISA applicants were exempted. There is a need for uniformity. It makes no sense punishing some children just because they turned 21 and allowing others to go scot-free.

    Mind you, the V. visa is a dual intent visa that carries both the immigrant and non immigrant status, and an I-130 application is also required for a V-visa. However, the v visa law states that only children of residents that fall into the F2A category are eligible for the V VISA. The C.S.P.A has made it such that children whose I-130 applications were filed when they were under 21 will not move from F2A category to F2B category when they become 21 or older. Since this is now the case, it's mind baffling that children who still fall under the F2A CATEGORY are denied V. visas despite the fact that THE V VISA LAW makes applicants in the F2A category eligible for V visas, provided their I-130 applications has being pending with the I.N.S for 3 years.

    Its really really sad that children who fall in the F2A category (due to C.S.P.A) and have waited 3 years are still ineligible for V visas. This seems like an injustice to this children. And the
    intention of congress was to correct this injustice with the C.S.P.A. I think it's high time people made this known. It's so unfortunate we have many humanitarian organisations or immigrant advocacy groups, but none of them has taken interest in this case.

    Punishing anyone or making them ineligible for benefits that they were otherwise entitled to is wrong, and it's called age discrimination. This kind of practise wouldn't be allowed anywhere else. An employer can not legally deny a job applicant (who's otherwise qualified) the chance to work just because the person is now 40 years old and no longer 30. If this is not acceptable in other spheres of life, why should immigrant children (at such a tender age) continue to lose immigration benefit (e.g v visa) despite the fact
    that the C.S.P.A was signed into law to stop this kind of age discrimination.

    (FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR ANYONE THAT CARES ABOUT HUMANITY)

  2. #2
    Guest
    I heard the U.s has abolished the law which would have limited people on tourist visas to just 30 days stay. Now, they can stay for 60 days (just like before. (Good news!)

    But what really baffles me is the Child Status Protection law. The congress passed the cHILD status protection Act (C.S.P.A,) because they wanted to end the ill treatment of immigrant children who lose immigration benefits as soon as they turned 21, while waiting for the I.N.S to process their case. These children used to lose immigration benefits, they were previously entitled to, as soon they turned 21. President Bush kindly signed the law (C.S.P.A) ABOLISHING the ill treatment of these immigrant children (regarding immigration benefits when they turn 21.)

    However, there is a particular immigration benefit (the V. visa) which children still become ineligible for as soon as they turn 21. I believe this is very unfair. The C.S.P.A was passed by congress, because the good men and women there recognised that it was unfair to deny children benefits, they are otherwise entitled to, just because they are now 21. Aging is only a normal process, and no one deserves to be punished for this. The c.s.p.a was designed to rectify this, but I don't know why V.VISA applicants were exempted. There is a need for uniformity. It makes no sense punishing some children just because they turned 21 and allowing others to go scot-free.

    Mind you, the V. visa is a dual intent visa that carries both the immigrant and non immigrant status, and an I-130 application is also required for a V-visa. However, the v visa law states that only children of residents that fall into the F2A category are eligible for the V VISA. The C.S.P.A has made it such that children whose I-130 applications were filed when they were under 21 will not move from F2A category to F2B category when they become 21 or older. Since this is now the case, it's mind baffling that children who still fall under the F2A CATEGORY are denied V. visas despite the fact that THE V VISA LAW makes applicants in the F2A category eligible for V visas, provided their I-130 applications has being pending with the I.N.S for 3 years.

    Its really really sad that children who fall in the F2A category (due to C.S.P.A) and have waited 3 years are still ineligible for V visas. This seems like an injustice to this children. And the
    intention of congress was to correct this injustice with the C.S.P.A. I think it's high time people made this known. It's so unfortunate we have many humanitarian organisations or immigrant advocacy groups, but none of them has taken interest in this case.

    Punishing anyone or making them ineligible for benefits that they were otherwise entitled to is wrong, and it's called age discrimination. This kind of practise wouldn't be allowed anywhere else. An employer can not legally deny a job applicant (who's otherwise qualified) the chance to work just because the person is now 40 years old and no longer 30. If this is not acceptable in other spheres of life, why should immigrant children (at such a tender age) continue to lose immigration benefit (e.g v visa) despite the fact
    that the C.S.P.A was signed into law to stop this kind of age discrimination.

    (FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR ANYONE THAT CARES ABOUT HUMANITY)

  3. #3
    Guest
    Thank you so much for sharing this information with us and also your thoughts. I really am so happy to hear that they have extended the stay for tourist visas.

    Guud Nuss, you really do raise some very valid points here and I can truly understand and feel your concern regarding this situation.

    It is true that once a child turns 21 or older, they can not get a V visa, but once their Visa category becomes current, they will be eligible for the Immigrant Visa.

    CSPA is very silent on V Visas, so I would encourage everybody to contact their Congressmen and Senators to make an ammendment in CSPA to benefit V Visa applicants.

    I sincerely hope that the U.S. will come around and start showing some empathy to these children and their families.

    My heart goes out to all of those who have had to struggle so much just to make their life a little easier.

    Regards and God Bless To All Of You!

  4. #4
    Guest
    when you have a tourist visa and you came here you are allowed to stay 6 months I think..is this still the case or you only get 2 months at the port of entry ???
    Thank you for yr reply

  5. #5
    Guest
    For sometime the Immigration had restricted to 30 days but now again they are allowing stay upto 6 months. This permission to stay in the United States can be granted by the Immigration ranging from couple of days to 6 months. It all depends upon situation and other factors they consider while admitting a non-immigrant into the United States.
    Good luck.

  6. #6
    Guest
    Yes White Female - perhaps this was an oversight on the part of the legislators, because I see no reason why they would intentionally leave children seeking the v-visa benefit out.

    The C.S.P.A law has a very direct effect on 1-130 applications and their benefits (regarding children.) I see no reason why the V-visa which is a benefit that comes from an 1-130 application should be left out. The V-visa is also an immigrant as well as a non immigrant visa. This must have been an oversight on the part of the I.N.S also, by deciding to exclude children seeking this benefit. Nevertheless, we should all contact our congressmen and 'women (just like White female said.) For too long, parents and their children have been seperated by the I.N.S and that's why the C.S.P.A was created to change this.

  7. #7
    Guest
    To White Female :

    I can not find words to express my feelings about your pain and sympathy towards immigrants. I wish you will instrumental in moving this CSPA amendment regarding V Visa applicants.

    White Female, keep the light glowing and we are with you.

    To Guud Nuus:

    Yes, White Female is right, we should contact our Congressmen and Senators and ask them to move legislation to cover V Visa applicants also in CSPA, 200. When, we have good Americans like White Female with us, we will succeed in this mission.

    God bless everybody.

  8. #8
    K-visa applicants atr excluded as well, which is not fair either.

  9. #9
    Dear All,

    Do you all think that the V visa will be extended at all, as we all know that only those who have petitioned on or before Dec 2000 is eligible for a V visa. I petitioned for my spouse in Nov 2001 and I am waiting to hear some Good News.

    Blessings and Joy to All

  10. #10
    Any idea anybody? Please respond, I will be greatful to you. Thanks.

Similar Threads

  1. Those who know me...good news!
    By Sprint_girl07 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-19-2012, 11:34 AM
  2. Good news
    By mayaren1 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-02-2008, 09:40 PM
  3. BREAKING NEWS:SOME SMALL GOOD NEWS FOR US MIGRANTS!
    By jean2005 in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06-22-2006, 03:17 PM
  4. Maybe some good news
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-13-2003, 06:17 PM
  5. Good news!
    By in forum Immigration Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-02-2003, 03:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
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: