Posts Tagged ‘USCIS’

Matter of Wang Killing Dreams

// June 19th, 2009 // 5 Comments » // Immigration

I happened to read this blog post during an important immigration strategy conference. “The workable solutions that preserve our values and move us forward” just seemed like empty words at that moment

Matter of Wang vs. Matter of Garcia are two essential court case decisions in the area of ‘aging out’ and CSPA.

Matter of Wang is an interim decision and not a precedent but essentially, the BIA  came close to overturning itself with Matter of Wang, saying that a child who has aged out under Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) cannot retain their original priority date and get converted to the appropriate category automatically.

The automatic conversion and priority date retention provisions of the Child Status Protection Act, Pub L. No. 107-208, 116 Stat. 927 (2002), do not apply to an alien who ages out of eligibility for an immigrant visa as the derivative beneficiary of a fourth-preference visa petition, and on whose behalf a second-preference petition is later filed by a different petitioner.

This is the absolute worst news I have received since the infamous ‘get married–it’s your only option’ lawyer day.

The scope of CSPA has been reduced to “the original priority date is retained if the subsequent petition is filed by the same petitioner.” That denies an automatic conversion from the 4th category to a 2nd since there is no petitioning in U.S. immigration law by an aunt for an over-21 niece. If your aunt petitioned for your mother when you were 4 years old and 20 years pass till a visa is made available, you will be ‘aged out’ under the original petition and not be eligible to use the old priority date under a new category–essentially, you go to the back of the line AGAIN and wait another 10-20 years, separated from your parent. Similarly, there may be no automatic conversion from the 3rd to the 2nd category because there is no grandparent to grandchild petitioning in immigration law.

That means another decade wait for youth who age out while waiting in line; twenty years if you are from China, Mexico or India. It means family separation. It means no relief for those of us who live like refugees in their own homes.

Now we wait for the 5 lawsuits against the USCIS on this. By the end of this year, I hope to get enough resources to sue them too whether or not we pass the DREAM Act.

You either detain and deport me or you give me my papers. I have had enough.

Azaadi

// June 14th, 2009 // 1 Comment » // Immigration

Would you have any fear about your safety if you had to return to your home country, if deported? Yes
No
Have you been the victim of a serious crime in the U.S. or been taken to the U.S. against your will? Yes
No

The answer to both questions is a resounding Yes but unfortunately the law doesn’t see it that way.

Lets be honest and forthright. As a child, I was trafficked into this country. Sure, it did not happen illegally and no exploitation was involved, but that one action is precisely why I am imprisoned here today and not in the United Kingdom doing my PhD.

_50P6773 by DreamActivist.

Well, that and USCIS incompetency regarding both F-1 visa rules and CSPA.

But I don’t want reparations, I don’t want to punish anyone–I just want my ‘freedom,’ Azaadi.

USCIS Priority: Deport 11-Year Olds

// June 12th, 2009 // 2 Comments » // Immigration, Moron of the Week

I have this urge to put USCIS on the Morons of the Week every single week but alas, we have to pass on the title every now and then.

What have they done this time? Try to deport a 11 year old to a country she does not know and not because she is in the United States illegally.

021061009ewelina4503355.jpg

Her mom and dad are legally allowed to stay at their home in Georgia, but an eleven-year-old child has been ordered to leave the country by July 23.

Ewelina Bledniak’s parents say it’s a paperwork mistake, made by the lawyer they hired when she was two and they moved to the states.

Dad Hubert is now a U.S. citizen who owns a tile installation business in their small town. Mom Agnes is a legal resident going through the process to become a citizen. But Ewelina’s plight came up when the Bledniaks applied for a green card for their daughter.

Immigration officials found her paperwork wasn’t in order and told her she had to leave by the 23rd, lest she be thrown out of the country and sent “home” to Poland. It’s a home she hasn’t seen in nine years.

Her parents are going to take her to Poland on the 20th to meet with the U.S. Embassy there and hopefully get the issue straightened out, but it’s already creating a hardship. The family has to leave their jobs during a downturn in the economy, and they don’t know when Ewelina will be allowed home. At eleven, they can’t very well leave her alone across the world. She may lose a whole year of school, and she doesn’t speak Polish – attending school there won’t help.

I feel so much safer now. Really.

And this is all due to an immigration lawyer’s mistake. It’s too bad these immigration lawyers aren’t deported each time they toy with our lives. Nancy was also rendered ‘illegal’ by a forgetful lawyer, Mohammad would be legal today had it not been for $20 and two cases of legal malpractice, and so many more students whose stories we might never get to hear.

Why is this story making media waves? Well, the immigrants are Polish, not Mexican.

The good thing is that she is not 18 so she has not started accruing illegal presence so she won’t face the awful 10-year ban.

It’s simply a minor inconvenience in her case, not a life-altering change that many who are deported have to undergo.

