Integrity Legal

Posts Tagged ‘USCBP’

29th January 2017

For those who have been following the news in recent days it is not new information that President Donald Trump has signed new executive orders with respect to US immigration and travelers from various countries. Effectively, these orders ban certain foreign nationals from obtaining a visa to the USA or entering the USA for at least 90-120 days. Although at present it appears that these orders will only directly impact nationals of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen there are certain aspects of the order which may impact the US immigration process in a broad sense. For example so-called “extreme vetting” protocols which these orders call for may conceivably be implemented by State Department personnel worldwide in connection with the US visa process. Furthermore, it now appears that those who already hold green cards, but are outside of the USA may be turned away by United States Customs and Border Protection (USCBP) or be required to undergo further screening which was not required for reentry to the USA in the past.

Many following this story may be asking themselves: by what authority is the President able to impose these recent restrictions? Pursuant to 8 U.S. Code § 1182:

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

It should further be noted that the same statute goes on to mention that the Attorney General has specific powers with regard to the aforementioned issue:

Whenever the Attorney General finds that a commercial airline has failed to comply with regulations of the Attorney General relating to requirements of airlines for the detection of fraudulent documents used by passengers traveling to the United States (including the training of personnel in such detection), the Attorney General may suspend the entry of some or all aliens transported to the United States by such airline.

Clearly, the President has statutory authority to impose restrictions like those recently created by Trump. The section regarding the power of the Attorney General in this regard is mentioned because in many cases individuals affected by these new rules will be denied the ability to board an airline bound for the USA as airlines and airline personnel do not wish to be the subject of fines and sanctions associated with transporting someone to the USA who has a strong chance of being refused entry.

As of the time of this writing, it remains to be fully seen exactly how these recent executive orders will play out. This is especially true in light of the fact that certain legal actions have resulted in court orders against implementation of these initiatives. Notwithstanding these developments it is very likely that many of the recently enacted restrictions will remain, at least for practical purposes, in place in the foreseeable future.

more Comments: 04

10th November 2016

In light of recent events in the United States election and the campaign promises made by the now President-elect, it seems appropriate to assume that Immigration matters will likely come to the forefront of American political discussion. For this reason, this blogger finds it relevant to provide an overview of the Immigration apparatus and how the components function.

In order to understand U.S. Immigration matters and the enforcement of U.S. Immigration law one must first understand the Department of Homeland Security. This Department oversees most of the Immigration matters arising in the United States (The Department of State deals with matters pertaining to US visas issued abroad, for more information on the role DOS plays in the immigration process please check out the many pages on this blog dedicated to Consular Processing information).

There are three agencies under the jurisdiction of DHS which deal with different aspects of Immigration law and policy. The first agency that many intending immigrant will no doubt have had dealings with is the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service or USCIS. This agency is tasked with adjudicating petitions for immigration benefits such as immigrant visas, work visas, and certain temporary stay visas. Furthermore, the USCIS also adjudicates I-601 waivers of inadmissibility as well as I-212 waivers for those who have previously been subjected to expedited removal. Those wishing to travel from abroad to the United States on some sort of immigrant or work authorized visa will likely have contact with USCIS.

Another component of DHS which deals with Immigration is the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service or USICE. USICE is often the agency tasked with ascertaining the legal status of foreign nationals physically present in the USA and if found to be present in the USA illegally USICE agents are tasked with apprehending such individuals and placing them in deportation proceedings.

Finally, there is the United States Customs and Border Protection Service or USCBP. In the US visa process, USCBP is arguably the most overlooked yet one of the most significant agencies an intending immigrant will deal with. Unbeknownst to most, notwithstanding the issuance of a valid visa, USCBP has the authority to turn away any alien attempting to enter the USA. In actual practice, an alien with a validly issued visa is unlikely to be refused admission at a port of entry, but it can happen. In most cases such refusal is due to a belief on the part of a USCBP officer that an alien attempting to enter the USA on a non-immigrant visa in fact has immigrant intent. This happens frequently to tourist visa holders who are attempting to conduct a so-called visa run in order to remain in the USA. In those cases involving immigrant spouses of US citizens holding visas such as the K-3, the CR-1, or the IR-1 refusal to admit the alien spouse is quite rare. The same can be said for foreign fiancees of US Citizens holding a K-1 visa, but the fact that USCBP has plenary power to turn away any alien seeking admission should not be forgotten.

