Integrity Legal

Those who have been reading this blog with any degree of regularity may have noticed that the economies, polities, and geopolitics of the world are in something of a state flux. This is not to say that this is either a positive or negative thing as such events occur from time to time. Therefore, astute followers of such events must be careful about making rigid predictions about how such matters will play out in the future. That being stated, it has recently come to this blogger’s attention that representatives from the so-called BRICS countries (an acronym denoting Brazil, Russia, India, China, and, now apparently, South Africa) are  having a summit. To quote directly from a concisely written article by Christopher Bodeen, Associated Press, On Wednesday April 13, 2011, 5:37 am EDT as posted on Yahoo.com:

SANYA, China (AP) — The leaders of the world’s largest emerging economies gather this week in southern China for what could be a watershed moment in their quest for a bigger say in the global financial architecture.

Thursday’s summit comes at a crucial moment for the expanded five-member bloc known as the BRICS, which groups Brazil, Russia, India, China, and, for the first time, South Africa.

Chinese President Hu Jintao, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and South African President Jacob Zuma will attend.

With the G-20 group of major economies seeking to remake parts of the global financial architecture, it’s time for the BRICS to test whether they can overcome internal differences and act as a bloc pursuing common interests.

The ramifications of this meeting could prove historic as the countries noted above, along with those that comprise the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), appear on track to become increasingly economically dynamic in the forthcoming years.     While reading this article, this blogger was especially impressed by this writer’s insightful analysis of the characteristics of the BRICS countries. To continue quoting directly from the aforementioned article:

The five countries are loosely joined by their common status as major fast-growing economies that have been traditionally underrepresented in world economic bodies, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

All broadly support free trade and oppose protectionism, although China in particular has been accused of erecting barriers to foreign competition. In foreign affairs, they tend toward nonintervention and oppose the use of force: Of the five, only South Africa voted in favor of the Libyan no-fly zone.

At the time of this writing, the summit noted above would appear to be geared mainly toward economic matters or matters pertaining to the economic realm, but how increasing ties among these nations could impact affairs playing out in the international political arena remains to be seen.

On a related note, Stock Exchanges in some of the Nations which compose the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), including Thailand, have recently announced collaborations apparently referred to as ASEAN Brand Identity, an ASEAN Exchanges website, and ASEAN Stars. In following up on that story it would appear that the ASEAN Exchanges website is now live, to quote directly from the website AsiaToday.com:

Launched today was the ASEAN Exchanges website (www.aseanexchanges.org) that will feature the ASEAN Stars and other ASEAN centric products and initiatives giving investors an integrated single-window view into the ASEAN capital market; a market that has a combined market capitalisation of approximately USD1.8 trillion and participation of more than 3,000 companies. Some of these companies are the largest and most dynamic companies in the world including leaders in finance and banking, telecommunications, commodities, automotive manufacturing and other industrial sectors.

The administration of this blog highly recommends that readers click upon the hyperlinks above to learn more details about these issues and the various exchanges within the ASEAN region as the whole Southeast Asia area is quickly becoming a vibrant economic force both on a regional and global level.

Meanwhile, it should be noted that the nation of Laos has recently brought a Lao stock exchange online while Cambodia appears poised to take the same steps soon. Even the developing Union of Myanmar (referred to by some as Burma) has signaled interest in the opening of a Myanmar stock exchange. Whether such a development comes to pass remains to be seen. What is clear is that economic relationships are becoming increasingly stratified as economically dictated by the interests of the players in each of the markets of the world. Those interested in such matters are highly encouraged to conduct their own research and come to their own informed conclusions.

For related information please see: US Company Registration or Company in Thailand.

Tags: ASEAN Brand Identity, ASEAN Exchanges, ASEAN Stars, Brazil, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, Cambodia Stock Exchange, China, China Business, Chinese President Hu Jintao, company in Thailand, India, India Business, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Laos Stock Exchange, Laos Stock Market, Myanmar Stock Exchange, Russia, Russia Business, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, South Africa, South African President Jacob Zuma, Thailand Business, US Company Registration
Posted in American Business, ASEAN Business, Brazil Business, Cambodia Business, China Business, India Business, Laos Business, Russia Business, South Africa Business, Thailand Business, US Company Registration | No Comments »

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.

