(215) 520-4000
info@getsonschatz.com
info@getsonschatz.com
Practice Areas
Immigration News
August 26, 2010
The Department of Homeland Security is systematically reviewing thousands of pending immigration cases and moving to dismiss those filed against suspected illegal immigrants who have no serious criminal records, according to several sources familiar with the efforts. Culling the immigration court system dockets of noncriminals started in earnest in Houston about a month ago and has stunned local immigration attorneys, who have reported coming to court anticipating clients' deportations only to learn that the government was dismissing their cases. Richard Rocha, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokesman, said Tuesday that the review is part of the agency's broader, nationwide strategy to prioritize the deportations of illegal immigrants who pose a threat to national security and public safety. Rocha declined to provide further details. Critics assailed the plan as another sign that the Obama administration is trying to create a kind of backdoor "amnesty" program.
August 22, 2010
A new report
from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Council on International Personnel (ACIP) highlights the enormous contributions that highly skilled immigrants make to the U.S. economy. The report, entitled Regaining America’s Competitive Advantage: Making Our Immigration System Work, rebuts the simplistic claims of immigration restrictionists that foreign-born professionals who come to the United States on temporary employment visas (such as H-1Bs) are somehow “stealing” jobs from native-born workers. As the report notes, the restrictionists overlook the myriad ways in which highly skilled immigrants fuel U.S. economic growth and create U.S. jobs through their innovation and entrepreneurship.
The Chamber of Commerce/ACIP report argues that one of the biggest mistakes made by critics of high-skilled immigration is to assume, incorrectly, that foreign-born and native-born professionals are competing for some fixed number of jobs in the U.S. economy. In reality, however, a skilled immigrant who contributes to a scientific breakthrough, a new invention, or the founding of a new company in the United States is creating jobs, not merely filling one. The report cites an abundance of research demonstrating this basic fact. For instance:
from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and American Council on International Personnel (ACIP) highlights the enormous contributions that highly skilled immigrants make to the U.S. economy. The report, entitled Regaining America’s Competitive Advantage: Making Our Immigration System Work, rebuts the simplistic claims of immigration restrictionists that foreign-born professionals who come to the United States on temporary employment visas (such as H-1Bs) are somehow “stealing” jobs from native-born workers. As the report notes, the restrictionists overlook the myriad ways in which highly skilled immigrants fuel U.S. economic growth and create U.S. jobs through their innovation and entrepreneurship.
The Chamber of Commerce/ACIP report argues that one of the biggest mistakes made by critics of high-skilled immigration is to assume, incorrectly, that foreign-born and native-born professionals are competing for some fixed number of jobs in the U.S. economy. In reality, however, a skilled immigrant who contributes to a scientific breakthrough, a new invention, or the founding of a new company in the United States is creating jobs, not merely filling one. The report cites an abundance of research demonstrating this basic fact. For instance:
- A 2008 study by researchers at Duke University and Harvard University concluded that one-quarter of all engineering and technology-related companies founded in the United States from 1995 to 2005 “had at least one immigrant key founder,” and that these companies “produced $52 billion in sales and employed 450,000 workers in 2005.” Moreover, these immigrant-founded firms have “contributed greatly to the country’s economic growth over time.”
- A 2006 study by the National Venture Capital Association found that, during the previous 15 years, immigrants started one-quarter of the public companies in the United States backed by venture capital. These companies had a market capitalization of more than $500 billion and employed 220,000 workers in the United States in 2006. The largest of these immigrant-founded firms were Intel, Solectron, Sanmina-SCI, Sun Microsystems, eBay, Yahoo!, and Google.
- A 2001 study by researchers at Georgia State University and the University of Missouri-St Louis found that foreign-born scientists and engineers in the United States are “disproportionately represented” among individuals elected to the National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engineering, among authors of scientific papers and patents, and among founders and chairs of biotechnology companies.
Closing the door to highly educated individuals…who aid the competitiveness of U.S. companies will weaken, not strengthen, our country and will diminish the competitiveness of American employers. In the global economy, investment follows the talent and attempts to restrict the hiring of talented foreign-born professionals in the United States encourages such hiring to take place overseas, where the investment dollars will follow.In other words, if the United States won’t take the best and the brightest, then its economic competitors will.
On August 13, 2010, the District Court dismissed with prejudice Broadgate, Inc., et al v. USCIS, a case challenging the January 8, 2010, Neufeld employer-employee/third-party placement Memo. The court held that the Memo does not constitute final agency action subject to judicial review.