Meanwhile in an interesting article in The Intercept, it was noted that certain documents have come to light which apparently show that although USCBP has traditionally recognized law enforcement functions (especially with respect to Customs matters) they also work with the FBI in matters not routinely thought of when pondering USCBP’s role. To quote directly from the aforementioned article:

“It is no surprise that law enforcement closely monitors border crossings for criminals or terror suspects. The initiatives described in these documents, however, are explicitly about gathering intelligence, not enforcing the law. A person doesn’t have to be connected to an active investigation or criminal suspect in order to be flagged; the FBI might want them for their potential to provide general intelligence on a given country, region, or group. The goal, according to an FBI presentation on an initiative at Boston’s Logan Airport, is “looking for ‘good guys’ not ‘bad guys.’”

Although immigration matters are often viewed as a “boring” aspect of the United States bureaucracy it should be noted that agents of the Department of Homeland Security play a significant role in maintaining the security of the USA and assist even in the gathering of intelligence.

Although the ultimate policies of the new administration regarding immigration matters remain to be seen it seems logical to infer that should the administration wish to make the immigration process more difficult for foreign nationals, then the sophisticated mechanisms mentioned above would likely have the capacity to make certain that such a course of events actually transpires.

more Comments: 04

18th August 2011

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the United States Customs and Border Protection Service (USCBP) is apparently poised to begin issuing new identification cards to participants in the Global Entry Program. In order to provide further insight into these developments it is necessary to quote directly from the official website of USCBP, CBP.gov:

Washington – U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) today announced that Global Entry members will now be issued a Global Entry version of the SENTRI card which allows expedited entry into the U.S. from Canada and Mexico using the NEXUS, SENTRI and Ready Lanes at land ports of entry. The new card operates as a SENTRI card for Global Entry members. The Global Entry card is a Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI)-compliant, radio frequency identification (RFID) technology-enabled document that may be used by U.S. citizens when entering the U.S. through a land or sea port of entry from Canada, Mexico or the Caribbean…

Readers are strongly encouraged to click upon the aforementioned hyperlinks noted above to read this information in detail.

Frequent readers may recall that the Global Entry Program was purportedly created in an effort to streamline the process of entering the United States for American Citizens. How the creation of new identity cards will facilitate this program remains to be seen, but hopefully such developments will be beneficial for all concerned.

In news pertaining to the economies which comprise the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, and Vietnam), it recently came to this blogger’s attention that some commentators are noting positive economic developments in the region. To quote directly from the Money Control website, MoneyControl.com:

ASEAN economy has proven itself to be resilient, but there are lingering challenges and risks, including the sovereign debt crisis and fiscal problems in some developed markets, rising food and commodity prices, and continued financial market stresses…According to the ASEAN secretariat’s press release received yesterday, ASEAN’s recovery as a whole has matured as both exports and domestic demand fueled growth to expand by 7.5% last year. Intra-regional trade and investment flows also showed an upward momentum and are likely to support domestic growth this year, which is projected between 5.7% and 6.4%. ASEAN`s merchandise trade grew at 32.9% last year, as trade value jumped from USD 1.54 trillion in 2009 to USD 2.04 trillion last year, after the 19% decline in 2009,” according to ASEAN`s high ranking officials as quoted by the secretariat. As an attractive foreign direct investment (FDI) destination, ASEAN has maintained its allure…

The administration of this blog recommends that readers click upon the relevant hyperlinks noted above to read this article in detail.

As ASEAN jurisdictions continue to be “alluring” to foreign investors it stands to reason that further economic growth can be expected in the future. That stated, as ASEAN has a unique Constitution in much the same way that each of her component jurisdictions have unique Constitutions one can easily infer that the trajectory and complexion of the economic growth and innovation in the coming years may be quite unlike anything seen in recent memory. For instance, the ramifications of a unified ASEAN visa much akin to the Schengen visa scheme in the European Community could be economically explosive while such a visa scheme could be custom tailored to the unique needs and desires of both ASEAN as a whole and her member nations.