Tags: 4th Amendment, Arrest, arrest warrant, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Detainment, Google Scholar, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, United States Customs and Border Protection Service, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement Service, United States Supreme Court, USCBP, USICE
Posted in Extradition, US Constitution, US Warrants, USCBP, USICE | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Peoples’ Republic of China has posted a trade deficit in United States dollars.  To quote directly from the official website of China Daily, ChinaDaily.com.cn:

BEIJING – China saw a trade deficit of 1.02 billion US dollars from January to March this year, the first quarterly trade deficit in six years, according to figures released Sunday by the General Administration of Customs (GAC).

In comparison, there was a trade surplus of 13.91 billion US dollars in the first quarter of last year.

China’s exports increased 26.5 percent year on year to 399.64 billion US dollars in the first three months this year, while imports soared 32.6 percent to 400.66 billion dollars from a year earlier, figures from the GAC showed.

From January to March, the total value of imports and exports increased 29.5 percent year on year to 800.3 billion dollars, said the customs administration, adding that China reported a small trade surplus of 140 million dollars in March, on the basis of a deficit of 7.3 billion dollars in February.

The administration of this web log highly recommends that readers click upon the hyperlinks above to view this whole story in detail as the discussion within the article is interesting.

There is little doubt that this news will have a direct impact upon the business environment in China as well as a possibly indirect impact upon the Nations which comprise the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Meanwhile, this announcement may also have an impact upon the economy of the United States of America and the American business environment as well. It would appear, at least at the time of this writing, that the American economy is likely to continue to show signs of turbulence as time moves forward, but some economists may see positive implications for the American economy from this recent news. That said, the trade deficit currently being maintained by the Chinese, as noted above, is not particularly large in relative terms as only one year ago the Peoples’ Republic of China maintained a substantial trade surplus with the United States of America.

This news comes at a time when Chinese and Thai authorities have announced that a large trading complex will be erected in Thailand to provide a platform for Sino-Thai trade. Concurrently, it would also appear as though plans continue for a high speed rail link connecting Thailand, particularly Bangkok, directly to Southern China.

It would appear that although China is currently maintaining a trade deficit, that country remains economically vibrant and still on track to become the largest economy in the world as previously noted on this blog when referencing a statement made by the CEO of the American Company General Electric (GE).

Meanwhile, it was recently noted that many of the stock exchanges in the ASEAN region have made deals to act in concert in an effort to create a combined market with a projected capitalization of 1.8 trillion USD. To quote directly from a recent posting on the website TheHinduBusinessLine.com:

Seven stock exchanges in the ASEAN region collaborated on Friday with the launch of ASEAN Brand Identity, ASEAN Exchanges Web site and ASEAN Stars, with the aim of jointly developing regional capital market estimated worth $1.8 trillion…The ASEAN Exchanges collaboration members are Bursa Malaysia, Hanoi Stock Exchange, Hochiminh Stock Exchange, Indonesia Stock Exchange, The Philippine Stock Exchange, Singapore Exchange and the Stock Exchange of Thailand.

Those reading this posting are highly encouraged to click on the hyperlinks above to read more about this story in detail.

As Southeast Asia continues to show signs of an increasing economic dynamism the effect of such events upon large economies such as the US economy and that of China remains to be seen, but it is clear that the business and economic environments in Southeast Asia are considered by many to be becoming increasingly robust as evidenced by the fact that there is a possibility that a combined ASEAN market could have such a relatively substantial capitalization.

For related information please see: business in China.

Tags: ASEAN, ASEAN Brand Identity, ASEAN Business, ASsociation of Southeast ASian Nations, Bursa Malaysia, Business In Indonesia, Business In Malaysia, Business in Philippines, Business In Singapore, Business in Thailand, Business In Vietnam, China Business, China Economy, General Administration of Customs, Hanoi Stock Exchange, Hochiminh Stock Exchange, Indonesia Stock Exchange, SGX, Singapore Exchange, Stock Exchange of Thailand, The Philippine Stock Exchange, Trade Deficit, Trade Surplus
Posted in ASEAN Business, China Business | No Comments »

In previous postings on this blog it was noted that the issue of impeaching of President Barack Obama was brought up in the context of the administration’s current position regarding enforcement of the provisions of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA). At the time of that posting, the notion seemed a bit more far fetched compared to the tone some lawmakers and advocates on Capital Hill are now taking especially in light of the recent events in Libya and what appeared to be partisan acrimony in the lead up to the 11th hour agreement to keep the United States government funded.

