Did you know about our complimentary firm-wide subscription service? For those of you who manage your firm's subscriptions, ILW.COM provides firm-wide sign-up service for Immigration Daily. Send us a list of email addresses of interested individuals at your firm to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Other Health Professionals Seminar - A Holistic Approach
ILW.COM's new telephonic seminar "Current Issues In Immigration For Nurses
And Other Healthcare Professionals
(PTs/OTs/MTs/MLTs/SLPs-As/Physician Assistants)" is
organized in cooperation with CGFNS (Commission on Graduates of Foreign
Nursing Schools). The intent of the 3 sessions of this seminar series is to
cover the subject holistically, from several approaches.
The September 30 session will cover immigration law issues, including BCIS
VisaScreen issues. The speakers
will be distinguished practioners in this sub-specialty of immigration
The October 23 session will cover employment issues. The speakers will
represent major healthcare
The November 24 session will cover state licensure and consular processing
issues. The speakers will be
representatives of State licensing boards and at least one expert in
consular processing matters.
The seminar series is designed to be useful to immigration
practitioners, recruiters, employers, and other interested parties - we
believe that it will materially assist all those with a serious interest in
Nurses and other health professions.
The deadline to register is
Friday, September 26th. For more info, including detailed curriculum,
speaker bios, and registration information, please see: http://www.ilw.com/seminars/september2003.shtm. For the fax version, please see: http://www.ilw.com/seminars/september2003.pdf
Update On Recent Consular Processing Changes And Update On Security Clearances For Third Country Nationals At Border Posts In Mexico/Canada
Avi Friedman & Bernard P. Wolfsdorf provide real-life scenarios and possible solutions to common situations in these post-9/11 times.
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: http://www.ilw.com/seminars/
Immigration Law News
BALCA Says Employer Must Be Given Opportunity To Rebut Rotating Shift Issue
In the Matters of Cardenas Market, Inc., Nos. 2002-INA-292, 2002-INA-306, 2003-INA-005 (BALCA, Sep. 3, 2003), the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals said that in cases in which the Certifying Officer raised a split-shift issue under 20 CFR 656.21(b)(3), the Employer must be given the opportunity to rebut by showing the business necessity of the requirement.
BALCA Notes Amendment To 750A Was Solely To Avoid SCA Wage
In the Matters of Garibaldi's Restaurant, Nos. 2002-INA-84, 2002-INA-109 thru 112, 2003-INA-128 (BALCA, Sep. 3, 2003), the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals said that "although Employer amended the job description to include purported supervisory duties, it was apparent that this amendment was done solely for the purpose of attempting to remove the position from a SCA wage determination."
Extreme Poverty In Mexico Does Not Warrant Downward Departure
In US v. Reyes-Rodriguez, No. 02-2147 (10th Cir. Sep. 19, 2003), the court said that the difficult circumstances in which Defendant's parents found themselves in Mexico did not undermine the court's conclusion that the care and support Defendant would provide to his parents once he returned to Mexico was not so specialized and unique that only he could provide it. The court also noted that it could not find any cases addressing the existence of poverty at the level presented in this case.
DOS Tranfers Master Terrorist Screening List To Terrorist Threat Integration Center
The Washington Post reports "In a decision that represents another reduction of the State Department's influence on counterterrorism policies, the CIA and FBI will soon take control of a database of suspected terrorists used to screen people seeking visas to enter the US, according to government officials."
Citizenship Oath Revision Not Taken Lightly
The Knoxville News Sentinel reports "Compared to the war raging in Iraq and efforts to make a struggling economy recover, the proposal by the Department of Homeland Security to change a few words in the oath of allegiance given new citizens sounds like small beer."
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: http://www.ilw.com/membership/
Books - 8 CFR, Includes 2003 BCIS Changes
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. For information on our various publications, see here. (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
This letter is for Mr. Murray from the masked man whose identity
remains even more guarded than R.L. Ranger. I think it's so interesting
that you have always referred to me as a "man". FYI - I am a woman.