For information pertaining to legal services in Southeast Asia please see: Legal.

more Comments: 04

28th May 2011

There are many different visa categories statutorily designed for those wishing to work and/or invest in the United States of America. The very plethora of visa categories can make researching immigration issues somewhat confusing for the layman. One visa category that relatively few prospective visa seekers seem to understand is the Employment Based First Preference Visa Category, or to put it more succinctly: the EB-1 visa. The eligibility criteria for this visa category are somewhat stringent compared to other visa categories. To elucidate this fact it may be best to quote directly from and eligibility chart found by this blogger on the official website of United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) at USCIS.gov:

Categories Description Evidence
Extraordinary Ability You must be able to demonstrate extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics through sustained national or international acclaim. Your achievements must be recognized in your field through extensive documentation. No offer of employment is required. You must meet 3 of 10 criteria* below, or provide evidence of a one-time achievement (i.e., Pulitzer, Oscar, Olympic Medal) 

 

Outstanding professors and researchers You must demonstrate international recognition for your outstanding achievements in a particular academic field. You must have at least 3 years experience in teaching or research in that academic area. You must be entering the United States in order to pursue tenure or tenure track teaching or comparable research position at a university or other institution of higher education. You must include documentation of at least two listed below** and an offer of employment from the prospective U.S. employer.
Multinational manager or executive You must have been employed outside the United States in the 3 years preceding the petition for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation and you must be seeking to enter the United States to continue service to that firm or organization. Your employment must have been outside the United States in a managerial or executive capacity and with the same employer, an affiliate, or a subsidiary of the employer. Your petitioning employer must be a U.S. employer. Your employer must have been doing business for at least 1 year, as an affiliate, a subsidiary, or as the same corporation or other legal entity that employed you abroad.

Readers should be aware that the above citation is not intended to be utilized as an exhaustive tool for determining EB-1 visa eligibility, but the chart above does shed light upon some of the overall eligibility criteria which will likely be scrutinized during adjudication of a petition.

There are many factors which must be taken into consideration during the adjudication of an Employment Based visa petition. Frequent readers of this blog may recall that there is another visa category classified as EB that is sometimes discussed within these pages. That specific visa is the EB-5 visa which was designed for prospective immigrants wishing to come to the United States to make a substantial investment in the American economy. In the case of the EB-1 visa, the prospective visa holder would be asked to make an investment of sorts in that their extraordinary abilities would be invested in the United States as a likely consequence of issuance of a United States travel document which grants lawful permanent residence to the bearer upon lawful admission to the US by officers of the United States Customs and Border Protection Service (USCBP).

Readers should be aware that often USCIS adjudication is not the only phase of the EB visa process as Consular Processing at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad may also be required depending upon the unique circumstances of a given case.

For Information Related To Family Based Visa Petitions Please See: US Visa Thailand.

more Comments: 04

12th April 2011

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that a 9th circuit decision in the United States Federal Court System regarding issues associated with the 4th Amendment as well as issues which could impact American agencies such as the United States Customs and Border Protection (USCBP) Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service (USICE, but sometimes referred to simply as ICE) has been handed down.  To quote directly from a recent article posted on Yahoo News at Yahoo.com:

If you can’t let a day go by without accessing your personal data and files, you’d better think twice about crossing the border back into the U.S. with your computer.  That’s because digital devices such as a laptop computer can be seized at the border without a warrant and sent to a secondary site for forensic inspection.

That ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit last week is the second in less than a year that allows the U.S. government to conduct offsite searches of digital devices seized at the border without a warrant, Network World reported.

This could have big implications for business travelers, in particular, who are increasingly mobile and frequently carry laptops and other digital devices containing sensitive personal and company information across our borders. If your data reveals traces of criminality or illegal kinkiness when examined, your troubles will go way beyond temporary data denial.