Many legislators seem rather fixated upon the President’s recent actions in Libya and elsewhere in North Africa. To quote Representative Ron Paul directly from his recent speech on the floor of the United States House of Representatives (as found at approximately the 2:00 minute mark of the YouTube video referenced in the aforementioned hyperlink):

“It is against international law and it challenges the war powers resolution…”

Meanwhile, dissenting voices are not only heard on the Republican side of the current political aisle as Democratic members of Congress have voiced concern about Mr. Obama’s recent decisions regarding the situation in Libya. To quote directly from Representative Dennis Kucinich (approximately the 2:40 mark) in a video on YouTube from a broadcast which would appear to have initially aired on Russia Today, the Representative summed up his position on Obama’s decision regarding Libya, when asked if the President’s actions were impeachable and for further elaboration on that subject:

…He did not abide by the Constitution…

Readers of this blog are highly encouraged to click upon the hyperlinks above to view these videos in detail in order to gain real insight on these issues. Concurrently, it would appear as though American advocates for Constitutional adherence are becoming increasingly vocal in their opposition to recent policies of the Obama Administration as writer Ben Smith noted in a concise and interesting article on the website Politico, to quote directly from Mr. Smith:

A prominent libertarian constitutional lawyer and civil libertarian has drafted an article of impeachment against President Obama over his attack on Libya, throwing down a legal gauntlet that could be picked up by some Congressional Republicans

Bruce Fein, a former Reagan administration official in the Department of Justice and chairman of American Freedom Agenda writes in his 15-page argument of Obama’s course that “Barack Hussein Obama has mocked the rule of law, endangered the very existence of the Republic and the liberties of the people, and perpetrated an impeachable high crime and misdemeanor.”

This blogger undertook some research regarding Mr. Bruce Fein as he appears to be a very learned individual especially regarding the subject and intentions underlying the drafting of the United States Constitution. Recently, Mr. Fein was featured in a 2 part interview on YouTube’s Alex Jones Channel and his analysis of the issues at play as well as the Constitutional legal principles underlying those issues was highly insightful, especially for those who may be unaccustomed to a truly thoughtful analysis of Constitutional law and the original intentions behind the adoption of the Checks and Balances system inherent to the Separation of Powers embodied within the provisions of the Constitution itself. Many people are under the mistaken impression that the only issues that come up with regard to the United States Constitution pertain to the so-called “Bill of Rights”, the reference to the original 10 Amendments to the Constitution which most clearly elucidates the rights, privileges, and immunities of States and People of the United States of America. However, the provisions regarding the relationships and interrelationships between the Several States and the Federal Government, the People and the Federal Government, the States’ relationships amongst themselves, and the States’ relationship to the People are more clearly defined within the provisions of the US Constitution itself.

One quote that this blogger felt was of most significance during the interview came when Mr. Fein stated (at approximately the 5:20 minute mark of the interview mentioned above):

“…The fundamental rule of law is at stake here.”

Later in this same interview (at approximately the 8:30 minute mark at part 2 of this interview) Mr. Fein went on to take exception with an apparent policy that Americans can be placed upon “assassination lists” if found to be an imminent threat to the country. Mr. Fein took exception with this policy based upon a belief that the United States government is not permitted to take the life of an American Citizen without the due process of law.  He went on to note that the so-called “Patriot Act” is “being used against us” (use of the word us implying the American People). Those interested in these issues are strongly encouraged to click on the links above and review this interview as it is quite insightful.

That said, a final resolution to the issues being brought to the foreground by Representatives such as Mr. Kucinich and Dr. Paul as well as advocates such as Mr. Fein has yet to manifest itself from the bubbling cauldron that is the American political system. To paraphrase Ted “Theodore” Logan from one of this blogger’s all time favorite movies, Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure: Strange Things Are Afoot On Capital Hill. How the issues noted above will play out in a Congress that just barely managed to patch together an 11th hour resolution to keep the government funded remains to be seen.