And, you know, the only reason I brought in the past, which I happen to
think is never irrelevant, is because you appeared to be on a moral high
horse. If you are going to say things like, "illegal immigrants don't
deserve to be happy" - then you leave me no choice but to remind you of
the fact that our country was built on the backs of slaves and illegal
immigrants, or on our illegal conquest of land. I also believe that in
a very real sense, that basic economic paradigm which gave rise to
slavery or Manifest Destiny is still very relevant today - only the
ethnic groups immigrating and the particular sectors of the economy
affected are different. For example, today we have urban areas which
are allegedly overrun with immigrants such that the school systems and
social services are strained to accomodate them, and yet in this same
era we have midwestern communities which are so underpopulated that they
are threatened with extinction and are recruiting immigrants. The
arguments themselves for and against immigration and immigrants are
strikingly similar to those in the transcripts of the Chinese Exclusion
Act of the 1880's. The problem with the immigration debate, and the reason why workable solutions seem to elude us is precisely because what might be a sound economic argument then becomes tainted with the moralistic, patriotic or otherwise personal, emotional baggage of the participants, and inevitably degrades into a shouting match. To lament that politicians are using immigration to sway an election is to lament our democratic political process at its core. What successful candidate doesn't pander to the electorate, especially when there is a hot issue? In order to devise solutions, we have to come to some kind of
an agreement about our national priorities. Is terrorism going to blind us to the exigencies of our economy or can we find solutions that can keep us both safe and prosperous? Are we going to be able to acknowledge the global nature of our modern economy, the interplay between offshoring and immigration? All too often, people don't want to
face the unpleasant paradoxes of our modern existence, but we can't wish
them away. We have created a society with an elaborate system of checks and balances. Corporations pursue profit and we have been nursed on the notion that it will trickle down to us. But, then, we also feel the need to protect our workers from undue exploitation and these two philosophical positions often come into conflict, especially in lean times. Too often, we are cutting off our nose to spite our face. In the end, speaking in broad, general policy or philosophical terms is not enough. We have to get down to the nitty gritty, and here I believe that only people with a sophisticated grasp of the complexities of immigration law can contribute significantly, like the person who suggested revamping the family preference system, like H & L
legislation, like the return of 245(i), like a guest worker program. I believe that to argue ad nauseum about the fairness of legalizing an illegal work force that already exists is to thwart any hopes for a meaningful dialogue. If we want enforceable laws, they have to take reality into account, otherwise, human nature will find loopholes. Okay - legalize, then meaningful reform, then hopefully, future legalizations will not be needed. How's that for a solution?
On Thursday, Sept. 18, the NY Law Journal reported that the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the BIA cannot rely on the "narrative statements" of police reports to determine that individuals have committed aggravated felonies and therefore should be deported under immigration law. "The opinion, written by Judge Sonia Sotomayor, held that a decision by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) to deport John P. Dickson for committing first-degree unlawful imprisonment was improperly based on the written hearsay of a probation officer contained in Mr. Dickson's pre-sentence report."
The decision will be released and published by the NY Law Journal on Monday. I'm sure Immigration Daily will want to note it as well. By the way, you have a great periodical going here. It's the first email I check every day when I come in. Timely, informative articles, great links, and easy reading. In a time of information overload, Immigration Daily is a quick refreshing read.
Eugene J. Glicksman, Glicksman & Cardoso
New York, NY
Editor's Note: Thank you for your kind words. Immigration Daily has provided unprecedented case reporting for over three years. With AILA's anticipated initiative, immigration case reporting will rise to greater heights.
This letter is in response to your editor's comments. Limit family immigration except not nuclear families? That would result in a great increase in legal family immigration. Under the current family system, parents cannot bring their children, if they happen to be sponsored by US citizen children and have younger children living with them. Permanent residents cannot bring spouses and minor children. Refugees and asylees cannot bring spouses and children if they marry or engender children after the grant of asylum or refugee status, and they will not be permanent residents eligible to petition for 7-10 years under current quotas and processing times. The only family categories are nuclear family categories: parents, spouses, children and siblings, in various limitations that give inhumane waiting lines as published monthly in the Visa Bulletin. The sibling category is so backed up (12 years for most countries and 22 years for the Philippines) that the siblings may only be able to retire here rather than join the work force. There are no categories for cousins, uncles, aunts, grandparents, nieces, nephews, or grandchildren.
The Kolbe-Flake proposal addresses the issue of a market-driven employment-based orderly migration procedure that will help many of the family members stuck in the long waiting lines, either abroad on in the US illegally. The PERM proposal of the department of labor addresses the problem of labor certification that takes so long that only professionals eligible for another employment-based work status can ever legally immigrate based on work. The solutions may not be perfect, but at least they recognize the problem, and it is not too much family immigration.
Eleanor Kaplan Adams, Attorney at Law
San Diego, CA
I'm curious as to why Mr. Prchal's letter implies that I oppose legal immigration, no such thing, as I have stated and explained before. To repeat, if American jobs are protected by labor certification (not the joke we have now), and if sponsors or employers are required to be responsible for the support of those they bring over, I have not a problem in the world with legal immigrants, skilled or unskilled. Not unreasonable expectations, I believe. As for having a problem with Mr. Prchal's immigration in particular, again, why? His ethnicity? My mother's grandparents were Bohemian (Czech ethnicity), and my father's Lebanese mother came (legally) to the US from Canada. A background which largely parallels Mr. Prchal's experience. As an Arab-American I do, however, find offensive (and, dare I say, racist) those who wish to "legalize" Latinos on the basis that they are "hard working...not terrorists", implying that everyone else is not hardworking, and likely a terrorist. But, ultimately, my main objection to legalizing those here illegally, visa overstays or EWI, is that it is fundamentally unfair and unjust.
When I read the letters to the Editor, I am amazed by the plethora of words that some writers, usually the same group, muster in the espousal of their contentions.
If one reads history, one discovers that the fears against immigrants are as unjustified today they were in the past. The recent article, "The Hidden History of Immigration", confirms that. The fears of loss of language, culture shock, and anarchy can all be safely deleted to the recycle bin of oblivion. The phenomenon that we are experiencing is known as global evolution. One cannot hold back evolution any more than one can hold back the tide.
It is sad that today's xenophobic rhetoric is directed mostly at one group of immigrants, a group that it is cruel to repoach. Have no fear, they will survive to become a valued adjunct to our society.
Richard E. Baer
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 email@example.com. 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.