This blogger has yet to take a great deal of exception with regard to American policy regarding the 4th Amendment at Ports of Entry in the United States of America as most occurrences that this blogger deals with in connection to such matters involve those who are not American Citizens, or for that matter sometimes not even lawful permanent residents or non-immigrants. Therefore, due to the wide latitude granted to Congress under their plenary authority regarding matters touching upon non-US Citizens and immigration policy it is difficult for this blogger to make cogent hypothetical arguments for people who have few, if any, rights under the American legal system. That said, when it comes to the search and seizure of American Citizens it is clear that Constitutional protections of Americans’ liberties must be taken into zealous consideration. The aforementioned article continued on Yahoo.com:

Writing for the majority, Judge Richard Tallman said, “The border search doctrine is not so rigid as to require the United States to equip every entry point — no matter how desolate or infrequently traveled — with inspectors and sophisticated forensics equipment.”

The administration of this blog highly encourages all readers to click upon the above cited hyperlinks to read more from this thought provoking story.

This blogger does not particularly take exception with the notion of the so-called “border search doctrine” per se, but this blogger has always felt as though little consideration has been accorded to the notion of the rights, privileges, and immunities of both United States Citizenship as well as underlying State Citizenship (if applicable to the individual being legally analyzed as some individuals come by their United States Citizenship either through operation of law or naturalization).

With all due respect to this Court as their decision had to be made pursuant to the unique set of law and facts available under the circumstances, this blogger’s “hackles get raised” anytime the issues associated with the fundamental rights, privileges, and immunities of United States Citizenship are at issue. Therefore, in order to shed more light upon this subject to the readership of this blog this blogger felt it might be enlightening to note some language from the introduction of the dissent in this case as quoted directly from Judge Betty B. Flecther:

I respectfully dissent. The “sticking point” of this case is not whether the Government’s authority “to subject incoming travelers to inspection for entry also permits the Government to transport property not yet cleared for entry away from the border to complete its search.” Maj. Op. at 4219-20. The real issue, as this case is framed by the government and the majority, is whether the Government has authority to seize an individual’s property in order to conduct an exhaustive search that takes days, weeks, or even months, with no reason to suspect that the property contains contraband.[1] In other words, the problem with this case is not that the Government searched Cotterman’s computer in Tucson as opposed to Lukeville. The problem is that the Government seized Cotterman’s laptop so it could conduct a computer forensic search, a time consuming and tremendously invasive process, without any particularized suspicion whatsoever. [emphasis added]

Those reading this blog are highly encouraged to click upon the links above to read the entire opinion as posted on Google Scholar.

Clearly, the ruling in this case could have a dramatic impact upon those individuals traveling in or through the United States of America. That said, it remains to be seen whether or not this case sees appeal to the United States Supreme Court and should such an appeal be heard: the opinion thereof.

For related information please see: Arrest Warrant.

more Comments: 04

25th March 2011

Those following this blog or the many other sources of information available on the World Wide Web may have, no doubt, noticed the impact of the recent tragedy in Japan and the unfolding events springing therefrom. The tragic plight of the Japanese people was further highlighted recently by what appears to be a trend among many nations in their refusal to allow imports of foodstuffs from Japan. To quote directly from the website NAMnewsnetwork.org:

TOKYO, March 24 (NNN-BSS) — Australia, Canada and Singapore joined a list of countries shunning Japanese food imports Thursday as radioactive steam wafted anew from a disaster-struck nuclear plant, straining nerves in Tokyo.

The grim toll of dead and missing from Japan’s monster quake and tsunami on March 11 topped 25,000, as hundreds of thousands remained huddled in evacuation shelters and fears grew in the megacity of Tokyo over water safety.

The damage to the Fukushima nuclear plant from the tectonic calamity and a series of explosions has stoked global anxiety. The United States and Hong Kong have already restricted Japanese food, and France wants the EU to do the same.

The administration of this blog highly encourage readers to click on the above hyperlinks to read further about the situation in Japan. As the situation becomes more dire in Japan it would appear that even Japan’s key allies are unable to allow importation of possibly dangerous food products. The authorities in the Kingdom of Thailand appear to be taking preventative measures regarding importation of possibly tainted food as well. To quote directly from Bloomberg.com:

Thailand will check all fruit and vegetable imports from Japan’s main island, Honshu, before allowing their sale and will randomly screen other products such as fish, Pipat Yingseri, secretary-general of the Thai Food and Drug Administration, told a media conference today. The country hadn’t found any abnormal contamination since checks started in mid-March, he said.