Strictly speaking, proceedings such as impeachment have a more political character compared to, say, a legal proceeding, but the outcomes of such proceedings can have legal consequences as well as consequences in the policy arena. To be candid, such events can even have geopolitical consequences as evidenced in the waning days of the Presidency of William Jefferson Clinton or, arguably, those of Richard Nixon or even Andrew Johnson. Therefore, in today’s interconnected world American Presidential impeachment can have ramifications for people as geographically distant as China or the Nations comprising the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

In real terms, all hyperbole aside: is impeachment possible? Certainly, it is always a technical possibility under the provisions of the United States Constitution. The question to be asked by the observant student of political and legal history in the United States is: can Senatorial removal be considered a real possibility? This is a much murkier issue as the Senate of the United States is currently dominated by members of the Democratic Party who would likely prove less-than-willing to vote to remove a President of their own Party. To put it as simply as possible, it is this blogger’s opinion that notwithstanding the possibility that articles of impeachment may be introduced against Mr. Obama, the possibility of seeing those articles of impeachment adopted by the full House of Representatives is simply that: a possibility.

To sum up, whatever one’s opinions are regarding Mr. Obama’s administration there is one thing that is certain: he will be running for a second Presidential term. Mr. Obama recently announced that he would be seeking the office of the Presidency for a second time. To quote directly from The Link Paper at thelinkpaper.ca:

US President Barack Obama announced his decision to run for a second term as he called upon his supporters to mobilise for the 2012 election campaign. “This campaign is just kicking off,” Obama said on his official website. In a message to his supporters through email, text and video, titled ‘It Begins with Us’, Obama said he would be filing his papers to launch his campaign for a second term.

As of yet, it would appear as though Mr. Obama’s main Presidential challengers have yet to officially reveal themselves. Although the reconvening Congress may be more interesting even than that which very nearly shutdown only mere hours ago.

Tags: Alex Jones, Articles of Impeachment, Barack Obama, Ben Smith, Bruce Fein, Checks and Balances, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, Obama Impeachment, Obama To Run For Reelection, Patriot Act, Politico, President Obama, Representative Dennis Kucinich, Representative Ron Paul, Russia Today, Separation of Powers, The Link Paper
Posted in US Constitution | No Comments »

It would appear as though government shutdown has been averted, at least for the time being as an apparent bi-partisan initiative has resulted in continued funding for the United States government. To quote directly from ABC News on go.com:

Barely more than an hour before a midnight deadline Friday night, officials announced a deal to avert a government shutdown. “We will cut $78.5 billion below the president’s 2011 budget proposal, and we have reached an agreement on the policy riders,” House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., wrote in a joint statement.

The agreement would cut $37.67 billion from the 2010 budget and keep intact funding to Planned Parenthood, sources from both parties told ABC News.

“We protected the investments we need to win the future,” President Obama said after the deal was struck. “At the same time, we also made sure at the end of the day this was a debate about spending cuts — not social issues like women’s health and the protection of our air and water. These are important issues that deserve discussion, just not during a debate about our budget.”

Readers of this blog are highly encouraged to visit the above links to gain more insight on this story.

On a related note, credit where credit is due regarding the preparations seemingly undertaken by the officers of the Department of State in trying to front load their efforts as much as humanly possible regarding previously-approved visa issuances as the prospect of Government Shutdown became more acute.

On a less related note, those interested in the struggle for equality for the LGBT community in the context of the United States immigration process should take note of the fact that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) attempted to put a hold on deportations involving same sex bi-national couples before having that hold rescinded by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). USCIS, your efforts to help keep bi-national families together has not gone unnoticed.

It would seem as though the ultimate resolution on this issue will come either in the form of a legal opinion from the United States Supreme Court, as in a case such as that from the Massachusetts Federal Court and others in the US Courts currently working their way through the appellate process, or through enactment of legislation which would repeal, hopefully at the very least, the Federal recognition provisions currently embodied in the language of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) similar to the legislation colloquially referred to as the Respect for Marriage Act and/or the Uniting American Families Act.

Tags: American government shutdown, Defense of Marriage Act, Department of Homeland Security, Department of State, House Speaker John Boehner, LGBT community, LGBT Equal Immigration, President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, Uniting American Families Act, US government shutdown, USCIS
Posted in Editorial, News, Opinion | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that various US Missions abroad are taking substantial steps to deal with what would appear to be an impending shutdown of the United States government. For those who are unaware, the United States government may shutdown due to the fact that various legislators in the nation’s capital are unable to reach an agreement which would result in a resolution to keep the American government funded.

