ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily June 27, 2003
Previous Issues
The unmatched news resource for legal professionals. Free! Join 9000+ readers

Editor's Comments

Using Netscape For ILW.COM

A letter to the Editor today refers to our recent comments about accessing our website from computers at the DOJ/DHS. Our website is accessible to anyone with MS Internet Explorer 5.0 and above or to Netscape Navigator 6.0 and above. We understand that Navigator 7.02, the most current version is free of the bugs that we understand plagued Navigator 6.0 at one time. Those who want to stay with Netscape may find 7.02 will bring them into the 21st century. We understand that DOJ/DHS have standardized their computers on Netscape 4.7, an ancient version. We also understand that DOJ (and now presumably DHS) have authorized upgrades to Internet Explorer 6.0. We hope our readers in these Departments will upgrade their browsers (there is no software cost to upgrade these browsers). This will not only restore their access to our website, it will also make their general browsing experience on many other websites more productive and pleasant.


200,000 Attorney Searches Per Year!

Approximately 200,000 searches are made each year for immigration attorneys on ILW.COM. That's more than 400 searches per year per attorney listed in our lawyer directory. Which means that if you are listed with ILW.COM, then your listing will be searched once each day throughout the year. You need only one client a year to make a profit on your listing! We can even link your ILW.COM listing directly to your own website. For a personal discussion on listing your practice in our directory, please send an e-mail with your phone number to Alternatively, if you prefer to list yourself on-line, please click here:

Featured Article

Aliens Victims of Post 9/11 False Terrorism Tips
Carl R. Baldwin writes "But given the dreadful impact that a false accusation will have on aliens and their families, I wish that the administration would get rid of a mindset that is far too quick to link aliens, especially Muslim aliens, to terrorism."

Keep on top of the latest in immigration law! Attend ILW.COM seminars! You can attend ILW.COM phone seminars from the convenience of your office! For more info on the seminars currently available, please click here:

Immigration Law News

BCBP Seeks Comments
The Bureau of Customs and Border Protection sought comments on the Visa Waiver Program Carrier Agreement, Form I-775; and Report of Compliant, Form I-847.

T Visa - A New Visa Category - Regs Promulgated
The Department of State promulgated regulations adding a new visa category (T) to implement section 107(e) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 that grants T nonimmigrant status to certain victims of severe forms of trafficking in persons, and in circumstances involving extreme hardship, to their immediate relatives.

BIA Is Bound By State Court's Designation Of Offense As Misdemeanor
In Garcia-Lopez v. Ashcroft, No. 02-70200 (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2003), the court said that the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) erred in determining that it was not bound by the [California] state court's designation of Petitioner's offense as a misdemeanor. Because the penalty for the offense did not exceed imprisonment for one year, and because Petitioner received an actual sentence of less than six months, he qualified for the petty offense exception to suspension of deportation.

9th Circuit Remands For Resolution Of Shoplifting Issues
In US v. Sanchez-Sanchez, No. 02-1005 (9th Cir. Jun. 26, 2003), the court said that the discrepancies involving Defendant's prior conviction for Arizona shoplifting should be resolved by the district court on remand.

Somali's Petition For Review Denied
In Waberi v. Ashcroft, No. 02-2815 (8th Cir. Jun. 26, 2003), the court denied the petition for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) because the evidence did not compel reversal.

Oklahoma Statute For Caretaker Abuse/Neglect Is Crime Of Moral Turpitude
In Ofosuhemaa v. Ashcroft, No. 02-9528 (10th Cir. Jun. 26, 2003), the court said that the Board of Immigration Appeal's (BIA) conclusion that Petitioner's 1998 Oklahoma conviction for caretaker abuse or neglect was a crime of moral turpitude, was reasonable.

Supreme Court Declines Immigration Case
The Kansas City Star reports " The Supreme Court refused Monday to consider when the government can indefinitely detain illegal immigrants caught at the borders in a case involving Mariel boatlift refugees who fled Cuba in 1980."

Bill To Make Police Federal Immigration Agents Dies In House
The Washington Times reports "The last amendment to the $30 billion homeland security bill approved Tuesday by House lawmakers would have denied federal money to so-called "sanctuary cities" that have passed ordinances freeing law-enforcement officials from reporting illegal immigrants."

