Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in Non-Citizens

by

the-now-time-KXUKLB-_Sb0-unsplash-scaledOn August 1st the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced new policies that could make immigrants applying for green cards through family-based petitions more vulnerable to deportation.

The changes appear in various updates to USCIS’ Policy Manual which states that immigration officials can begin removal proceedings for immigrants who lack legal status and apply to become permanent residents through family-based petitions.

According to the Policy Manual, “if USCIS determines the alien beneficiary is removeable and amenable to removal from the United States, USCIS may issue a Notice to Appear (NTA) [in immigration court] placing the beneficiary in removal proceedings. Petitioners and alien beneficiaries should be aware that a family-based petition accords no immigration status nor does it bar removal.”

The new policy went into effect immediately and applies to pending requests for a green card, and those filed on or after August 1st.

While the practical impact of this policy is yet to be seen, it provides immigration officials with more discretion to initiate removal proceedings even where a green card application is pending with USCIS, for those who entered the U.S. illegally, overstayed a U.S. visa, or otherwise failed to maintain their legal status.

These policy changes underscore the importance of maintaining underlying legal status throughout the green card process. Those who lack legal status or who lost their status during the green card process may be most at risk.

Continue reading

by

hand-634653_1280In a recent interview with the New York Times, published on July 25th the new director of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) Joseph Edlow told reporters that the agency is planning sweeping changes to the way the agency awards visas for H-1B high-skilled workers in specialty occupations.

Under current provisions, USCIS conducts a random lottery to select enough applicants to fill the government’s annual H-1B visa quota of 85,000 visas. But that may all soon change.

As we reported last week, the government has been quietly advancing efforts to reform the H-1B visa selection process. On Thursday last week, the Department of Homeland Security submitted a proposed rule—RIN 1615-AD01, titled “Weighted Selection Process for Registrants and Petitioners Seeking to File Cap-Subject H-1B Petitions” aimed at significantly restructuring the selection system for cap-subject H-1B specialty occupation visas. The proposal is now under review by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

It has not yet been made public, but once approved, the government is required to publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register for public comment as part of the formal rulemaking process.

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

donald-trump-4921211_1280On April 28th, President Donald Trump signed two new executive orders that significantly impact U.S. immigration policy and enforcement.

These presidential actions are a continued effort to prioritize national security by enhancing law enforcement capabilities and imposes penalties on “sanctuary” cities that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

  • Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens

The first executive order entitled “Strengthening and Unleashing America’s Law Enforcement to Pursue Criminals and Protect Innocent Citizens,” empowers state and local law enforcement agencies to take stronger action against crime by expanding their authority and increasing investment in prison infrastructure. It also holds state and local officials accountable for obstructing criminal law enforcement or violating civil rights.

Specifically, it directs the Attorney General to prosecute officials who

willfully and unlawfully direct the obstruction of criminal law, including by directly and unlawfully prohibiting law enforcement officers from carrying out duties necessary for public safety and law enforcement; or

unlawfully engage in discrimination or civil-rights violations under the guise of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” initiatives that restrict law enforcement activity or endanger citizens.

Continue reading

by

arrested-8303916_1280In the latest clash between the Trump administration and the judiciary—Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge Hannah Dugan has been arrested by agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for accusations of helping a man evade immigration authorities.

This all went down on Friday April 25th after allegations that the judge directed an undocumented immigrant and his lawyer to exit her courtroom through a side door after learning that federal immigration agents were waiting in the hallway to arrest him.

Upon being spotted by agents outside the courthouse, the man was pursued on foot and was ultimately taken into custody.

These actions have prompted a showdown over allegations of obstruction of justice amid Trump’s immigration crackdowns. The U.S. attorney general Pam Bondi has accused the judge of interfering with the government’s enforcement priorities claiming the arrest sends a “strong message” to judges that they will be prosecuted if they “escort a criminal defendant out a back door.”

The circumstances surrounding the judge’s arrest remain unclear. What is known is that six federal officers descended upon the Milwaukee County Courthouse to arrest Eduardo Flores-Ruiz, a Mexican national attending a court hearing to respond to battery charges in connection with a criminal complaint filed by his roommate.

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

donald-2911302_1280Trump Administration Plans Revocation of CHNV Parole Leaving Thousands Without Legal Status

In a shocking turn of events, new information has been released by CBS News about the Trump administration’s imminent plans to revoke the legal status of those who were granted humanitarian parole under the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV) humanitarian parole programs.

It is estimated that more than 530,000 Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans and Venezuelans are currently in the U.S. under these programs.

What is CHNV Parole?

The CHNV parole program was first enacted in 2023 by the Biden administration. Much like the Uniting for Ukraine parole program, nationals from qualifying countries (Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela) were required to have a U.S.-based supporter, pass enhanced security vetting, and meet other criteria to gain admission to the U.S.

Those admitted were granted entry to the U.S. for a temporary period of up to two years, including the ability to apply for temporary employment authorization with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).

Following President Trump’s day one executive order entitled, “Securing Our Borders,” on January 28th USCIS stopped the acceptance of Form I-134A, Online Request to be a Supporter and Declaration of Financial Support, for these parole programs pending further review. This was the first sign of trouble for the CHNV program. The CHNV parole webpage is no longer available on the USCIS website.

DHS Notice to Revoke CHNV

According to internal government documents reviewed by CBS News, the Department of Homeland Security will soon publish a notice in the Federal Register terminating the CHNV parole programs and revoking the parole status of all who were granted entry to the United States under the CHNV humanitarian parole programs.

Such individuals will be placed in removal proceedings if they do not have any other lawful basis to remain in the country.