The United States cannot deport all 12 million illegal aliens in the United States and should stop trying, a spokeswoman for the National Council of La Raza (NCLR) told CNSNews.com last week.
“We have to recognize that our immigration system has been broken for 20 years and there are now 12 million people living and working and praying among us who are here without documents. Many have spouses who are citizens or children fighting for our country,” NCLR Immigration Field Coordinator A. Elena Lacayo said in an e-mail response to a question from CNSNews.com.
“Deporting 12 million people is not a realistic solution,” she wrote. “It’s time we create a rational immigration system, take these people out of the shadows and restore the rule of law.”
CNSNews.com had asked Lacayo: “Should law enforcement officers strive to prosecute and deport known illegal immigrants whenever they are apprehended or stopped for any reason since they are breaking U.S. law by being inside U.S. borders without legal documentation?”
La Raza released a report last week calling for the termination of a federal program that allows Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to work with local law enforcement to target illegal aliens for deportation.
Lacayo, the author of the report, said that the federal 287(g) program had failed in its mission to target aliens considered to pose the greatest public risk, and routinely led to the apprehension and deportation proceedings of illegal aliens for “minor offenses.”
“Although the stated priority of the program is to apprehend those who pose the greatest threat to our society, in other words, serious criminals and terrorists, the program has been shown to apprehend large numbers of individuals who pose no credible threat to our community or country,” Lacayo said during a telephone news conference last Thursday announcing the report.
The report said that a majority of immigrants detained under 287(g) authority, “have been apprehended for minor offenses such as driving with a broken taillight, fishing without a permit, or ‘conspiracy to smuggle oneself,’” referring to instances when illegal immigrants conspire with human smugglers to enter the United States.
The NCLR also directly attacked Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County, Ariz. Sheriff Arpaio is internationally known for his strict enforcement of immigration laws in Arizona.
“Perhaps no jurisdiction has shown greater misuse of the 287(g) program than Maricopa County, where Sheriff Joe Arpaio has effectively converted the police department into an immigration enforcement agency,” the report stated.
“More than 2,200 lawsuits have been filed against Sheriff Arpaio’s broad use of the 287(g) program for ‘crime suppression/anti-illegal immigration’ sweeps that have been conducted ‘without any evidence of criminal activity violating federal regulations intended to prevent racial profiling,'" stated the report.
Arpaio did not respond to attempts by CNSNews.com to seek his response to the allegations. He is being threatened with a lawsuit by the Justice Department over his “crimesweeps,” and a federal grand jury in Phoenix is currently probing the sheriff on other charges.
The 287(g) program, added to the Immigration and Nationality Act by the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, is described by ICE as “one of ICE's top partnership initiatives” that has “emerged as one of the agency's most successful and popular partnership initiatives as more state and local leaders have come to understand how a shared approach to immigration enforcement can benefit their communities.”
According to ICE, since January of 2006, the 287(g) program is credited with identifying more than 173,000 potentially removable aliens, mostly at local jails.
ICE spokesman Richard Rocha told CNSNews.com: “Consistent with ICE’s continued focus on criminal aliens, in the past two years ICE has removed more than 35,000 convicted criminal aliens identified through the 287(g) program.”
Jessica Vaughan, director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies, told CNSNews.com that the criticism of the 287(g) program for apprehending illegal aliens for minor violations has become very common but is “silly.”
“Every person who is an illegal alien here is potentially subject to deportation because they are in violation of immigration law and they don’t have permission to be here,” Vaughan said.
“If the way they get discovered is because they commit another crime, I think most Americans understand the logic there that that’s simply how they came into the attention of law enforcement,” she said.
Vaughan said that the program should be expanded by several fold because local officers are the ones who know where the criminal aliens are and it is important to have their involvement in immigration law enforcement.
“What it boils down to is that this organization, National Council of La Raza, (apparently does not) think any illegal alien should be subject to immigration law enforcement,” Vaughan told CNSNews.com.
“If we can’t even remove criminals, even if they’re (arrested for) minor crimes, who can we remove?” Vaughn said.
“This program works, and that’s why they have devoted so much attention to trying to end it, even though it is really not particularly controversial, especially in the law enforcement community, and definitely not among members of the public,” Vaughan added.
On Aug. 13, 2010, President Obama signed into law Public Law 111-230, which contains provisions to increase certain H-1B and L-1 petition fees. Effective immediately, Public Law 111-230 requires the submission of an additional fee of $2,000 for certain H-1B petitions and $2,250 for certain L-1A and L-1B petitions postmarked on or after Aug. 14, 2010, and will remain in effect through Sept. 30, 2014.