Attorney listings on ILW.COM are searched 200,000 times/year! Each attorney listed is searched an average of once each day! Just one new client will pay for the entire year's fee! Click here for more info:


Immigration Bonds
National Bonding Corp. is the #1 immigration bond writer in the country. We handle all types of State, Federal and Immigration Bonds nationwide. We are the experts in immigration bonding - setting the standard that others have followed for 15 years. Call us toll-free at
1-800-244-9030. National Bonding Corp. offers flexible terms, competitive rates, financing, a fully bi-lingual staff (English and Spanish) and nationwide coverage. We are available everyday, 24 hours, 7 days a week. Call us for info + assistance at 1-800-244-9030 or

Books - 2003 Edition 8 CFR Plus And INA
We are pleased to announce that the latest edition of the Immigration & Nationality Act (INA) is now available. This reference tool is invaluable while writing to the INS about a RFE or preparing a petition. Attorneys have been using the exhaustive topic indices in the 8 CFR Plus and The Whole ACT - INA (Annotated) to do just that for years. Whether you are a seasoned practitioner or a less experienced attorney entering the immigration law field, these books are a must-have. Not satisfied with your purchase? We offer a money-back, no questions asked, guarantee. For information on our various publications, please see this link. (A Supplement is provided Free of cost updating the 8 CFR Plus as of June 1, 2003. All BCIS related changes have been included in this Supplement as well as a complete index to ALL 8 CFR Sections updated as of June 1, 2003.)

We carry advertisements for Help Wanted: Attorney, Help Wanted: Paralegal, Help Wanted: Other, Positions Sought, Products & Services Offered, etc.
For information on advertising in the classifieds please click here

For a listing of current immigration events please click here
For services/products of use in your law practice please click here

Letters to the Editor

Dear Editor:
I read Immigration Daily's Editor's comments this past week concerning the Netscape issue. Please note that the DHS and BCIS have no plans to upgrade its version of Netscape. In the alternative, is there any plan on the part of ILW.COM to make its website accessible to older versions of Netscape?

John Abram

Editor's Note: Please see Editor's comments above.

Dear Editor:
The scholarly conclusion of Norm Matloff of the University of California-Davis that the H-1B visa program is directly harming US citizens is more significant than many readers may realize. This same politically correct institution publishes the respected "Migration News", a thorough and objective report of immigration trends available free by email. The "pause for thought" that he has provided is one that many are reconsidering in regards to our overly generous and loosely enforced entry policies that results in many harmful manifestations including security concerns, contrary to the naive statements of Name Not Provided and others. Many wonder if such liberal policies can be attributed to "a good deed" on the part of excessive immigration advocates, as Mr. Matloff suggests, which regardless of any individual's motive or sincerity seems to serve only the interests of those with more political and profit motivations. After months of proclamations of pure motives of human rights, idealistic poems and novels, we now see an admission of a more base motivation that allows them to "fill menial jobs", as stated in Richard Baer's 6/26 letter. This and the noted comments of Mr. Matloff in regards to the servitude nature of the visa programs, even in other than menial jobs, do not exactly portray an egalitarian utopia. The speech of former INS head, James Ziglar has a good amount of merit, particularly in regards to recognition of the Constitution. But one has to wonder if he has read Article IV, Section 4 which guarantees that the US will protect the States, "...each of them against Invasion". His frequent references to "freedom" in regards to immigrants does not seem to apply to violated citizen's rights when excessive numbers of foreigners are allowed and encouraged to legally and illegally "migrate" or invade US. There is no right or freedom of others to come here, only as may be controlled, limited, allocated, and allowed as determined by our sovereign interests, not special interests.

R. L. Ranger

Dear Editor:
I am writing you in response to Mr. Norm Matloff's comment. Did you ever think, Sir, that H1-B visa holders can be other than electrical or computer science engineers? That they can have unique skills in unique fields? How can a professor a computer science that is trained in thinking in logical terms generalize based solely on the examples he sees in his field/environment? Your article hurts. It hurts H-1B holders that bring unique skills to this country, and that are paid correspondingly. It equally hurts employers like mine that treat people well, and don't take advantage of workers. You would be surprised to find out that this country does have nice and honest employers. And equally, employees that don't occupy anybody's place.

