Jaime
08-06 12:12 PM
Yeah, why not? As long as Legals ALSO get green cards!
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
On The Washington Post today:
A Less Ambitious Approach to Immigration
By Arlen Specter
Monday, August 6, 2007; Page A17
The charge of amnesty defeated comprehensive immigration reform in the Senate this summer. It is too important, and there has been too much legislative investment, not to try again. The time to do so is now.
Certainly the government should implement the provisions it has already enacted to improve border security and crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants. But the important additions on those subjects contained in the bill defeated in June will not be enacted without also dealing with the 12 million-plus undocumented immigrants and the guest worker program.
So let's take a fresh look and try a narrower approach.
There is a consensus in Congress on most objectives and many remedies for immigration reform: more border patrols, additional fencing, drones and some form of a guest worker program. Modern technological advances provide foolproof identification so employers can -- justifiably -- be severely sanctioned if they don't verify IDs and act to eliminate the magnet attracting illegals to penetrate the border. Yet Congress is unlikely to appropriate $3 billion for border security without dealing simultaneously with the illegal immigrants already here.
The main objective in legalizing the 12 million was to eliminate their fugitive status, allowing them to live in the United States without fear of being detected and deported or being abused by unscrupulous employers. We should consider a revised status for those 12 million people. Let them hold the status of those with green cards -- without the automatic path to citizenship that was the core component of critics' argument that reform efforts were really amnesty. Give these people the company of their spouses and minor children and consider other indicators of citizenship short of the right to vote (which was always the dealbreaker).
This approach may be attacked as creating an "underclass" inconsistent with American values, which have always been to give refuge to the "huddled masses." But such a compromise is clearly better than leaving these people a fugitive class. People with a lesser status are frequently referred to as second-class citizens. Congress has adamantly refused to make the 12 million people already here full citizens, but isn't it better for them to at least be secure aliens than hunted and exploited?
Giving these people green-card status leaves open the opportunity for them to return to their native lands and seek citizenship through regular channels. Or, after our borders are secured and tough employer sanctions have been put in place, Congress can revisit the issue and possibly find a more hospitable America.
Some of the other refinements of the defeated bill can await another day and the regular process of Judiciary Committee hearings and markups. Changing the law on family unification with a point system can also be considered later. Now, perhaps, we could add green cards for highly skilled workers and tinker at the edges of immigration law, providing we don't get bogged down in endless debate and defeated cloture motions.
It would be refreshing if Congress, and the country, could come together in a bipartisan way to at least partially solve one of the big domestic issues of the day.
The writer, a senator from Pennsylvania, is the ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
indianabacklog
10-25 02:29 PM
Ok, count on me and will be there at 11:00 am.
See you Saturday, please see the previous reply to USIRIT as I suggest we meet outside.
See you Saturday, please see the previous reply to USIRIT as I suggest we meet outside.
cagedcactus
05-02 03:39 PM
Well, good lawyer or bad lawyer, everyone here knows, that they never reveal the true story of what and where the company messed up.
I want to just find out that, if I transfer to a new company with 14 months left on that 6 year limit, do I have enough time to transfer H1, file brand new Perm, file a brand new I 140 , get approved, and get three year extention instead of on year? a small window for timing here. Should I stick with the same company?
Any input is appreciated.
thanks.....
I want to just find out that, if I transfer to a new company with 14 months left on that 6 year limit, do I have enough time to transfer H1, file brand new Perm, file a brand new I 140 , get approved, and get three year extention instead of on year? a small window for timing here. Should I stick with the same company?
Any input is appreciated.
thanks.....
gc_relief
03-06 01:25 PM
Guys this will be a good idea..If we can send a letter to Pres Obama like we did in the past..Let me know your thoughts..
more...
lostinbeta
10-03 01:45 PM
mwwwwwahahahahahhahahhahhhaaaaa :evil:
thirumalkn
07-26 05:11 PM
Thanks for the info vxg. Thanks for sharing.
So, did you notify USCIS at any stage about your promotion ?
My duties increased, in past i was doing more tech work now i mostly manage people who do the same tech work but as i said it's all subjected to the lawyer and employer.
So, did you notify USCIS at any stage about your promotion ?
My duties increased, in past i was doing more tech work now i mostly manage people who do the same tech work but as i said it's all subjected to the lawyer and employer.
more...
nixstor
02-23 04:22 PM
AFAIK States that do not have state income tax do not let H4 visa holders pay instate and make Green Card as a requirement for instate qualification.
WA state is a good example of the above situation. I don't know about TX,FL,SD,NV,AK,WY which also do not have state income taxes. You might want to look at the instate qualification website for the state you are interested in.
MD doesn't allow instate
DC has no instate concept at all :)
VA,NY,CA,MA,IL allow instate as of my knowledge.
WA state is a good example of the above situation. I don't know about TX,FL,SD,NV,AK,WY which also do not have state income taxes. You might want to look at the instate qualification website for the state you are interested in.
MD doesn't allow instate
DC has no instate concept at all :)
VA,NY,CA,MA,IL allow instate as of my knowledge.
h1techSlave
10-01 12:51 PM
They are not dumb , they might be already keeping a watch on you while on soil.
I think their problem is that they are watching the wrong people. And they miss the people whom they should be watching.
If they sure are watching me at this instance. I hope they will come and help me debug this .Net problem that I have been trying to fix for the last 4 days and mostly nights :D
I think their problem is that they are watching the wrong people. And they miss the people whom they should be watching.
If they sure are watching me at this instance. I hope they will come and help me debug this .Net problem that I have been trying to fix for the last 4 days and mostly nights :D
more...
sam_hoosier
06-06 05:29 PM
Yes, you should be able to use AC21 to change employment (subject to the AC21 restrictions).
anu_t
06-17 12:20 PM
I am in the same boat too. Only difference is that I have formally accepted the offer and it's in the same corporation (but different legal entity).
My lawyer recommended that I have three options
1) Start over and recapture your PD. She mentioned that this is the cleanest option.
2) Apply for 485 from your old job and then move to the other job after six months
3) Move to the new job but apply for your 485 from your old job.However, you will need to move back to your old job once you get your Green Card.
I believe Option 3 is the best for all of you. Try contacting your old employers to see if they can file for your 485. That said, once your complete your six months after applying for 485, you can technically move. Now I am not sure if this will work, but can we not move into another company at more apparent time before the actual receipt of the Green Card. Also, given the severe retrogression expected, it may be a long wait and this move may potentially not have to happen for a while.
Please note the above is my opinion and you will need to consult your own lawyers.
How come option 1 will work if the law passes? First you have to apply for the labour and then only u can capture the old pd.
But we even can't apply for the labour so there is no point in capturing the old pd. Am I making the valid point here? Correct me if I am wrong.
My lawyer recommended that I have three options
1) Start over and recapture your PD. She mentioned that this is the cleanest option.
2) Apply for 485 from your old job and then move to the other job after six months
3) Move to the new job but apply for your 485 from your old job.However, you will need to move back to your old job once you get your Green Card.
I believe Option 3 is the best for all of you. Try contacting your old employers to see if they can file for your 485. That said, once your complete your six months after applying for 485, you can technically move. Now I am not sure if this will work, but can we not move into another company at more apparent time before the actual receipt of the Green Card. Also, given the severe retrogression expected, it may be a long wait and this move may potentially not have to happen for a while.
Please note the above is my opinion and you will need to consult your own lawyers.
How come option 1 will work if the law passes? First you have to apply for the labour and then only u can capture the old pd.
But we even can't apply for the labour so there is no point in capturing the old pd. Am I making the valid point here? Correct me if I am wrong.
more...
somegchuh
03-04 06:30 PM
Same thing is true for me. For 4+years I was stuck in PBEC. Dates were current all along. Then filed 485 in Feb 07, dates were still current but name check was pending. Now that the NC isn't an issue, the dates are UNAVAILABLE! This whole thing is just screwing with my brain. To add to the mystery they decided to make a "soft" lud on my 140 yesterday. So just keep waiting like idiots ....
What about the thousands who lost 2-4 years because they were stuck in namecheck, now the name check is cleared but the dates will not move..frigging idiots..too little too late
Before giving the blue/green/red dots, think about this. they created a traffic jam and now they are suddenly releasing it. There were about 150-300k stuck in name check, now all of them are waiting for their PD to be current. (i am one of them too). Think how this will affect the overall queue.
What about the thousands who lost 2-4 years because they were stuck in namecheck, now the name check is cleared but the dates will not move..frigging idiots..too little too late
Before giving the blue/green/red dots, think about this. they created a traffic jam and now they are suddenly releasing it. There were about 150-300k stuck in name check, now all of them are waiting for their PD to be current. (i am one of them too). Think how this will affect the overall queue.
leoindiano
03-17 11:54 AM
there was randon LUD's over weekends....It could be accidental that LUD happened in same week. Your lawyer should be able to do an enquiry into it...
more...
hopefulgc
03-08 12:57 PM
AFAIK, I-140 is the underlying petition for the I-485. If I-140 is denied, the i-485 is automatically denied.
Move fast, start a PERM and see if u can lock in a date.
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
Move fast, start a PERM and see if u can lock in a date.
i missed the second part of your question.
i personally know a friend whose 1-140 was denied and their 485 is obviously pending....he is working on EAD, they have appealed for the 140. While the case is pending the EAD has been extended by 2 years.
Hope this helps.
bskrishna
04-21 12:01 AM
I had applied for AP at NSC got it in a months time. I had applied for EAD on Oct 26th of last year. Got it approved by December 14th. Are majority of the people experiencing EAD delays of late?
more...
fcres
07-12 04:43 PM
I think it is true that once you are counted in the cap you will not be counted again. so you can switch back and forth H4 and H1 without being counted in the quota.
This is what my lawyer also told me when i asked him about being on H4. I'm on 9th yr ext with approved I140 and my spouse is on non-profit H1.
This is what my lawyer also told me when i asked him about being on H4. I'm on 9th yr ext with approved I140 and my spouse is on non-profit H1.
Better_Days
10-14 07:30 PM
Yes. It happened in my case as well. My I-140 was denied from NSC after having filed I-485. It was refiled (yes refiled in TSC, not MTR and got a different case number). After the I-140 denial my I-485 was also denied. Upon approval on my new I-140 the I-485 was reopened automatically. The online status had not changed from 'Denied". I was surprised when I got my second round of FP notices in August 09. Now the status says "Case has resumed processing". I would however suggest that you ask your attorney to send a letter to USCIS.
I had an I-485 pending when my first I-140 was denied. The cases ended up with AAO.
I started a new GC process in PERM and the second I-140 was approved. After approval I noticed a LUD on my pending 485. I called the 1-800 number and asked for the I-140 number underlying my I-485. To my surprise, I was given the receipt number for the second I-140. What surprised me was that the my priority date was not current.
I can only assume that when one has more than one I-140 pending with the same employer (remember that a I-140 with MTR or with AAO is considered to be pending), the first one to get approved gets linked with the I-485. CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THIS PLEASE?
The interesting thing is that the AAO woke from it's slumber and issued an RFE last week. As a result of the RFE, both my I-140 have changed their status and now show "Post Decision Activity".
I had an I-485 pending when my first I-140 was denied. The cases ended up with AAO.
I started a new GC process in PERM and the second I-140 was approved. After approval I noticed a LUD on my pending 485. I called the 1-800 number and asked for the I-140 number underlying my I-485. To my surprise, I was given the receipt number for the second I-140. What surprised me was that the my priority date was not current.
I can only assume that when one has more than one I-140 pending with the same employer (remember that a I-140 with MTR or with AAO is considered to be pending), the first one to get approved gets linked with the I-485. CAN ANYONE CONFIRM THIS PLEASE?
The interesting thing is that the AAO woke from it's slumber and issued an RFE last week. As a result of the RFE, both my I-140 have changed their status and now show "Post Decision Activity".
more...
chandra_mb
07-18 11:37 PM
I understand that to file 485, all applicants need to be in the US.
Do the dependents/spouse need to be present in the US to file the EAD later (after we get the 485 receipt) ?
Do the dependents/spouse need to be present in the US to file the EAD later (after we get the 485 receipt) ?
sobers
02-21 03:59 PM
good job, eb3_nepa!!
While you're at it, why don't you also copy and paste all the articles/news stories that support skilled worker immigration that are on this site, and send them across too.
That will help them tremendously, since congressional staffers are often pressed for time and cannot gather all the supporting information by themselves.
Thanks! Keep it up!
While you're at it, why don't you also copy and paste all the articles/news stories that support skilled worker immigration that are on this site, and send them across too.
That will help them tremendously, since congressional staffers are often pressed for time and cannot gather all the supporting information by themselves.
Thanks! Keep it up!
CRAZYMONK
03-18 02:38 PM
Your exemployer is very clever. He took all steps to not leave any evidence behind. The 5 months you are talking about, he is not liable as you are outside the US. If you are here in US and he did'nt paid, then its a differnt story.
In the offer letter he gave, when you joined, is there any thing mentioned about vacation pay?
In the offer letter he gave, when you joined, is there any thing mentioned about vacation pay?
purgan
08-15 12:41 PM
I filed in last week of June but have still not issued receipts. There are many like me. At the same time, some July 2 filers have receipts.
The explantion for this is that USCIS does not stricly follow first in, first out. They continue to process applications and issue receipt notices haphazardly, that is why some early filers have not recieved RNs while some later filers have. This has created a lot of confusion and anxiety.
The only thing that can help us is a legislative fix. Please help IV help ourselves!
The explantion for this is that USCIS does not stricly follow first in, first out. They continue to process applications and issue receipt notices haphazardly, that is why some early filers have not recieved RNs while some later filers have. This has created a lot of confusion and anxiety.
The only thing that can help us is a legislative fix. Please help IV help ourselves!
Xipe Totec
09-14 04:02 PM
I just _have_ to ask: what game was that?
No comments:
Post a Comment