These additional fees apply to petitioners who employ 50 or more employees in the United States with more than 50 percent of its employees in the United States in H-1B or L (including L-1A, L-1B and L-2) nonimmigrant status. Petitioners meeting these criteria must submit the fee with an H-1B or L-1 petition filed:
- Initially to grant an alien nonimmigrant status described in subparagraph (H)(i)(b) or (L) of section 101(a)(15), or
- To obtain authorization for an alien having such status to change employers.
August 18, 2010
A parade of states led by Arizona says the federal government is not doing enough to combat illegal immigration. But by one measure – deportations – the federal government is doing more than it has ever done.
In 2009, the United States deported a record 387,790 people – a 5 percent increase over 2008. Nearly two months before the end of the 2010 federal fiscal year, the deportation rate is down slightly from 2009, but the number of removals is still likely to be more than triple what it was in 2001.
The numbers come from a recently released study by Syracuse University in New York. Among the other significant findings: An increasing share of deportees are immigrants who have been convicted of a crime, reflecting President Obama's desire to reorient the deportation process toward targeting criminals.
Critics of Mr. Obama worry that the focus on criminals could mean a pass for most noncriminal illegal immigrants. They also note that deportation alone does not represent a comprehensive immigration reform policy. But the deportation trend does run counter to many perceptions in border states and beyond about federal anti-illegal immigration efforts.
“We have never, ever deported so many people from the country as we are doing now,” says Douglas Massey, an immigration expert at Princeton University in New Jersey.
The only other time deportations came close to existing levels was in the early 1930s, during quasi-official deportation campaigns against Mexicans. Expulsions peaked at 136,000 in 1931 and "were done primarily by local officials and don't show up in federal statistics on deportations,” Professor Massey says.
The current deportation boom began in the mid-1990s and accelerated after the 9/11 attacks. Since coming into office, Obama has begun to recast this trend.
In 2008 and 2009, for instance, the majority of removals were people who had not been convicted of any crime, according to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) data. Through Aug. 2, 51 percent of the 294,230 people deported or forced out this fiscal year were convicted criminals. The report by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse is based on ICE data. It comes as the Obama administration endures strong criticism from state lawmakers and conservative pundits who say the federal government has done little to clamp down on illegal immigration and to secure the border. In April, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a law that required local police, during the course of their normal duties, to determine the immigration status of potential illegal immigrants. Last month, a federal judge put this and other controversial parts of the law on hold although some portions became effective July 29. The Syracuse report is a rebuke to those backing Arizona-style laws, says Gregory Chen, director of advocacy for the American Immigration Lawyers Association: “It’s a perfect example of how those allegations are based really only in politics.”But others say the Syracuse report doesn't tell the full story. Removals may be on the rise, but they are not enough to rein in illegal immigration, says Ira Mehlman, a spokesman with the Federation for American Immigration Reform.
“The problem isn’t just criminal aliens, it is a general lack of respect for our laws, and even noncriminal aliens do have a significant impact on state budgets, on unemployment, on all sorts of things.” Mr. Mehlman says the efforts to remove criminals is a tactic designed to promote an eventual amnesty for illegal immigrants who don’t commit crimes. The report, however, suggests that a focus on criminals does not necessarily lead to a criminals-only policy. The report singles out the Secure Communities program – which relies on fingerprints from arrests – as one way the federal government can cast a wider net. The program targets not just suspects in serious crimes such as homicide, kidnapping, and sexual assault but also those arrested for traffic violations and a variety of other minor offenses. The database-driven program is “a very large contributor to the increase in criminal aliens ICE has identified,” says Vincent Picard, an agency spokesman. Secure Communities was launched in October 2008 and plans are to implement it in every jail by 2013. Some say the continued rise in deportations may be Obama’s way of trying to win over critics and make his version of comprehensive immigration reform more palatable to opponents. “The administration is trying to gain credibility – with enhanced enforcement, troops to the border, and by other measures – to make clear it is taking action on immigration,” says Jack Chin, a University of Arizona law professor.
The number of cases awaiting resolution before the Immigration Courts reached a new all-time high of 247,922 by mid June 2010, according to very timely government enforcement data obtained by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC). The case backlog has continued to grow - up 2.1 percent - since TRAC's last report three months ago, and a third higher (33.1%) than levels at the end of FY 2008 (see Figure 1). Wait times have also continued to inch upward
The book, which became a sort of holistic prescription for self-empowerment via self-fulfillment, was passed from person to person and ended up - in a life-changing moment amidst a story full of such karmic twists - in the hands of Oprah Winfrey.