Delia Radulescu
Biomedical Engineer

Dear Editor:
In response to Norm Matloff's letter, who takes Mr. Siskind to task over his opinions regarding the H-1B program, I just have to say, as a direct descendent of African slaves, your analogy comparing the H-1B program to slavery is offensive. Perhaps you have no concept of what slavery is, but making 50K+ a year isn't. My people worked for hundreds of years for free while being murdered and raped. I don't hear those kinds of horrors coming from any H visa holders. H-1B employers are required to pay the prevailing wage. If someone has a problem with prevailing wages being too low, I suggest that they take it up with Congress.

Chicago, IL

Dear Editor:
I appreciate Mr. Matloff's response to the correspondence I have had with Mr. Sanchez. I first should remind Mr. Matloff that Mr. Sanchez brought my faith into the debate (which was certainly inappropriate). I would certainly have been happy to stick to just the relevant arguments on whether the H-1B visa is good or bad for this country. With that said, I was happy to offer my religious views because I see them as consistent with the work I do every day as an immigration lawyer and I was annoyed that Mr. Sanchez would seek to lecture me on the tenets of my own faith. Mr. Matloff is not incorrect in saying that justice is a central theme of Judaism. But I think many readers of Immigration Daily would agree with me when I say that his attempt to portray the H-1B programs as a form of slavery or indentured servitude is ridiculous. No one is holding a gun to an H-1B visa holder's head forcing her to work in America. The whole world is competing for top talent right now not only for the skills that they possess, but also for the energy they bring to their new countries. Fortunately, America's vibrant, free economy and open society make us an intelligent choice for this global pool of specialty workers. It is patronizing to say that these workers are not smart enough to think for themselves and I really don't think many people will be convinced by Mr. Matloff's contention that the immigration restrictionists take their positions out of a concern for the H-1B visa holders themselves. I doubt there are many who follow this issue closely who would honestly say that this is about anything other than protectionism. By the way, I doubt most business immigration lawyers are practicing in this area out of some desire to help poor immigrants from the third world. We're in it because we think that business immigration is good for the American economy. I'm sorry if seasoned immigrants like the ones you mention in your letter don't like competition from newer immigrants. But I certainly think competition is the reason why our economy is so strong. My central argument in my argument with Sanchez was that free trade - and business immigration is simply free trade in services - helps grow the pie for everyone and keeps the overall unemployment rate down. Protecting the labor market may save jobs for some, but it stealthily stifles the wider economy and causes pain for others. Finally, I am bothered by something that Mr. Matloff subtly brings out. He's a professor in Northern California, a place that probably is going through a tougher situation than any other part of the country. It also has an extremely high concentration of workers in one industry - high tech. I would urge that the H-1B debate not be viewed through the lenses of Silicon Valley. The H-1B visa is not the "high-tech" visa that the media portrays. It is used by people in many other fields and by many parts of the country that still are experiencing real shortages of specialty workers. One industry (which is largely concentrated in one metropolitan area) is setting the tone for this national debate. Doctors, teachers, nurses and a host of other professionals are going to pay the price for protecting jobs for a small group of high tech workers adversely affected by the business cycle.

Greg Siskind

Dear Editor:
The Migration Policy Institute issued the following press release.

The September 11 attacks demanded a powerful response, but blanket measures such as roundups and arrests, intimidating interviews, lengthy detention, and special registration requirements are blunt tools: despite their use, many of the September 11 terrorists would probably be admitted to the United States today since most had no previous criminal, terrorist, or immigration records. The government's successes in apprehending terrorists have come not from immigration initiatives but from international intelligence breakthroughs, law enforcement cooperation, information gleaned from arrests made abroad, and interagency information-sharing. Intelligence and immigration policy have to work together to be effective in combating terrorism. These are among the conclusions of a wide-ranging review of post-September 11 immigration measures described in "America's Challenge: Domestic Security, Civil Liberties and National Unity After September 11." The report, released today by the Migration Policy Institute (MPI), involved 18 months of research. It is the most comprehensive compilation and analysis yet of the individuals detained in the wake of September 11, their experiences, and the government's post-September 11 immigration measures.

Amy Mehringer
Migration Policy Institute

An Important disclaimer! The information provided on this page is not legal advice. Transmission of this information is not intended to create, and receipt by you does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers must not act upon any information without first seeking advice from a qualified attorney. Send Correspondence and articles to Letters and articles may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium. Opinions expressed in letters and articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.

Editorial Advisory Board
Marc Ellis, Gary Endelman

© Copyright 1999-2003 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM