Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in LPRs

by

motherhood-7114294_1280Last month, the Supreme Court ruled that lower courts cannot issue nationwide injunctions blocking the Trump administration’s executive order limiting birthright citizenship, except in class action lawsuits.

Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, at least three different lawsuits had secured nationwide injunctions protecting all individuals potentially affected by Trump’s executive order restricting birthright citizenship. However, the Court’s ruling scaled back those protections, potentially leaving some children unprotected.

To safeguard all families across the country and address any gaps left by prior legal actions, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a class-action lawsuit, Barbara v. Donald J. Trump to stop the government’s enforcement of the order against all current or future babies born or after February 20, 2025, where:

(1) that child’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the child’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said child’s birth, or

(2) that child’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the child’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said child’s birth.

The U.S. District Judge Joseph Laplante agreed with the plaintiffs and issued a class-wide preliminary injunction blocking Trump’s executive order from being enforced against any affected baby born in the United States after February 20th.

Continue reading

by

sarah-kranz-pKqAaTUi0wg-unsplash-scaledIn a significant ruling handed down on Friday, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the power of federal judges to impose nationwide injunctions against President Trump’s executive order aimed at denying birthright citizenship to children born in the U.S. to noncitizens.

While the justices did not rule on the legality of the President’s executive order, this decision is an extraordinary victory for the Trump administration, because it hinders lower courts from intervening in potentially illegal actions by the government.

Historically, lower courts have issued nationwide preliminary injunctions early in litigation to block government conduct that could cause irreparable harm to plaintiffs pending judicial review.

The court’s decision to restrain judges from providing such relief is a remarkable departure from historic precedent and ventures into dangerous territory. It further indicates that the balance of power on the Supreme Court has clearly shifted in Trump’s favor, with six conservative justices backing his position.

What it Means

The ruling means that lower courts cannot stop the enforcement of the executive order on a nationwide basis for affected individuals. The executive order can only be suspended against individuals who have filed lawsuits against the government (either as individual plaintiffs or in class actions) or where a state has issued a state-wide injunction.

It will take time before the Supreme Court ultimately rules on the constitutionality of the executive order, with some legal experts suggesting the process could stretch on for years.

It is also uncertain whether this decision could restrict future nationwide blocks on controversial laws, particularly in other immigration and civil rights cases against the government.

Continue reading

by

patty-zavala-TKwGZ9a6YHU-unsplash-scaledThe Department of Homeland Security has announced the implementation of its REAL ID enforcement measures at Transportation Security Administration (TSA) checkpoints nationwide as of May 7th.

Anyone 18 years and older traveling domestically within the United States must have a REAL ID-compliant state-issued driver’s license or another accepted form of identification to board a commercial flight.

According to the agency, 81 percent of travelers are already REAL ID compliant.

Continue reading

by

boeing-159589_1280A new article published in the New York Times reveals the 43 countries that are reportedly included in President Trump’s new travel ban, expected to be released by executive order on Friday March 21st.

According to anonymous government sources, the White House is considering a draft proposal establishing partial or full suspensions on entry to the United States for countries falling into three different tiers: red, orange, and yellow.

The “red” list of countries includes nationals whose entry to the United States would be barred for a temporary period that is yet to be determined by the U.S. government including:

  • Afghanistan
  • Bhutan
  • Cuba
  • Iran
  • Libya
  • North Korea
  • Somalia
  • Sudan
  • Syria
  • Venezuela and
  • Yemen

The draft proposal also includes an “orange” list of countries whose nationals would not be barred from the United States, but who must be properly vetted and screened at mandatory in-person visa interviews before gaining admission to the United States.

Continue reading

by

ai-generated-8775943_1280We knew it was coming. The Trump administration is preparing to roll out a new ban on travel to the United States, restricting the entry of citizens from certain countries for which vetting and screening warrants a partial or full suspension of admission to the United States. This travel restriction is rumored to take place by executive action next week.