As Thai, Hong Kong, Chinese, American, Australian, Canadian, and Singaporean authorities place restrictions on food imports, speculation abounds as to the response from other countries in the Asia-Pacific region as well as member States of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). In discussions regarding the ramifications of the Japanese Crisis it may be best to remember the human elements which are constantly present in all of these regulatory and policy calculations.

As the situation in Japan continues to have global implications it remains to be seen how the various governments and international organizations around the world will react both politically and economically. One thing is clear, the crisis in Japan has the potential to completely reshape the geopolitical situation in Asia from both an economic as well as political perspective. How this change will impact both Thailand and the ASEAN community will be of increasing interest to the administration of this web log.

For related information please see: Legal.

more Comments: 04

17th March 2011

สำหรับผู้ที่ไม่ได้ติดตาม หน่วยบริการการป้องกันเขตแดนและศุลกากรสหรัฐอเมริกา (USCBP) มีหน้าที่รับผิดชอบในการตรวจสอบในส่วนของการเข้าเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกา อาจจะมีความเป็นไปได้ที่จะได้รับการอนุมัติที่ทำให้การเข้าเมืองเร็วขึ้นในหลายๆส่วนของการเข้าเมืองและทั่วทั้งสหรัฐอเมริกา อ้างโดยตรงจากโฮมเพจของเว็บไซต์ GlobalEntry.gov:

GlobalEntryเป็นโปรแกรมสำหรับป้องกันเขตแดนและศุลกากรสหรัฐอเมริกา (CBP) ซึ่งอนุญาตให้มีการเร่งการตรวจสอบสำหรับก่อนการอนุมัติ นักเดินทางที่มีความเสี่ยงน้อยที่จะมาถึงสหรัฐอเมริกา แม้ว่าตั้งใจเพื่อจะเดินทางเป็นนักเดินทางต่างชาติอยู่บ่อยๆ แต่คุณสมบัติของการเข้าโปรแกรมนั้นไม่มีตัวเลขขั้นต่ำของความจำเป็นที่จะเดินทาง ผู้เข้าร่วมอาจจะเข้าในสหรัฐอเมริกาโดยการใช้บริการอัตโนมัติที่ติดตั้งอยู่ในสนามบิน

ตามที่อ้างไว้แล้ว อาจจะมีความเป็นไปได้ที่ผู้ที่อยู่ในโปรแกรมเข้าไปในสหรัฐอเมริกาโดยใช้ระบบอัตโนมัติมากกว่าที่จะใช้ระบบมาตรฐานของการเข้าเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกาโดยวิธีการเข้าเมืองแบบดั้งเดิม เพื่อความเข้าใจยิ่งขึ้นขออ้างโดยตรงจาก หน้า “เกี่ยวกับ” ในเว็บไซต์ GlobalEntry.gov:

ในสนามบิน โปรแกรมที่ผู้เข้าร่วมทำการผ่านระบบ Global Entry นำเสนอเครื่องที่สามารถอ่านพาสปอร์ตสหรัฐอเมริกา หรือบัตรถิ่นที่อยู่ถาวร โดยการสแกนลายนิ้วมือเพื่อที่จะพิสูจน์ลายนิ้วมือ และประกาศพิธีการทางศุลกากร แผงอัตโนมัตินี้ออกใบเสร็จรับเงินการเดินทางและนำผู้เดินทางไปสู่การนำส่งสัมภาระและทางออก

ผู้เดินทางต้องได้รับการอนุมัติก่อนสำหรับโปรแกรมการเดินทางเข้าทั่วโลก ผู้สมัครทั้งหมดอยู่ภายใต้กฎระเบียบที่เคร่งครัดและการสัมภาษณ์ก่อนการลงทะเบียน

ในขณะที่จุดประสงค์ของการเดินทางเข้าทั่วโลกนั้นช่วยเร่งให้ผู้เดินทางในระหว่างกระบวนการ สมาชิกอาจจะได้รับการเลือกที่จะตรวจสอบเพิ่มเมื่อมีการเดินทางเข้าสหรัฐอเมริกา การละเมิดข้อตกลงและเงื่อนไขของโปรแกรมจะส่งผลที่เหมาะสม และการยกเลิกสิทธิประโยชน์การเป็นสมาชิกของผู้เดินทาง

บริการความมั่นคงชายแดนและศุลกากรมีคำสั่งที่คอยตรวจสอบการเข้าเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกาเช่นเดียวกับการบังคับใช้กฎหมายศุลกากร ในขณะเดียวกัน USCBP ได้มีการจัดตั้งคณะกรรมการย่อยขององค์การความร่วมมือทางเศรษฐกิจเอเชียแปซิฟิกซึ่งมีความร่วมมือทางเศรษฐกิจกับประเทศในกลุ่มเอเชียแปซิฟิกที่หลากหลาย ในปัจจุบันนี้ตำแหน่งของเอเปคของสหรัฐอเมริกาเนื่องจากมีการเปลี่ยนจากญี่ปุ่นเป็นสหรัฐอเมริกาในเดือนพฤศจิกายน 2010

บทความนี้คงไม่เป็นที่สับสนในโปรแกรมการเข้าเมืองทั่วโลก ไม่ว่าจะเป็นระบบอิเล็กทรอนิกส์สำหรับอำนาจในการเดินทาง (ESTA) หรือ การขอยกเว้นสิทธิวีซ่า (VWP, ซึ่งโดยตัวเองอาจจะสับสนกับการขอยกเว้นสิทธิ I-601 หรือ I-212) ด้วยความแตกต่างนี้และอาจจะไม่เกี่ยวข้องกัน สำหรับการหาข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมเกี่ยวกับ ESTAและVWP

To view this posting in the English language please see: United States Customs and Border Protection Service

more Comments: 04

14th March 2011

For those who are unaware, the United States Customs and Border Protection Service (USCBP) is responsible for monitoring the ports of entry to the United States of America. For some, it may be possible to receive a sort of pre-approval for expedited admission at the various ports of entry in and around the United States.  To quote directly from the homepage of the website GlobalEntry.gov:

Global Entry is a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) program that allows expedited clearance for pre-approved, low-risk travelers upon arrival in the United States. Though intended for frequent international travelers, there is no minimum number of trips necessary to qualify for the program. Participants may enter the United States by using automated kiosks located at select airports.

As noted in the citation above, it may be possible for those who are in the program to enter the United States using an automated kiosk rather than the standard method of entering the USA through a classic immigration checkpoint. In order to better understand this it may be best to quote directly from the “About” page of the website GlobalEntry.gov:

At airports, program participants proceed to Global Entry kiosks, present their machine-readable U.S. passport or permanent resident card, place their fingertips on the scanner for fingerprint verification, and make a customs declaration. The kiosk issues the traveler a transaction receipt and directs the traveler to baggage claim and the exit.

Travelers must be pre-approved for the Global Entry program. All applicants undergo a rigorous background check and interview before enrollment.

While Global Entry’s goal is to speed travelers through the process, members may be selected for further examination when entering the United States. Any violation of the program’s terms and conditions will result in appropriate enforcement action and revocation of the traveler’s membership privileges.

The Customs and Border Protection Service has a broad mandate to monitor the ports of entry to the United States as well as enforcing relevant customs law. Meanwhile, USCBP recently held the chair of a subcommittee of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) organization, which is dedicated to economic coordination of the various Asia-Pacific countries. Currently, the United States of America chairs APEC since the chair was turned over to the United States from the Japanese in November of 2010.

Those reading this posting should not confuse the global entry program with the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) nor the visa waiver program (VWP, which itself should not be confused with the I-601 waiver or the I-212 waiver) as these are different programs and may not be relevant to those seeking information regarding ESTA and the VWP.

For related information please see: USCIS.

more Comments: 04

27th February 2011

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Department of Homeland Security may soon be utilizing a portable DNA screener which can establish kinship via DNA comparison in a relatively quick span of time. To quote directly from the website Nextgov.com (a site dedicated to providing information about the confluence of technology and government):

[P]lans to begin testing a DNA analyzer that’s small enough to be easily portable and fast enough to return results in less than an hour.

The analyzer, about the size of a laser printer, initially will be used to determine kinship among refugees and asylum seekers. It also could help establish whether foreigners giving children up for adoption are their parents or other relatives, and help combat child smuggling and human trafficking, said Christopher Miles, biometrics program manager in the DHS Office of Science and Technology.

The administration of this web log highly recommends that readers click on the links above to read this interesting article in its entirety.

This technology could have some remarkably positive implications. For example, as noted above, the ability to quickly determine a genetic link between two individuals could expedite the processing of requests for American immigration benefits such as asylum or conferral of refugee status. Moreover, such technology could be tremendously useful in adjudications pertaining to issuance of a Certificate of Citizenship or Consular Report of Birth Abroad. Also, technology such as this could truly be useful in combating problems such as human trafficking (hopefully with particular emphasis upon trafficking in children). This being said, There are some eerily Orwellian aspects to technology such as this. To continue quoting from the above cited article on Nextgov.com:

Eventually, the analyzer also could be used to positively identify criminals, illegal immigrants, missing persons and mass casualty victims, he said.

The implications for so-called “criminals,” (a term often applied loosely by law enforcement personnel) could be serious. Usage of technology such as that noted above, when utilized against American Citizens or Lawful Permanent Residents in matters which could have an impact upon individual civil liberties, needs to comport with the protections guaranteed to individuals under the United States Constitution and enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

Some may ponder: “Why does this blogger take issue with technology such as that noted above when utilized against US Citizens, while being less concerned for the rights of refugees and asylum seekers?” The short answer: prospective immigrants outside of the United States have virtually no “rights”. Those seeking immigration benefits are seeking just that: BENEFITS. While American Citizens and those already admitted to the United States in Lawful Permanent Resident status (or another lawful visa status) are guaranteed certain protections from governmental intrusion.

Widespread usage of this technology has yet to be implemented, but one thing is clear: technology is revolutionizing all aspects of the US Immigration process.

For related information please see: DHS Iris Scanners.

more Comments: 04

26th December 2010

ผู้เขียนบล็อกนี้ได้รับข้อมูลมาจากการประกาศใช้กฎหมายของกฎระเบียบฉบับสุดท้ายที่เกี่ยวกับวีซ่าประเภท อี สอง สำหรับผู้ที่สนใจจะลงทุนและประกอบธุรกิจในคอมมอนเวลท์ของตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่า ข้อความต่อไปนี้อ้างโดยตรงจากเว็บไซต์ที่เป็นทางการของหน่วยบริการพลเมืองและคนเข้าเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกา (USCIS):

วอชิงตัน- บริการพลเมืองและคนเข้าเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกา (USCIS) ออกร่างกฎระเบียบสุดท้ายในทะเบียนของรัฐบาลกลางซึ่งมีประเภทของวีซ่าผู้ลงทุนประเภทผู้ที่ไม่มีถิ่นฐานถาวรในคอมมอนเวลท์ของตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่า วีซ่าลงทุนประเภท อี สอง ซีเอ็นเอ็มไอ (E-2 CNMI)อนุญาตให้นักลงทุนระยะยาวที่เป็นชาวต่างชาติที่จะพักอาศัยในคอมมอนเวลท์ของตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่าตลอดเดือนธันวาคม 2014 คำขอของวีซ่าลงทุนประเภท E-2 CNMI Investorจะได้รับการอนุมัติตั้งแต่ 18มกราคม 2011 คำขอที่ได้รับก่อนวันที่ 18 มกราคม 2011 จะได้รับการปฏิเสธ

อาศัยอำนาจตามความมในพระราชบัญญัติทรัพยากรธรรมชาติ (CNRA) ปี 2008 วีซ่าลงทุนประเภท E-2 CNMI นั้นมีอายุ 2 ปี และสามารถต่ออายุใหม่ได้ และสามารถใช้ได้ในคอมมอนเวลท์ในตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่าเท่านั้น คู่หมั้นและบุตรของผู้ลงทุนอาจจะยื่นขอวีซ่าโดยใช้สิทธิของผู้ลงทุนได้

สำหรับผู้ที่ไม่คุ้นเคยกับคอมมอนเวลท์ในตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่าควรจะระลึกไว้เสมอว่า เขตอำนาจนี้รวบรวมกลุ่มของเขตอำนาจศาลซึ่งใช้ประโยชน์จากกระทรวงความมั่นคงแห่งมาตุภูมิในการที่จะออกกฎและบังคับตามกฎหมายคนเข้าเมือง ในอดีต คอมมอนเวลท์ในตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่า (CNMI) ยังคงที่มีสถานะอิสระ แต่กฎระเบียบที่ร่างขึ้นมาใหม่นั้นคล้ายคลึงกับส่วนที่เหลือของสหรัฐอเมริกา

วีซ่าประเภท อี สองนั้นเป็นเอกสารการเดินทางที่มีประโยชน์สำหรับผู้ที่ประสงค์จะเดินทางไปยังสหรัฐอเมริกา (หรือตามตัวอย่างนี้คือคอมมอนเวลท์ของตอนเหนือของเกาะมารีน่า)สำหรับวัตถุประสงค์ทางธุรกิจและการลงทุน อาจกล่าวได้ว่า วีซ่าประเภทอี สองนั้นเป็นประเภทวีซ่าของผู้ที่ไม่มีถิ่นฐานถาวร แตกต่างจากวีซ่าประเภท บี สอง (วีซ่าประเภทท่องเที่ยวสหรัฐอเมริกา) วีซ่าประเภทอี สองนั้นมีสำหรับผู้ที่มีเจตนาสองอย่างในการเป็นเอกสารการเดินทางที่เหมือนกันกับวีซ่าประเภท แอล หนี่ง (L-1) หนึ่งในประโยชน์ของเอกสารการเดินทางประเภทนี้คือผู้สมัครไมว่จำต้องพิสูจน์ข้อสันนิษฐานของเจตนาที่กล่าวไว้ในมาตรา 214บี ตามพระราชบัญญัตขิสัญชาติและคนเข้าเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกา

วีซ่าประเภทอี สอง (E-2)นั้นอาจจะเป็นที่สับสนกับวีซ่าประเภท EB-5 วีซ่าของสหรัฐอเมริกาประเภท EB-5เป็นวีซ่านักลงทุนผู้อพยพ ในการที่จะเป็นไปตามกฎหมายคนเข้าเมือง ผู้ยื่นคำของวีซ่าประเภท EB-5 นั้นเกี่ยวข้องกับสถานะของคนเข้าเมืองผู้มีภิ่นฐานถาวรอย่างถูกต้องตามกฎหมาย ควรระลึกว่า ขั้นตอนของวีซ่าประเภท EB-5 สามารถที่จะเริ่มต้นดำเนินการขอกับหน่วยบริการคนเข้าเมืองและพลเมืองสหรัฐอเมริกา(USCIS) นอกจากนี้ผู้ที่กำลังมองหาวีซ่าประเภท EB-5 นั้นต้องอยู่ภายใต้ขั้นตอนของกงสุลที่สถานทูตสหรัฐอเมริกา สถานกงสุลสหรัฐ สถาบันของอเมริกัน หรือภารกิจของสหรัฐอเมริกาด้วยอำนาจทางกงสุลที่อยู่ในเขตอำนาจ ท้ายที่สุดแล้วศุลกากรสหรัฐอเมริกาและหน่วยรักษาดินแดนสหรัฐอเมริกา (USCBP) มีภาระหน้าที่ที่จะตรวจสอบและหาหนทางสำหรับการที่ชาวต่างชาติจะเข้ามายังสหรัฐอเมริกา ตามที่กล่าวมาแล้วข้างต้น จากการที่มีการเข้าเมืองเป็นไปอย่างถูกต้องตามมกฎหมาย ชาวต่างชาติที่อยู่ในสถานะของวีซ่า EB-5 จะได้รับการเป็นผู้มีถิ่นฐานถาวรในสหรัฐอเมริกา

To view this post in English please see: E-2 visa.

more Comments: 04

The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisement. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. The information presented on this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.