For a somewhat different perspective on this issue, it may be best to quote directly from the Huffington Post:

WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama says another round of talks with congressional leaders has helped but there is no deal yet to avert a government shutdown.

Obama said he hoped to be able to announce a deal on Friday but “there’s no certainty yet.” He said he told House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid that he wants an answer in the morning.

Meanwhile, it would appear as though the United States Department of State is frantically working in an effort to get as much done as possible before the shutdown actually takes effect. For example, the US Embassy in Bangkok, to that Post’s immense credit, has been processing out approved visas as quickly as possible as the possible shutdown approaches. This blogger personally witnessed the expedited remittance of a visaed passport by the US Embassy to an applicant immediately preceding the writing of the posting. Meanwhile, it also came to this blogger’s attention that some Department of State employees situated in the United States were put in a position where they had to work a substantial amount of overtime in an effort to get as much done as possible prior to a government closure.

In this blogger’s opinion, the current efforts of States Department officials are notable for the fact that such endeavors go to show a genuine concern for providing optimal service to the public-at-large. At the time of this writing, it remains to be seen whether the American government will actually shutdown, but for those with pending immigration matters the prospect of a government shutdown opens up the possibility of delay in the overall immigration process. This is especially true in the context of United States Embassies and United States Consulates abroad as such Posts are likely to close for all but emergencies should a shutdown eventually come to pass.

For related information please see: Government Shutdown.

Tags: Department of State, Government Shutdown, Government Shutdown US Visa Process, House Speaker John Boehner, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, US Consulate shutdown, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy shutdown, us embassy thailand, US government shutdown, US Immigration Government Shutdown
Posted in US State Department | No Comments »

This blogger writes this post in transit between the Vientiane, Laos and Bangkok, Thailand having been retained to assist with Consular Processing at the Post in Laos. It came to this blogger’s attention while physically outside of the US Embassy compound that the Post in Vientiane will be closed on April the 8th for training purposes. This alone would not have concerned this blogger a great deal as United States Missions abroad routinely close local posts in order to use the closure as an opportunity to train personnel. Therefore, those reading this should not necessarily make the assumption that the Post in Vientiane is closing in anticipation of a government shutdown. That said, the forthcoming information, in conjunction with that noted above gave this blogger pause.

Bearing the above paragraph in mind, this blogger was also notified that the US Embassy in Bangkok has been calling prospective visa beneficiaries with upcoming visa interview appointments in order to attempt to reschedule pending visa interviews. It would appear that this is being done in response to the belief that a government shutdown is possibly imminent and should such a shutdown actually occur it would likely result in the closure of the various Immigrant Visa Units and Non-Immigrant Visa Units at US Missions abroad.

In a previous posting on this blog, the administration analyzed the possible ramifications of such a state of affairs and those reading this posting are encouraged to look at that post in order to learn more about this rather serious issue. The previous posting on this issue can be found at: Government Shutdown.

A few notes on the US Embassy in Vientiane, Laos; first, three words accurately describe this Post: courteous, professional, and efficient. The foreign-language officers are extremely helpful and the English-language officer aptly engaged in staying on top of what, to this blogger, appeared to be  substantial caseload and simultaneously dealing with applicants very politely all while checking documents and doing the routine due diligence required of Consular Officers stationed overseas.

At the time of this writing, it remains to be seen whether or not a government shutdown will actually occur, but should the government shutdown, then this could have a substantial impact upon US visa applications for visas such as the CR-1 visa, the K-1 visa, the IR-1 visa, and the K-3 visa. Meanwhile, processing of business visas such as the EB-5 visa and the L-1 visa could also be impacted by a shutdown of the United States government. There is some speculation as to whether or not the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) will shutdown as a result of possible government closure as USCIS is self-funded by petition and application fees (although that agency did receive money from the US government last year in order to cover a funding shortfall).

As this situation evolves, the administration of this blog will attempt to keep readers updated.

Tags: American Embassy Laos, American Embassy Thailand, American government shutdown, American Visa Process Government Shutdown, CR-1 Visa Process Government Shutdown, Department of States, EB-5 Visa Process Government Shutdown, IR-1 Visa Process Government Shutdown, K-1 Visa Process Government Shutdown, L-1 Visa Process Government Shutdown, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Laos, us embassy thailand, US Embassy Vientiane, US government shutdown, US Visa Laos, US Visa Process Government Shutdown, US Visa Thailand
Posted in CR1 Visa, Fiance Visa Thailand, IR1 Visa, J1 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K2 Visa, K2 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, L1 Visa, National Visa Center, News, US Consulate ChengDu, US Consulate Chennai, US Consulate Chiang Mai, US Consulate Guangzhou, US Consulate HCMC, US Consulate Hong Kong, US Consulate Hyderabad, US Consulate Kolkata, US Consulate Macau, US Consulate Mumbai, US Consulate Shanghai, US Consulate Shenyang, US Consulate Singapore, US Consulate Vladivostok, US Consulate Wuhan, US Embassy Australia, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Bangladesh, US Embassy Beijing, US Embassy Brunei Darussalam, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Cambodia, US Embassy China, US Embassy Dhaka, US Embassy Fiji, US Embassy Hanoi, US Embassy India, US Embassy Indonesia, US Embassy Iraq, US Embassy Islamabad, US Embassy Jakarta, US Embassy Japan, US Embassy Kathmandu, US Embassy Kiribati, US Embassy Kuala Lumpur, US Embassy Kyrgyz Republic (Kyrgyzstan), US Embassy Laos, US Embassy Malaysia, US Embassy Maldives, US Embassy Manila, US Embassy Mauritius, US Embassy Mongolia, US Embassy Myanmar, US Embassy Nauru, US Embassy Nepal, US Embassy New Dehli, US Embassy New Zealand, US Embassy Pakistan, US Embassy Papua New Guinea, US Embassy Philippines, US Embassy Phnom Phen, US Embassy Port Moresby, US Embassy Rangoon, US Embassy Russia, US Embassy Singapore, US Embassy South Korea, US Embassy Sri Lanka, US Embassy Suva, US Embassy Thailand, US Embassy Tokyo, US Embassy Tonga, US Embassy Turkmenistan, US Embassy Tuvalu, US Embassy Uzbekistan, US Embassy Vietnam, US Embassy Yangon, US State Department, US Tourist Visa, US Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Center for Disease Control and the United States Department of State are likely to begin imposing more stringent regulations upon visa applicants, especially immigrant visa applicants, seeking a travel document for lawful admission to the United States of America. According to research conducted by the administration of this blog as well as credible anecdotal evidence it would appear that those with tuberculosis or those who have previously had tuberculosis are likely to be required to undergo intense screening in order to ascertain whether the applicant has fully recovered from the disease and poses no threat of future contagion.

In the past, tuberculosis has been a significant issue for those within the consular jurisdiction of the US Embassy Thailand as the applicants applying for visas at the US Embassy in Bangkok and the US Consulate Chiang Mai are sometimes found to either have tuberculosis or to have had it previously. The major issue associated with Consular Processing is timing. Even for those who no longer have TB, it could take a matter of weeks or even months to undergo testing necessary to prove that the disease has been treated to such a degree that contagion is no longer an issue.

Meanwhile, there are likely to be rule changes regarding X-rays as well. For example, in the past it was possible to have the required chest X-ray waived for pregnant women. It has come to this blogger’s attention that such waivers are unlikely to continue to be granted. Therefore, those pregnant spouses and fiancees of American Citizens or Lawful Permanent Residents seeking visas such as the K-1 visa, the K-3 visa, the CR-1 visa, or the IR-1 visa are likely to be required to either undergo an X-ray while using a lead screen to shield the fetus or await the birth of the child and then see that the mother undergoes an X-ray post-pregnancy. As to children, it would appear as though child seekers of visas such as the K-2 visa, K-4 visa, or the IR-2 visa may be required to have skin tests to check for illnesses. It may also prove necessary for children to be X-rayed in connection with diseases such as tuberculosis.

Notwithstanding upcoming changes some recent changes to the rules regarding disease and admission to the United States have resulted in more lax requirements for visa applicants. For example, only relatively recently have visa applicants seen the restrictions imposed on those with HIV lifted. Bearing this in mind, the reader should note that the removal of the imposition of inadmissibility upon HIV infected immigrants does not mean that it is necessarily easy to gain admission to the United States for those with HIV as such visa applications are generally subjected to intense scrutiny to ascertain whether the intending immigrant has adequate medical coverage for the duration of their lawful status in the United States. In the past, those infected with HIV needed an I-601 waiver in order to overcome the legal grounds of inadmissibility. As HIV infection is no longer a legal grounds of inadmissibility an I-601 waiver is no longer required under such circumstances.

Tags: CDC, Center for Disease control, CR-1 Visa Thailand, Department of State, HIV, I-601, I-601 Waiver, IR-1 Visa Thailand, K-1 Visa, K-1 Visa Thailand, K-2 Visa, K-3 Visa, K-3 Visa Thailand, K-4 visa, Medical Examination, Tuberculosis, US Consulate Chiang Mai, us embassy bangkok, us embassy thailand, US Immigration Medical Examination
Posted in US Consulate Chiang Mai | No Comments »

In a recent episode of Bill Maher’s popular television program Mr. Maher noted the fact that the debate on same sex marriage is being stubbornly maintained despite the continued damage it does to honest American Citizens and their families. He also noted the somewhat hypocritical stature of the current position held by the administration and the Congress regarding the issue of same sex marriage. After watching this program this blogger felt as though Maher had failed to take into consideration the endeavors of some steadfast legislators on behalf of the LGBT community and those same sex bi-national couples who continue to hope for legal change either in the form of judicial or legislative action.

A fascinating article on this issue was posted on an interesting website known as the Business Insider.  To quote directly from the Business Insider website BusinessInsider.com:

In his New Rules segment last night, Bill Maher took Obama and the Democratic party to task for not being able to pass gay marriage in America, even though more than a majority of people support it for the first time.

The administration of this web log highly encourages readers to click on the hyperlinks above to read the Business Insider’s take on these issues as the piece written by the author Steven Loeb is quite enlightening and insightful.The issue of same sex marriage is increasingly in the news as developments on the issue seem to be occurring quite quickly at the time of this writing. One of the reasons for this may stem from a sincere hope that the notion of Equal Protection under the Federal law will be extended to all American Citizens regardless of their sexual orientation and/or preference. Concurrently, there are those who also hope that Federal authorities recognize the Several States’ Right to regulate the marriage of those within their jurisdiction. Furthermore, there are others who hope that some of these issues could be resolved by the United States Supreme Court as there are likely legal implications pursuant to the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution. Putting these issues aside, Mr. Maher went on to note, humorously if somewhat crudely, quoting further from the Business Insider:

…that only 53% of people support it, which means that “47% of Americans are assholes.”

“But still, this is remarkable progress considering that it wasn’t that long ago that just saying the words gay marriage made most Americans throw up in their Cornflakes. So, tonight, I’d like to congratulate the leadership of the Democratic party who really stood up for what was right. I’d like to, but I can’t. Because other than Gavin Newsom, Dennis Kucinich and that Governor of New Jersey… no Democrat would touch this issue with a ten inch pole.”

Although this blogger has often noted the exploits of Representative Dennis Kucinich this monologue by Maher should be noted first for the fact that for all of the hyperbole and some might say profanity: the man is right. Same sex marriage is apparently becoming increasingly popular to a broader sector of the population, even though the cause has seen relatively little support at times from so-called “main stream” sections of either political party. Meanwhile, there are strong legal arguments which can be made against the Federal government’s enforcement of the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” (DOMA) as it applies in sovereign US States which recognize, legalize, and/or solemnize same sex marriages. That stated, the Constitutionality of DOMA is questionable in terms understandable by broad sectors of the population as DOMA’s continued withholding of Federal recognition of unions  solemnized and legalized by 6 States and the District of Columbia infringes upon sovereign rights long reserved to the States, most notable among these rights is the right to solemnize and/or legalize marriages within the State’s jurisdiction (as well as annulment and/or divorce) as noted in a recent Massachusetts Federal Court decision.

Putting all of this aside, why no mention of Representative Jerrold Nadler? Why no mention of the other legislators who have championed this cause such as Representative Zoe Lofgren or Senator Kirsten Gillibrand? In the case of Representative Nadler, whom this blogger has followed with keen interest as he appears, at least to this blogger, to be the Federal legislator most active on this issue: here is a Democrat from New York who has continued to be an advocate for same sex bi-national couples as well as the entire LGBT community by actively supporting legislation such as the Respect for Marriage Act, the Uniting American Families Act, and; perhaps, Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation which would include relevant language allowing same sex bi-national couples to receive United States immigration benefits to the same degree as their different-sex counterparts. This blogger is not disagreeing with Mr. Maher’s opinion on the issue of some Democrats apparently refusing to support legislation which would modify or repeal DOMA, but in an attempt to see that some credit is given where due it has been repeatedly noted on this blog that Representative Nadler has remained a champion of legislation which would reform what many feel is a flagrant violation of the civil rights of many Americans as well as the States’ right to make policies regarding the legalization and solemnization of marriages.

It should be noted that this blogger is in no way affiliated with Representative Nadler having never personally dealt with his office nor his staff and this mention is in no way an endorsement of anything other than his position on respecting the civil liberties of all Americans to marry whomever they choose and the State institution of marriage.

Tags: Bill Maher, LGBT Equal Rights, LGBT Immigration rights, lgbt visa, New Rules, Representative Dennis Kucinich, Representative Jerrold Nadler, Representative Zoe Lofgren, Respect for Marriage Act, same sex marriage visa, samse sex marriage, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, Uniting American Families Act
Posted in same sex visa | No Comments »

It recently came to this blogger’s attention that the Governor of the State of Utah has signed legislation which would recognize gold and silver as legal tender for intrastate transactions. To quote directly from the Constitutional Tender Blog, but initially found by this blogger on the website DGCMagazine.com:

On Friday, March 25th, Gov. Gary Herbert signed HB 317, the “Utah Legal Tender Act,” into law.

The law recognizes gold and silver coins issued by the federal government as legal currency in the state. The coins do not replace the current paper currency, but may be used and accepted voluntarily as an alternative.

The administration of this blog highly recommends that readers click on the hyperlinks above to read this article in its entirety as it can provide very valuable insight into this evolving issue.

This notion of something akin to an “alternative currency system” has been discussed in the context of State legal tender reform in many American States recently, but there are two notable jurisdictions that have taken proactive steps to enact legislation which would allow usage of gold and silver in an intrastate context. One of these states is Utah while the other is Virginia. It is this blogger’s understanding that as of the time of this writing the State of Virginia has yet to enact similar legislation although it remains to be seen whether such legislation will actually see passage.

One interesting aspect of this issue involves the ramifications for financial institutions in the State of Utah. The aforementioned article went on to point out:

The law exempts the sale of gold and silver coins from the state capital gains tax, since you would simply be exchanging one form of legal tender currency for another. It also calls for a committee to study alternative currencies for the State and a means for Utahans to pay their taxes with gold and silver coins.

Gold and silver coins issued by the federal government are already legal tender, of course, and can be used to purchase items and pay debts owed. However, they could only be used at the face value of the coins — which is ridiculously lower than the value of the precious metal content of the coins. If you were to use them at the actual value of the coins, you would face a capital gains tax on the “profit” you gained over the face value.

Clearly, the provisions of this act could have a significant impact upon the economies of the State of Utah, the United States Federal government, and Greater North America. Bearing this in mind the reader is encouraged to consider the possible reverberations of this legislation in a global context as the promulgation, passage, and enactment of this bill, and possible similar future legislation in other American States; could prove to be tremendous for jurisdictions such as Thailand, China, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). The overall long term effect of this legislation remains to be seen, but this is definitely something that could have an impact upon the business environment in the United States and elsewhere.

Those interested in receiving an in-depth legal analysis of the issues associated with legal tender reform in Utah are highly encouraged to contact a licensed attorney in Utah. The administration of this blog reminds readers that it is always prudent to ascertain the credentials of anyone claiming to be a licensed lawyer in any jurisdiction.

For related information please see: Integrity Legal.

Tags: Gold, gold and silver coins issued by the federal government, Gold Legal Tender, Governor Gary Herbert, HB 317, Legal Tender Reform, Silver, Silver Legal Tender, state capital gains tax, Utah Capital Gains Tax, Utah Legal Tender Reform, Virginia Legal Tender Reform
Posted in American Business, ASEAN Business, Cambodia Business, China Business, Editorial, Gaming Law, Legal Opinion, Thailand Business | No Comments »