Rendered Stateless – Girl Without a Country

// July 22nd, 2008 // No Comments » // Education, Immigration

Alexander (Allie) Mulhivill, 16, is the latest victim of a rigid and heartless immigration system that often does not work. And no–she is not an “illegal alien.” Allie was adopted by U.S. citizens, Lori and Scott Mulhiville, when she was 2 years old from Guatemala. For the past 14 years, the Mulhivills have been trying to get a visa for Allie without any luck. And time is running out for her as Allie turns 16 and becomes another DREAMer who cannot work, vote, drive legally, travel abroad, get financial aid for college because the USCIS is not willing to give her a visa.

All this is because 15 years ago, the U.S. Embassy failed to verify that the woman giving Allie up for adoption was her birth mother–from the get go they allowed Allie to be adopted but did not grant her a visa because later they suspected baby trafficking. Allie continues to be in immigration limbo even as her adoptive parents fight to keep her in the United States but she risks deportation when she turns 16. Would readopting her do the trick? Government officials give no guarantee–they are still stuck on their baby trafficking scenario even without any hard evidence. Keeping Allie and her family in a state of permanent limbo based on unproven hypothesis is cruel and inhumane.

When the Mulhivills asked government officials how they could keep their daughter, USCIS was particularly unhelpful and told them they “simply cannot ignore the law. We strongly urge the Mulvihills to provide evidence showing their daughter is eligible for permanent residency.”

Having almost given up on attorneys and government officials after years of making the rounds, the Mulhivilles are appealing to the public. This problem could be taken care of if the federal government passed the DREAM Act. What do other government officials say when asked for advice?

“We asked a gentleman from the state department after months, we said, ‘What is going to happen to Allie if you don’t allow her to come here?’ He said, ‘You have legally adopted her. She’s going to go to an orphanage and you must pay for this.’ He said, ‘We’re going to put her back on the garbage heap she came from.’ Yeah, this is how we were spoken to by our government,” Lori Mulvihill said

Allie is keeping optimistic despite her limbo immigration status. “I want to be able to have a job, drive, be able to vote, everything else other people take for granted. I’ve been here for 14 years I haven’t done anything wrong,” Allie Mulvihill said.

We hope for the sake of Allie and her family, her immigration issue is resolved soon and she does not face deportation away from her family. In the meantime, there is always the DREAM Act.

Adoption Timeline Key events in Allie’s adoption process:

October 1993: Guatemala approves adoption for Scott and Lori Mulvihill.

December 1993: U.S. Embassy denies the Mulvihills’ baby a visa because of suspicion of baby trafficking.

Aug. 23, 1994: With then-U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno’s intervention, the Mulvihills’ baby arrives in the United States on two-year humanitarian parole.

1996: The Mulvihills first try to apply for citizenship for Allie.

May 2001: The Immigration and Naturalization Service denies Allie citizenship.

March 22, 2005: The Mulvihills meet with director of immigration services in Philadelphia and are told citizenship would be granted if they get DNA from Allie’s birth mother.

2007: Guatemala approves a treaty requiring uniform procedures for international adoptions.

August 2007: Guatemalan police raid adoption home run by two people who worked on Allie’s adoption; arrests follow.

May 2008: Guatemalan attorney general puts 2,286 pending adoptions on hold as authorities investigate.

Aug. 18, 2008: Allie turns 16 and will no longer be considered an orphan by immigration services.

Source: Allentown Morning Call and the AP

Step Backwards – USCIS closes offices in Tijuana

// July 21st, 2008 // No Comments » // Immigration

On one hand, the ICE and concerned Americans are pressing for a crackdown on “illegal immigration” and on the other hand, USCIS is making legal migration from Mexico much tougher by permanently closing offices in Tijuana. Obviously, this move is contradictory to resolving the problem of “illegal immigration” into the United States.

The Sun reports:

The office has provided a location for foreign nationals, especially citizens of Mexico, to begin the immigration process to the United States by obtaining needed information and materials. Americans in our area who are assisting relatives who want to immigrate to our nation or get necessary documentation have also used the Tijuana office.

Mexican citizens and even Americans making use of the office in Tijuana would be further discouraged from pursuing legal avenues of migration. USCIS is already plagued with inefficient paper bureaucracy, lack of communication and inadequate services–closing down offices is not the solution to resolving immigration issues with our neighbor and major trading partner. With a strong borderlands culture and connection to the United States, Tijuana serves as a major source of migrant workers into the United States. Instead of closing offices, more services should be provided to ensure legal channels of immigration.

Read more here

USCIS director answers questions on processing times

// June 25th, 2008 // 3 Comments » // Immigration

Check out the Acting Director of the USCIS (formerly known as INS) making excuses for the slow, inefficient and bureaucratic mess of the immigration system in this country.

And within a couple days, he is again bombarded with hundreds of questions about processing times and dates. Just how many people are waiting in line for naturalization, legalization and to be united with their families?

It is not completely the fault of the USCIS — they do have quotas and rules to follow, but seriously their communication can be improved. Can we talk to a live person regarding our case on the phone or via email? Their 1800 number is absolutely useless. You enter your decade old petition number on the USCIS website and all it says is “petition approved.”

