Visa Lawyer Blog

Articles Posted in DHS

by

1a233a6

In this segment, we answer 4 of your most frequently asked questions received on our social media platforms and our website. Please remember that every case is different and every immigration journey is unique. You should not compare your situation to anyone else’s. We hope that our answers will provide you with further guidance while you embark on your immigration journey. If you have any further questions, please call our office to schedule a free first time consultation. We serve international clients and domestic clients in all 50 states. We thank you for your continued trust in our law office. For more information on the services we offer please click here.

Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA) and the Affidavit of Support

Q:  I am a US Citizen married to a foreign national. We have a child together. We recently moved to the United States from abroad.  My husband and son entered the United States on a B-2 visa and we are planning to apply for their adjustment of status. My question is regarding the Form I-864 Affidavit of Support. I have just secured employment and will be able to sponsor my family. I want to know what documents are required in support of the Affidavit of Support as proof that I have sufficient income to support my family. At the moment I do not have pay stubs. I plan to start my employment next month.

A: Thank you for your question. If your child was born abroad, your child may acquire U.S. Citizenship by filing for a Consular Report of Birth Abroad (CRBA, Form FS-240) before your child reaches their 18th birthday. To do so, the U.S. Citizen parent must report the birth of the child at their nearest U.S. Embassy or Consulate. Anytime that a child of a U.S. Citizen parent is born abroad, the parent must report the birth to nearest U.S. Consulate as soon as possible. This will allow the Consulate to issue a Consular Report of Birth Abroad as an official record of your child’s claim to U.S. Citizenship. The CRBA may be used as proof of your child’s U.S. Citizenship and allows the child to obtain a U.S. passport. A child with a consular report of birth abroad receives the same privileges as a child born in the United States. It is recommended that you first contact your closest U.S. embassy or Consulate before filing a petition for your son, because it is likely that you will not need to go through the immigration process for your son.

Continue reading

by

6848823919_724f516a05_z

On May 04, 2016 the Department of Homeland Security published a proposed rule in the Federal Register, announcing that filing fees for many USCIS petitions and applications are expected to increase for U.S. employers and foreign nationals. The proposed regulation stipulates that filing fees may be adjusted for certain immigration and naturalization benefit requests by USCIS. The increase in filing fees was considered after USCIS conducted a comprehensive review of its fees and found that the current fees do not cover the cost of services provided by USCIS. According to USCIS, in an effort to fully recover costs and maintain adequate services, “an adjustment to the fee schedule will be necessary”. According to the regulation, fees for most employment-based petitions and applications would be raised by an average of 21%, though other types of petitions may experience a higher increase in filing fees.

According to DHS, the higher fees will more accurately reflect the current cost of processing immigration applications and petition. A portion of the increased fees would provide additional funding for refugee and citizenship programs as well as system support for interagency immigration status verification databases.  The increase in filing fees will not take effect until the federal government approves the regulation, which is expected to take several months following the close of the 60-day comment period on July 5, 2016.

According to the new fee schedule under consideration, employment-based petitions would be the most impacted by the increase in filing fees. The filing fee for Form I-129, Petition for a Nonimmigrant Worker, would increase by 42% to a fee of $460, from the current rate of $325.  Similarly, the filing fee for Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker, would increase by 21% to a fee of $700, from the current rate of $580. The complete fee schedule under consideration has been provided below for your reference.

The EB-5 Immigrant Investor Visa Program is expected to be the most heavily affected by the new fee schedule. The filing fee for Form I-924, Application for Regional Center Under the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program, would increase by a rate of 186% requiring Regional Centers seeking designation under the program to pay a filing fee of $17,795 instead of the current rate of $6,230. In addition, Regional Centers would be required to pay a $3,035 annual fee to certify their continued eligibility for the designation. Currently, there is no fee in place for annual certification. The filing fee for the I-526 Immigrant Petition by Alien Entrepreneur, an application associated with the EB-5 visa program, would also increase to a rate of $3,675, a 145% increase up from the current rate of $1,500. The filing fee for an investor’s petition to remove conditions on residence would remain unchanged under these new regulations.

Continue reading

by

26031574284_479fdd52ab_z
The Department of Homeland Security is currently under pressure to provide Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to Ecuadorians, following a 7.8 magnitude earthquake that rocked the Northern coast of Ecuador on April 16, causing nearly 600 fatalities. Dozens of people remain missing under the rubble, while thousands of Ecuadorians have sustained injuries. The Obama administration is expected to respond to a request from American lawmakers, which would allow Ecuadorians physically present in the United States, to apply for an extension of stay to remain in the country temporarily. Furthermore, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and other politicians have called on the Obama administration to intervene, by designating Ecuador as a country temporarily eligible to receive Temporary Protected Status (TPS). In a statement issued last week, De Blasio noted that “New York City alone is home to nearly 140,000 Ecuadorian immigrants. Many of these New Yorkers face additional uncertainty about whether it is safe for them to return to Ecuador at this time. We must extend whatever support we can at this critical moment.” Approximately 143,000 Ecuadorians currently reside in the United States illegally in the states of New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California and Florida.

The administration is also being pressured by lawmakers to extend temporary protected status to migrants from Central America, due to the criminal and security concerns in the region including gang violence. The administration has not yielded to this pressure as of yet.

Enacted by the United States Immigration Act of 1990, TPS allows the government to extend the stay of foreign nationals whose countries have been affected by war, civil unrest, violence, natural disasters, or other emergent needs that concern the safety of foreign nationals from troubled regions. The provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) allow this temporary status to exist, as well as other blanket forms of relief from removal of individuals from these affected regions. Under the INA, the executive branch and legislative branch are authorized to grant TPS as relief from removal for individuals from designated countries. The Secretary of Homeland Security and Secretary of State, are given the authority to issue TPS for a period of 6 to 18 months that can be extended if conditions remain the same in the designated countries. TPS recipients receive a registration document and temporary employment authorization for the duration that the foreign national is granted Temporary Protected Status. Temporary Protected Status is NOT a visa or a path to permanent residence. Foreign nationals who have been found inadmissible to the United States or in other words have been subject to a “bar” are not eligible to receive Temporary Protected States.

Continue reading

by

16385858547_80cfa6c978_z
As previously reported, the Department of Homeland Security published a new final rule that will allow certain F-1 students with degrees in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics, also known as (STEM) fields, to apply for a 24-month extension of their optical practical training (OPT) program. This new 24-month OPT extension will replace the 17-month STEM OPT extension that had been previously in place since 2008. Eligible students can begin to apply for the new 24-month extension starting May 10, 2016. If you mistakenly apply for a 24-month extension before May 10, 2016 you will receive a 17-month extension.

Applicants should note that the cap gap extension has not changed. Individuals who have filed an H-1B change of status application that is currently pending with USCIS, must keep in mind that their status will only be extended until September 30. It is recommended that selected H-1B participants upgrade their petition to premium processing, so that foreign workers in F-1 status do not experience significant gaps in employment. USCIS will adjudicate STEM OPT applications under the 2008 rules until May 9, 2016. STEM OPT extension applications filed and approved before May 10, 2016 will receive a 17-month extension. If you have a pending application requesting a 17-month STEM OPT extension on May 10, 2016 you will receive a request for evidence asking for additional documentation to satisfy the new rule for the new 24-month extension. We have learned that the SEVIS system will be updated so that I-20’s will reflect 24-month extensions.

Students currently on 17-month STEM OPT

Continue reading

by

6733401147_3a5069bba1_z
Today the Supreme Court of the United States will begin hearing arguments in the case United States v. Texas, a lawsuit challenging Obama’s executive actions on immigration. As you have heard, a federal court order temporarily froze the expanded DACA and new DAPA programs from going into effect as expected. The Supreme Court will decide the fate of these programs by June of this year.

It is truly an exciting time of the year for immigration law. United States v. Texas is the biggest immigration case of our generation. The Supreme Court’s ruling will set an important precedent for the future of immigration policy. The court will also determine whether the President had authority to enforce the executive actions on immigration. As a member of the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association (AILA), we invite you to join a live webcast with AILA experts Greg Chen,  Legal Director Melissa Crow, and UCLA School of Law Professor Hiroshi Motomura on Tuesday, April 19, 2016, at 1:00 pm (ET), as they recap and offer expert analysis of Monday’s Supreme Court oral arguments in the United States v. Texas case.

Click here to watch the live stream.

Continue reading

by

61320634_2e4c8e752c_z

Every year USCIS receives and adjudicates approximately 6 million applications from foreign nationals seeking to immigrate to the United States, and U.S. companies seeking to employ foreign workers temporarily.  According to the Department of Homeland Security’s Office of Immigration Statistics, “an estimated 13.1 million lawful permanent residents (LPRs) were living in the United States on January 1, 2013.” Of these permanent residents, more than half–8.8 million–were eligible to apply for naturalization. Additionally, the United States issues approximately 700,000 temporary non-immigrant work visas for a variety of temporary workers including: highly skilled foreign workers employed in specialty occupations in the STEM fields, fashion models, internationally acclaimed athletes and entertainers, aliens of extraordinary ability, religious workers, intra-company transferees, treaty traders/investors, foreign media workers, and agricultural and seasonal workers.

The reason the issuance of temporary worker visas is so low, when compared to the issuance of permanent resident cards, is because most of the temporary foreign worker visa programs are subject to a congressional cap, that limits the amount of non-immigrants that can be admitted per fiscal year. Additionally, certain temporary nonimmigrant worker visa classifications are granted for a specified period of time, although in most cases at least one extension may be granted. The cap applies primarily to the H nonimmigrant worker classifications, and non-minister religious workers. The H visa category accounts for approximately 54% of all visas issued for temporary workers. That is why the H visas are the most talked about visas among politicians when discussing immigration reform. The cap does not apply to treaty traders/investors, aliens of extraordinary ability, intra-company transferees, NAFTA professionals (Canada and Mexico), and foreign media workers. In comparison to developed countries, the United States admits a relatively low number of temporary foreign workers. Foreign workers are typically admitted either to fill labor shortages in the American job market, or because of their exceptional, or highly technical skills, as is the case for the H-1B visa classification.  Only highly skilled foreign nationals, aliens of extraordinary ability, aliens holding advanced degrees, high capital investors, nurses and physical therapists, doctors in undeserved area, and recipients of national interest waivers, have the unique opportunity to obtain permanent residence based on employment.

The mammoth task of meaningful immigration reform will not be easy and it will not happen overnight. The presidential nominees have failed to outline a clear strategy to overhaul our immigration system. None of the presidential candidates have addressed the most contentious areas of immigration policy that must be revised, in order to repair our broken immigration system.

Continue reading

by

5162244018_51c361d054_z

The new replacement rule affecting the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program for F-1 students with degrees in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM), has been posted and is now available for inspection in the federal register. The new replacement rule will replace the previous 2008 rule and become effective beginning May 10, 2016.

The new rule authorizes F-1 STEM students pursuing a 12-month Optional Practical Training program in the United States to extend their ‘OPT’ status for a 24-month period. The 24-month extension replaces the 17-month STEM OPT extension previously available to STEM students. The 17-month STEM OPT extension will continue to be effective until May 9, 2016. The new 24-month extension applies only to F-1 STEM OPT students attending accredited United States institutions, whose employers participate in the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services E-verify program. Only students in a valid period of post-completion OPT may file for a STEM OPT extension. The 24-month extension, coupled with the 12-month period given with initial post-completion OPT, will give STEM students a period of 36 total months of practical training in their field. Amendments that come with the new rule include additional oversight and improvement of the program requiring formal mentoring and training plans by employers, a new STEM definition and Classification of Instructional Program Categories, provisions on previously obtained STEM degrees, Accreditation and Employer Visits, and OPT compliance. In addition, new provisions have been introduced relating to wage and protections for STEM OPT students and safeguards for American workers as described below.

The ‘Cap Gap’ provision previously available to F-1 STEM OPT students in 2008 remains in place. This provision allows students with a timely filed H-1B petition requesting a change of status, the benefit of automatically extending their F-1 status and employment authorization until October 1 of the H-1B visa fiscal year for which the student has applied. The Cap-Gap was created with intention of avoiding any disruption students might experience in their careers and personal life as a result of temporary gaps in their status.

Continue reading

by

6000446155_1d67582412_z

The fate of the President’s executive actions on immigration now rests in the hands of eight justices on the Supreme Court, absent Justice Antonin Scalia. The Supreme Court will begin to hear oral arguments for the case, United States v. Texas on April 18th of this year, with a final ruling expected by summertime. Nearly a year and a half ago, President Obama announced a series of executive actions on immigration including the expanded Deferred Action of Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, the new Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) program, and other measures to enhance border security, prioritize deportations, and modernize the immigration system. USCIS was expected to begin accepting applications for the expanded DACA and DAPA program on February 18th. The excitement surrounding the expanded DACA and DAPA program however was very short lived. A federal court order filed by Texas and other states on February 16th temporarily suspended these programs from going into effect.

Since then, the federal government and the State of Texas have been battling one another in court. The Fifth Circuit court determined that Texas and at least 25 other states had sufficient ‘standing’ to challenge both programs from being implemented. The state of Texas along with other states, argue that these programs are not only outside the purview of the President’s constitutional power, but that the States would be substantially burdened, should the programs go into effect. Texas states that as a result of these programs, the State would suffer increased health-care, law enforcement, and educational costs which would come out of the State budget and more importantly the pockets of Texas residents, who do not take kindly to these programs. Additionally, Texas claims that it would suffer additional financial burden in having to issue more drivers’ licenses to individuals qualifying for expanded DACA and DAPA, a state-subsidized benefit. If the Supreme Court decides in favor of the federal government, nearly 5 million immigrants residing in the United States unlawfully will be shielded from deportation, and States will be forced to bear the costs to accommodate their new ‘deferred’ status. Deferred status will grant individuals the right to legally obtain employment, obtain a social security number, a driver’s license, and an education, but it is not a path to citizenship. As it stands, it is unlikely that a new Supreme Court Justice will be appointed before oral arguments begin in this case, especially with mounting political pressure from Republicans seeking to block the President from making a nomination.

Continue reading

by

9374736981_85a6e772fd_z

A new factsheet published by AILA and Kids in Need of Defense (KIND) provides statistics on the representation and removal of unaccompanied children and families facing removal proceedings before immigration court. The data concludes that an overwhelming number of unaccompanied children and families are ordered removed from the United States, despite having demonstrated a legitimate fear of persecution or torture and passing a credible fear interview, making these individuals viable candidates for asylum, prosecutorial discretion, or other relief from deportation. This is due to a lack of legal representation and legitimate concern for the due process of law.

Families Passing Credible Fear in preliminary interviews with federal asylum officers

On the whole, the majority of families in detention centers demonstrate a legitimate fear of persecution or torture and maintain a high rate of approval during credible fear interviews;

  • In preliminary interviews with asylum officers, approximately 90% of families successfully demonstrated a credible fear of persecution or torture;
  • Upon completion of these interviews, approximately 88% of detained families pass their credible fear interviews;
  • The USCIS Asylum Office has indicated that the credible fear passage rates remain unchanged—at a rate of 90%;
  • DHS data indicates that 53% of 121 individuals, arrested by DHS during the January raids, lacked legal representation before immigration court;

Continue reading

by

3421880567_7c3cfa34f0_z

Beginning February 19, 2016 certain nonimmigrant Caribbean residents seeking admission to the United States as H-2A agricultural workers, will be required to obtain a valid passport and valid H-2B visa in order to be admitted. Spouses and children traveling with an H-2A agricultural worker will also be required to present a valid passport and H-2A visa. The H-2A nonimmigrant visa exception for Caribbean residents was first introduced during World War II in an effort to address labor shortages in the American workforce. The change, comes as part of the revised 2016 Omnibus Appropriations Bill, which eliminates the nonimmigrant visa exception for these individuals, along with other provisions that impact the H-2B nonagricultural visa program. The new rule will apply to nationals of the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and nationals of Barbados, Grenada, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, who either maintain a residence in a territory governed by England, France, or the Netherlands located in the adjacent islands of the Caribbean, or maintain a residence in Barbados, Grenada, Jamaica, or Trinidad and Tobago. The change was validated in yesterday’s Federal Register by the Department of State and Homeland Security respectively. Removal of this visa exemption will allow the Department of State to properly screen individuals prior to their arrival in the United States, and further protect agricultural workers from employment violations and work related abuse. To learn more about the H-2A visa program click here.

Continue reading