At its peak, Love was at the top of the best-sellers' list, and was hailed by millions as the holy text for embodying "la dolce vita." (I learned about it when a friend sent me a Barnes & Noble gift certificate, and proclaimed, "Use this to buy Eat, Pray, Love!") Readers have debated its place in the lexicon of feminist literature . . . organized book clubs to swoon over its lush storylines . . . and spent more than a few hours daydreaming about throwing caution to the wind, and following in Gilbert's footsteps, in pursuit of a more perfect union (with themselves).
In short order, the book's title - Eat, Pray, Love - became a mantra for the masses. And now, it has become a movie.
Beginning today, movie-goers are expected to flock to theaters to see Gilbert - played by screen icon Julia Roberts - eat, pray and love her way across Italy, India and Indonesia. But when the film stops rolling, another inspiring and empowering chapter in Gilbert's life will just be beginning: Her selfless work on behalf of lesbian and gay immigrant families.
Gilbert's follow-up book to Love is Committed, which picks up where the former book (and the movie) leave off. After swearing off marriage, following a now-notorious divorce, Gilbert nonetheless falls in love. When she brings her Brazilian partner to the U.S. border one too many times, though, she is told by U.S. immigration agents that he will not be allowed to enter the country unless the two marry. Suddenly, Gilbert realizes that, in order to be with the person she loves, she must enter into the institution she has sworn to avoid.
Committed chronicles Gilbert's quest to better understand marriage, its history and its meaning across cultures. Along the way, she also ponders those for whom marriage is not always such an easily obtainable union: Lesbian and gay people who, largely, remain locked out of those unions and the rights they convey.
As part of that journey, Gilbert also became particularly aware of the fact that, unlike herself, lesbian and gay Americans who fall in love abroad cannot bring loved ones to the U.S. using the same means available to her. And that, as Oprah would say, was Elizabeth Gilbert's "a ha!" moment.
That moment has now become a mission for Gilbert, and it is what will bring her to Capitol Hill next month.
Gilbert will join the Immigration Equality Action Fund an organization dedicated to helping LGBT immigrant families - in the nation's capital. on September 30th. She will lend her voice to the campaign to end discrimination against lesbian and gay Americans and their immigrant partners.
Following a keynote address at the organization's fundraiser in June, Gilbert will converge on the capitol and ask lawmakers to pass the Uniting American Families Act . . . a bill which would allow lesbian and gay Americans to sponsor their partners for residency, just as Gilbert did.
For Gilbert, it has become a passionate cause that she sees as a matter of urgency for the families impacted.
Lesbian and gay families, she told the group's supporters in June, must be recognized as families equal under the law in every way, including by recognizing their rights to keep their families together.
"My citizenship is not a courtesy that is offered to me by my government," Gilbert said. "It is my birthright. It is my right as an American citizen. And my rights are not something that are offered to me out of politeness or friendliness by the United States government."
"Central to those rights," she said, "are the idea that I will obey the law and pay taxes and be a good citizen, and the government will do its part, which is to first and foremost ensure the safety and the well-being and the privacy of my family, however I should choose to create that family."
Gilbert called discriminatory immigration laws - which leave more than 36,000 lesbian and gay binational couples facing separation or exile - "unjust and cruel and unconscionable."
She'll continue to speak out next month, when she arrives in D.C. to meet with lawmakers and give voice to LGBT families. In conjunction with her visit to Washington, the Immigration Equality Action Fund will also launch a new campaign - Engage, Lobby, Love - to rally grassroots support for legislation to end the discrimination LGBT immigrant families face.
"With Elizabeth Gilbert's help and inspiration, we will engage the American public; lobby Congress to end this injustice; and share our stories of loving families who are struggling to stay together," the organization said.
"Elizabeth Gilbert is a great writer, and a great activist," said Rachel B. Tiven, the group's executive director. "Immigration Equality Action Fund is honored to have her join us in Washington as she lends her voice to the campaign to end discrimination against our families. Millions of readers, and now millions of movie-goers, have been moved by Elizabeth's story of love, courage and empowerment. We know our elected leaders will be equally inspired by her passionate advocacy on behalf of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender binational families."
Those families, Elizabeth Gilbert said in June, "are in a fight for their lives."
"I am proud to be part of that fight," Gilbert said. "I'm humbled and honored to be part of that fight."