What this means: 

  • Those whose parole classification is revoked, and who lack another immigration status, will be immediately ineligible to remain in the United States, and can no longer work on a lawful basis.
  • Accelerated Deportations: The Department of Homeland Security has expanded expedited removal procedures, targeting individuals without permanent legal status
  • Alternative Legal Pathways: those in the U.S. under CHNV parole must explore alternative legal avenues to remain in the U.S. or prepare to depart

Continue reading

by

recruitment-6838250_1280New changes are being implemented for certain self-petitioners filing immigration petitions under the Violence Against Women Act, also known as VAWA.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced that beginning in December they will be conducting in-person interviews for select VAWA self-petitioners who have an I-360 and I-485 application pending.

Not all self-petitioners will be required to attend an interview. Self-petitioners who have filed a stand-alone I-360 will not be interviewed.

USCIS expects to continue to adjudicate the majority of VAWA cases without the need for an interview.

Why has this change been made?

An increase in the volume of immigration petitions filed under the VAWA program, along with a surge in VAWA-related fraud reported in the states of New York, Massachusetts, and Maryland has led to this policy change.

While no plans are currently being made to expand interviews to a broader pool of VAWA self-petitioners, the incoming Trump administration may consider this in the future.

How will I know if I am required to attend an in-person interview?

VAWA self-petitioners who are required to attend an interview, will receive an interview notice by mail at the safe address they have provided. Legal representatives will also be notified by mail.

Please note that a self-petitioner’s selection for an interview is not a negative indicator and does not suggest a case will receive an unfavorable outcome.

Continue reading

by

IMPORTANT ALERT: On August 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in Texas v. Department of Homeland Security, Case Number 24-cv-306 administratively stayed DHS from granting parole in place under Keeping Families Together for 14 days; the District Court might extend the period of this administrative stay.

While the administrative stay is in place, USCIS will:

  • Not grant any pending parole in place requests under Keeping Families Together.
  • Continue to accept filings of Form I-131F, Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens.

The District Court’s administrative stay order does not impact parole applications that were approved before the administrative stay order was issued by the court.

WARNING:

The court expects that good cause may exist to extend the administrative stay for additional periods through mid-October. The court is also scheduled to decide whether the plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Summary Judgment will be issued during the month of October.

Immediate Call to Action

If you are eligible for parole in place under the Keeping Families Together program, you must take immediate action and submit the online application Form I-131F, Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens, as soon as possible before time runs out. A court order may soon prohibit USCIS from accepting applications for parole in place. For assistance with your application, contact us at 619-819-9204 or text 619-569-1768 for a consultation. 

gavel-7233485_1280We bring you this breaking news to announce that on Friday, August 23, 2024, Texas along with 15 other Republican-led states filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, seeking to invalidate the parole in place program established by President Biden’s June executive order.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began accepting applications for parole in place on Monday August 19th to keep families of U.S. Citizens together. This program allows certain undocumented spouses and stepchildren of U.S. Citizens who entered the country without inspection, to legalize their status without departing the United States.

Those eligible can apply for parole in place using the new online Form I-131F, and if approved, are given three years to apply for temporary work authorization and permanent residency. The administration estimates about 500,000 people could be eligible, plus about 50,000 of their children.

The program is meant to eliminate the need for such individuals to go through the cumbersome extreme hardship “waiver” process, which requires undocumented spouses of U.S. Citizens to receive an approved waiver from USCIS, before applying for an immigrant visa at a U.S. Consulate abroad.

Unfortunately, the Republican-led coalition is seeking to put an end to the program claiming that the Biden administration has abused their power in creating it. These states argue that only Congress has the authority to enact legislation that would authorize a program like parole in place.

Court filings also accuse the Biden administration of unlawfully creating a pathway to permanent residency for these individuals solely for political purposes, due to the fast-approaching presidential election.

Continue reading

by

people-4417185_1280Recently the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced new changes to the International Entrepreneur Rule effective October 1, 2024.

What is the International Entrepreneur Rule

The International Entrepreneur Rule (IER), was first established by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2017.

The program allows noncitizen entrepreneurs to live and work in the United States temporarily, if they can demonstrate that their businesses will provide a significant public benefit to the United States via economic benefits and job creation.

Those granted parole under the program are eligible to work for their startup companies for an initial period of 2 ½ years, and their dependents can accompany them to the United States.

The current requirements of the International Entrepreneur parole program are as follows:

  • Entrepreneurs already in the United States and those residing overseas are eligible to apply
  • Start-up entities must have been formed in the United States within the past five years
  • Start-up entities must demonstrate substantial potential for rapid growth and job creation by showing at least $264,147 in qualified investments from qualifying investors, at least $105,659 in qualified government awards or grants, or alternative evidence
  • The spouse of the entrepreneur may apply for employment authorization after being paroled into the United States
  • The entrepreneur may be granted an initial parole period of up to 2½ years. If approved for re-parole, based on additional benchmarks in funding, job creation, or revenue described below, the entrepreneur may receive up to another 2½ years, for a maximum of 5 years under the program

New Increases to Qualifying Investment Amounts

  • Initial Applications: Starting October 1st to demonstrate the businesses’ potential for growth and job creation, initial applicants will need to show at least $311,071 in qualified investments from qualifying investors, at least $124,429 in qualified government awards or grants, or, if only partially meeting the threshold investment or award criteria, alternative evidence of the start-up entity’s substantial potential for rapid growth and job creation.
  • Re-parole Applications: For those applying for a second period of authorized stay, the entrepreneur must demonstrate that the start-up entity has either:
    • Received a qualified investment, qualified government grants or awards, or a combination of such funding, of at least $622,142(currently $528,293);
    • Created at least five qualified jobs; or
    • Reached annual revenue in the United States of at least $622,142 (currently $528,293) and averaged at least 20% in annual revenue growth.

Continue reading