This one is priceless:

Many of you also asked about the processing times displayed at www.uscis.gov, and why the dates sometimes go backward rather than forward. We estimate those dates based on a formula that calculates, among other things, the number of cases received within a defined period, how many cases we’ve completed during that time period, and how many cases remain in process that our beyond our established processing time goals. Sometimes the flow of cases received and completed changes during a specific period in a way that shifts the date backwards. The processing timeframes shown on our webpage reflect applications just completed. So the page is only a tool for customers to estimate our current processing times.

Perfect, just perfect http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/4906/6751rolleyesev7.gif

Supreme Court relaxes Immigration Laws – Chipping Away at “Illegal is Illegal” de jure

// June 18th, 2008 // 1 Comment » // Immigration

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 last week that anyone who is under “voluntary departure” can still petition to remain in the U.S. if their circumstances change i.e. marriage. You can read the details below.

Basically, under older USCIS provisions, once you are in the country illegally, you are doomed. There is no way to petition for legal residency while staying here even through marriage unless you have a 245-I waiver. I believe the new ruling helps to make “illegal” less of a “permanent” scarlet letter. With the new ruling, people who entered legally and overstayed their visas would be allowed, under some circumstances, to pursue legalization from within the United States. A lot of mixed immigration families may be able to sigh in relief at the decision. I do wonder about those that have already had their petitions denied and deported. I suppose the law is not retroactive so tough luck?

Long time coming!

Supreme Court opinion for the case is here

PTI – The Press Trust of India Ltd.

June 17, 2008

US top court eases rules for foreigners seeking legal status.

LENGTH: 287 words

US top court eases rules for foreigners seeking legal status

Washington, June 17 (PTI) — In a development that could ease up immigration rules, the top court in the US has ruled that foreigners who overstay their visas can continue to remain in the country to seeklegal status.

Under “some” circumstances, people could withdraw their voluntary agreement to leave the US and continue with an application for lawfulstatus, the top court said in a verdict yesterday.

The ruling, jurists have pointed out, would particularly benefit those married to American citizens.

The federal government had earlier taken a position that intendingimmigrants who left the US would no longer be eligible for a “green card” and if they stayed in the US longer than authorised, they wouldbe disqualified.

“The Supreme Court rejected the government’s hard-line approach toimmigrants and to lawful immigration options,” said Nadine Wettstein, legal director of the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF), which filed a “Friend of the Court” brief in the case.

“The Court correctly held that immigrants’ rights under the law must be respected,” Wettstein added.

“This decision should send a message to the government,” added Beth Werlin, AILF’s Litigation Clearinghouse Attorney and co-author of AILF’s Amicus Curiae brief.

“The government should have reached this conclusion on its own years ago, rather than fighting through the courts.” The decision resolved majority of visa-related conflicts in the lower courts and involved two parts of the immigration law. One allows people to avoid being deported by agreeing to leave the country voluntarily and the other allows immigrants ,who overstay their visas, make their case to immigration officials.

Legally Here, Only to be Deported

// April 12th, 2008 // No Comments » // Immigration

Harder to Become a Citizen

That is the story 89,683 legal permanent residents of the United States last year, who were denied naturalization and are now facing deportation proceedings.

The CIS is turning down more cases of naturalization than ever before since the 1996 law that increased scrutiny of citizenship applications. In some cases, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has had to step in and overturn CIS decisions. One notable case is the Matter of Lovo in 2005 where the BIA overturned several CIS decisions against family petitions that included a post-operative trans-sexual and her/his partner. And despite internal memos, transgender and overtly feminine or masculine applicants for citizenship continue to face harassment and inappropriate scrutiny from immigration officials.

Why is it so difficult to naturalize after gaining legal permanent residency? Well, the reason could be as small as forgetting to update your home address and be charged with a felony for ignoring a notice sent by immigration officials. And this “aggravated felony” (yes, unopened and returned mail to the CIS) precludes someone from gaining U.S. citizenship. And before you know it, you are being deported for not updating your home address.  Or you could fail to show up at the INS for being fingerprinted since you are a quadriplegic as in the case of Marin Turcinovic who is now fighting deportation. More cases of former legal residents now fighting deportation can be read at the New York Times here.

Why would someone want to apply for citizenship, given the 12-33% heightened risk of rejection? Without American citizenship, one cannot vote or travel with an American passport. Also, family reunification is expedited with citizenship. Also, citizens cannot be deported for small crimes and misdemeanors and retire with social security benefits, and other tax benefits unlike legal permanent residents.

Yet, given the risks and difficulties of doing everything legally and still ‘getting screwed,’ it is no wonder that many choose to enter and remain illegally in the United States. But the beneficiaries of the DREAM Act did not choose to enter the country illegally and all that the legislation does is give children and young adults the chance to meet some criteria for conditional residency. When the time comes for citizenship applications, some of us would have great difficulties becoming citizens and may just be ordered for removal unless the system of senseless heightened scrutiny is fixed.

« Older Entries