For her, it is a new, and passionate, chapter in an always-evolving exploration of, and dedication to, Love.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) reminds nationals of El Salvador (and persons without nationality who last habitually resided in El Salvador), who have Temporary Protected Status (TPS), to file their re-registration applications for TPS before the end of the re-registration period on Sept. 7, 2010
New U.S. legislation that sharply boosts visa fees to pay for tighter border security may play well in some parts of the country, but the applause is faint in Silicon Valley.
The measure, signed into law by President Barack Obama on Friday, is expected to raise operating costs for outsourcing firms that use large numbers of foreign-born employees to serve their U.S. customers. But the biggest impact, critics say, is to increase the perception that America is becoming more protectionist and hostile toward foreigners.
"It's adding to the negativity about America," said Vivek Wadhwa, a visiting scholar at the University of California and research associate at Duke University who studies immigration issues. "The money raised is insignificant and the damage is huge."
Backers of the bill predict the visa fee increase will raise about $200 million a year to help pay for a $600 million appropriation to beef up security on the U.S.-Mexico border. The money is expected to pay for improvements that include hiring more border guards, boosting the number of federal agents and drone aircraft used for surveillance.
Big U.S. companies that augment their work forces with small percentages of foreign workers wouldn't be affected by the measure, nor would small start-ups led by a handful of entrepreneurs from abroad. But the carefully crafted criteria strikes some observers as discriminatory, since most of the foreign outsourcing firms with large U.S. operations targeted by the measure are based in India.
The chief sponsor of the measure, Sen. Charles Schumer (D.,N.Y.), on Thursday said it is "simply untrue" that the purpose of the legislation is to target Indian information-technology companies. Rather, he said, the measure targets firms—regardless of where they are based—that use the H-1B program in ways that are contrary to its intent.
The program, Mr. Schumer said, was principally designed to help companies like Microsoft Corp. an Apple Inc. hire foreign-born students who would help develop innovative products and ultimately become U.S. residents. Outsourcing companies, by contrast, are essentially creating "multinational temp agencies" that pay less than prevailing U.S. wages and drive down the pay of American workers, he said.
Sen. Schumer's statements were challenged Friday by the National Association of Software and Service Companies, which represents Indian tech firms. The group argued that India outsourcing firms have added significantly to the U.S. economy, hired American workers and used the H-1B program properly.
The broader issue for Silicon Valley is that the flow of technology talent has now reversed. Most foreign students that get advanced degrees at U.S. universities no longer hope to stay in the country, said Mr. Wadhwa, partly because of stiffened immigration policies but also because job opportunities in places like Bangalor and Shanghai are so attractive. The visa increase sends another signal to foreign engineers that they aren't welcome, he added.
At the same time, many U.S.-based start-ups are locating the bulk of their workers in countries where wages are lower and talent is plentiful. One is Zoho Corp., a company based in Pleasanton, Calif., that has about 20 employees there—most of them American-born—and about 1,000 in India. "I don't remember the last time we applied for a visa," said Sridhar Vembu, Zoho's chief executive.
There has indeed been evidence that some outsourcing firms pay less than prevailing U.S. wages and that is a problem, said Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, a Washington policy think tank. But he argued that the way to combat that issue is to analyze outsourcers' payroll records and penalize those that don't play by the rules, not a fee increase that affects companies that do.
Sen. Schumer acknowledged broader problems that would be tackled only by comprehensive immigration reform. But he said the visa fee increase would make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with Americans for tech jobs in America—and cited comments by some Indian companies that the fee increase would push them to hire more American workers.
The senator had set off shock waves in the Indian business community when he initially referred to outsourcing companies as "chop shops," a term used to refer to illicit businesses that strip stolen cars for parts. On Thursday, Mr. Schumer said that expression was a slip of the tongue; he said he had meant to use the term "body shops," an industry slang term for outsourcing firms.
Visa fee increases are expected to help pay for security on the U.S.-Mexico border. Above, the border fence separating Mexico from the U.S. in Nogales, Sonora, Mexico in July.
The fee increase applies only to companies with at least 50 employees in the U.S. and 50% or more of their work force holding one of two widely used types of visas. The fee for them to apply for an additional H-1B visa— which covers temporary skilled workers—rises under the legislation to $2,320 from $320. The fee for additional L visas, which cover transfers within a company, increases to $2,570 from $320.
"It is just like a tax, but why are you only taxing one group of people?" asks Vish Mishra, president of the Silicon Valley chapter of the Indus Entrepreneurs, a forum for executives from South Asia.
Contact Us
Archives
Categories
- Uncategorized (130)