If this sounds like déjà vu, that’s because it is.

During his first term in office, in 2017 Trump signed Executive Order 13769 entitled, “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States,” which banned nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States for a period of 90 days.

This executive order caused international chaos, due to several key provisions:

  • It suspended the entry of immigrants and non-immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries including Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen – for 90 days
  • The order indefinitely suspended the entry of Syrian refugees
  • It reduced the number of refugees to be admitted to the United States in 2017 to 50,000
  • The U.S. Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) was suspended for 120 days

Implementation of this executive order led to controversy and numerous legal challenges:

  • More than 700 travelers were detained, and up to 60,000 visas were “provisionally revoked”
  • Protests and chaos erupted at airports across the country
  • Multiple lawsuits were filed in federal court challenging its constitutionality

Continue reading

by
50484974517_c9a324e36a_b

This image is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License Fibonacci Blue

Watch the Press Conference here.

On Wednesday February 26th House lawmakers reintroduced the American Dream and Promise Act of 2025—a bill that would create a legal pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants brought to the United States as children known as “Dreamers.” The bill would also include beneficiaries of Temporary Protected Status or Deferred Enforced Departure.

The Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program was first created in 2012 by the Obama administration to protect eligible undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children from deportation, while allowing them to apply for work authorization for temporary, renewable periods.

After a lengthy legal battle, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit allowed the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to continue to accept and process DACA renewal applications and accompanying applications for employment authorization. However, USCIS is prohibited from processing initial requests for DACA.

In a statement accompanying the reintroduction of the bill, Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia, one of its authors said, “Dreamers are American in every way but on paper. For decades, they have contributed to and shaped the fabric of America. Yet, they are currently denied their place in the American story.

Continue reading

by

calendar-151591_1280We are pleased to report that today the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs published the January 2025 Visa Bulletin.

In this blog post, we breakdown the movement of the employment-based and family-sponsored categories in the coming month.

USCIS Adjustment of Status

The U.S. Citizenship and immigration Services (USCIS) has not yet indicated which chart it will use to determine filing eligibility for adjustment of status to permanent residence in January 2025.

Please click here for more information.

Highlights of the January 2025 Visa Bulletin

At a Glance

What can we expect to see in the month of January?

Employment-Based Categories

Dates for Filing

  • No change from previous month 

Final Action Advancements

EB-2 Members of the Professions and Aliens of Exceptional Ability

  • EB-2 India will advance by two months to October 1, 2012
  • EB-2 China will advance by one month to April 22, 2020
  • EB-2 All other countries will advance by two weeks to April 1, 2023

EB-3 Professionals and Skilled Workers

  • EB-3 India will advance by three weeks to December 1, 2012
  • EB-3 China will advance by two months to June 1, 2020
  • EB-3 All other countries will advance by two weeks to December 1, 2022

EB-3 Other Workers

  • EB-3 India will advance by three weeks to December 1, 2012
  • EB-3 Except China, all other countries will advance by one week to December 8, 2020

Continue reading

by

donald-trump-2030308_1280In this blog post, we discuss how Trump’s return to the White House on January 20th could impact employment-based visa applicants and their employers in the years ahead.

While the Trump campaign has been very vocal about their zero-tolerance policy toward illegal immigration, much less has been said about employment-based immigration. For that reason, it has been hard to know exactly what lies ahead for foreign workers.

While we don’t have all the answers, Trump’s track record on employment-based immigration helps provide insights into the changes we are likely to see during his second term.

To help readers understand how the incoming Trump administration may impact employment-based immigration, we have drawn up the top five areas where there is a high likelihood that changes may be introduced either by executive action or internal policymaking.

This information is based on our collective experience dealing with immigration agencies during Trump’s first term in office. Readers should be aware that none of this information is set in stone. Immigration policies are likely to evolve as the Trump administration settles in and as the political climate becomes more balanced.

Increasing Vetting and Processing Times for Employment-Based Workers

Foreign workers who plan to file employment-based cases should be aware of the following potential changes in the months ahead.

  1. The Return of Employment-Based Green Card Interviews?

In 2017, the Trump administration made the employment-based green card application process much more difficult when it required adjustment of status applicants to attend in-person interviews.

This directive was handed down with the passage of Trump’s executive order known as “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States.” This executive order was meant to crack down on immigration, by combating fraud and abuse in the green card process.

The decision to reinstate visa interviews for employment-based green card applicants led to a sharp increase in processing times at USCIS offices nationwide. This was due to the increased demand for interviews and limited resources available to accommodate the surge in applicants.

While in-person interviews are generally required under the law, prior to Trump’s presidency, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) waived in-person interviews for a broad category of applicants, including employment-based green card applicants to better allocate resources toward higher risk cases.

Continue reading

by

animal-2345418_1280

We are pleased to report that today the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs published the December Visa Bulletin. Unfortunately, the December Visa Bulletin brings almost no movement.

USCIS Adjustment of Status

For employment-based and family-sponsored preference categories, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has confirmed it will continue to use the Dates for Filing chart to determine filing eligibility for adjustment of status to permanent residence in the month of December.

Highlights of the December 2024 Visa Bulletin

At a Glance

What can we expect to see in the month of December?

Employment-Based Categories

  • The Final Action Date for India EB-2 will advance by two weeks to August 1, 2012
  • The Final Action Date for India EB-3 will advance by one week to November 8, 2012
  • All other employment-based Final Action Dates and Dates for Filing will remain the same in December as the previous month

Family-Sponsored Categories

  • All family-sponsored Final Action Dates and Dates for Filing will remain the same in December as the previous month

For more details, please see our analysis of the December 2024 Visa bulletin below.

Employment-Based Categories

FINAL ACTION DATES FOR EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCE CASES

According to the Department of State’s December 2024 Visa Bulletin, the following Final Action cutoff dates will apply for employment-based categories in the month of December.

  • No change from previous month, except for EB-2 India and EB-3 India

EB-1 Aliens of extraordinary ability, Outstanding Professors and Researchers, and Certain Multinational Managers or Executives

  • EB-1 India will remain at February 1, 2022
  • EB-1 China will remain at November 8, 2022
  • EB-1 All other countries will remain current

EB-2 Members of the Professions and Aliens of Exceptional Ability

  • EB-2 India will advance by two weeks to August 1, 2012
  • EB-2 China will remain at March 22, 2020
  • EB-2 All other countries will remain at March 15, 2023

EB-3 Professionals and Skilled Workers

  • EB-3 India will advance by one week to November 8, 2012
  • EB-3 China will remain at April 1, 2020
  • EB-3 All other countries will remain at November 15, 2022

EB-3 Other Workers

Continue reading

by

boy-2027487_1280In the last few days, the immigration world has been reeling from the results of the Presidential election. People across the nation are preparing for an incoming Trump administration that promises to be extremely tough on immigration.

While the future of many hangs in the balance, the federal courts have started taking action to undo the immigration policies of the Biden administration.

Just two days after Americans cast their ballots and elected Donald Trump to become the next President of the United States, federal Judge J. Campbell Barker of the Eastern District Court of Texas issued a court order in the case Texas et. al. vs. DHS et. al., Case No. 6:24-cv-00306 (E.D. Tex.), ending President Biden’s Keeping Families Together parole program.

In a short one-page ruling, the judge declared that the Biden administration lacked the authority to grant parole in place to undocumented aliens, and therefore set aside and vacated Biden’s Keeping Families Together program.

In doing so, judge Barker delivered the first major blow to Biden’s immigration friendly policies. This decision stops the government from accepting applications for parole in place under the program, which would have allowed undocumented spouses and stepchildren of U.S. Citizens to remain together during the immigration process.

Continue reading