Integrity Legal

In a recent announcement from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS), Deferred Action will be granted to those widows and widowers of United States Citizens who die before the two year anniversary of the foreign spouse’s arrival in the United States of America. To quote the AILA press release:

“U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano, on June 9, 2009, announced that DHS would grant deferred action relief to surviving spouses of U.S. citizens who died before the second anniversary of their marriage. Based on the Secretary’s decision, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will temporarily suspend adjudication of visa petitions and adjustment applications filed for widow(er)s where the sole reason for an adverse decision from USCIS would be the death of a U.S. citizen spouse prior to the second anniversary of their marriage.”

The first question that probably comes to the mind of the reader is:  ok, so what does “deferred action” mean in practice? To further quote the USCIS press release:

“Deferred action is an exercise of prosecutorial discretion not to pursue removal from the United States of a particular foreigner for a specific period. Deferred action is not intended to be a permanent remedy for this situation; rather it is a temporary discretionary solution.”

In cases involving United States Immigrant visas, there are two types of immigrant visa categories for spouses of American Citizens. There is the Conditional Resident Visa (CR1) and the Immediate Relative Visa (IR1). The Conditional Resident Visa is meant for spouses of United States Citizens who have been married for less than two years. IR-1 visas are meant for those who have been married for more than 2 years. When a Permanent Resident is in CR-1 status, then they must apply for a lift of conditions before they change status to IR-1. If residence is conditional, then the immigrant must leave the USA  if the lift of conditionality is not filed and approved. In many cases, only the US Citizen spouse can file to have the conditions lifted. Therefore, if the US Citizen spouse dies before the lift of conditions is filed and approved then the Conditional Permanent Resident could fall out of status as soon as 2 years is up. Deferred action places the Resident in a kind of limbo in which they can lawfully remain in the USA, but are not moved in IR-1 status. The press release goes further and states:

“Aliens with deferred action may apply for an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) if they can establish an economic necessity for employment.”

Therefore, the alien in the US in this situation could work and reside without fear of being removed, but the situation would seem to be simply a temporary stopgap measure and it does not appear that this would be a viable long term legal option.

Bear in mind that this issue only deals with US spousal and fiancee visas after adjustment of status. Therefore, the above analysis is not relevant to the K1 visa or the K3 visa per se, although it would be relevant if the foreign fiancee or spouse adjusts to CR1 status.

Tags: American Visa, CR-1 Visa, CR1 Visa, Deferred Action, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, US Immigration, US Visa, USCIS
Posted in Adjustment of Status, Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Thailand, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Upcoming Legislation, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

Apparently the Thai government officials in Phuket are actively investigating companies that might be using Thai nominees in order to conduct otherwise restricted activities in Thailand.  To quote the Nation via Thaivisa.com:

“A fact-finding effort is underway in Phuket to compile information about local businesses in which Thai people are hired by foreigners as their nominees – a practice considered suspicious and possibly illegal.”

The major concern seems centered around use of Thai nominees to own Thai property. Thailand has imposed many legal restrictions on foreign ownership of Thai property. Many are under the mistaken idea that foreigners are completely barred from owning land in the Kingdom of Thailand. This is in fact not true as foreigners can own land, but they need Ministry of Interior approval and this approval is virtually impossible to obtain except in limited cases involving inheritance.

The above quoted article doesn’t really mention anything new regarding the attitude of Thai authorities, but instead seems to mark a change in attitude regarding the use of nominee shareholders. Although nominee shareholders are expressly prohibited under Thai law, it is difficult to ascertain exactly what constitutes a “nominee.” Basically, a passive shareholder could be considered a nominee, but the term would be inaccurate because the supposed nominee has a vested interest in the company and is not holding shares for anyone else. The real poison pill comes down to land. Where a company is being used to own Thai real estate the issue of nominee shareholders is a major one that will likely be heavily scrutinized by Thai authorities. That being said, a Thai company that owns property is not illegal as a Thai company is not barred from owning land in Thailand. This being said, the Thai land department is taking a very tough stand regarding the use of nominees:

“The provincial land office said legal action would be taken against any businesses found to have been operated illegally with a majority of foreign ownership, because Thai land laws imposed strict sanctions on foreigners owning land plots in Thailand.”

For those who wish to own property in Thailand, it may be best to obtain a Foreign Freehold Title to a Thai Condo rather than attempting to circumvent land department regulations. At the present time, it would appear that Thai authorities are stringently enforcing the land laws and foreigners in Thailand should be prepared to deal with increased scrutiny. Strict observance of the law may be the best method of ensuring the least amount of difficulty.

Tags: Thailand Business, Thailand Legal News, Thailand Property Law, Thailand Real Estate Law
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Thailand Business, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate | No Comments »

In an interesting a convoluted situation, it appears that United States officials deported an American Citizen…on more than one occasion. To quote another website:

“Newly released documents show that federal investigators twice ignored FBI records and other evidence and deported a North Carolina native to Latin America, The Charlotte Observer”

One of the most interesting, and somewhat tragic, aspects of the situation is the fact that the Citizen in question could not speak any Spanish and was also mentally ill. To quote the Charlotte Observer:

“At the time of Mark Lyttle’s deportation, immigration officials had criminal record checks that said he was a U.S. citizen. They had his Social Security number and the names of his parents. They had Lyttle’s own sworn statement that he had been born in Rowan County. None of this stopped them from leaving Lyttle, a mentally ill American who speaks no Spanish, alone and penniless in Mexico, where he has no ties.”

Cases such as this really bring to light important issues regarding the overwhelming power of the United States Federal government. The bureaucracy of the United States government is staggering and at times people fall through the cracks. In this situation, the American Citizen at issue not only fell through the cracks, but he should never have been put in a position where he could have fallen through a crack. Had the federal authorities simply done their due diligence, they would have learned that the subject was a Citizen of the United States of America and therefore, could not be subject to deportation. More importantly, he was a native born Citizen of the United States of America. This is important because American Citizens who are born American Citizens cannot lose their Citizenship, except through the process of renunciation. Further, an American Citizen cannot be deported. Therefore the authorities representing the US government made a grave error by wrongfully deporting someone with US citizenship.

It is very disconcerting to see this kind of thing happening to Americans. However, it should be noted that the American deportee had a history of mental illness and actually had claimed Mexican Citizenship on prior occasions. Even still, other government agencies had informed the Immigration officials that the deportee was a Citizen. Further when the deportee went to the US Embassy in Guatemala, “It took someone in Guatemala one day to prove he was a citizen.”This begs the question, if this was easily ascertainable overseas, why couldn’t US Immigration officials figure it out while in the USA.

Tags: American Citizen, CBP, deportation, ICE, US Embassy, US Immigration
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Weird Law | No Comments »

The United States Department of Homeland Security recently announced rule changes that will effect those traveling to the United States of America. Under the new rules, clearer lines have been drawn with regard to searches of media devices belonging to those entering the USA. To quote an official press release from the US Department of Homeland Security:

“The new directives address the circumstances under which U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) can conduct border searches of electronic media—consistent with the Department’s Constitutional authority to search other sensitive non-electronic materials, such as briefcases, backpacks and notebooks, at U.S. borders.”

These new rules will have an important impact upon those Americans residing in Thailand who return to the United States of America on a regular basis. These rule changes are even more important for the fiance or spouse of a US citizen traveling to the United States on a K1 or K3 visa. In many cases, the Thai fiancee or spouse has a less than perfect grasp of the English language and therefore cannot adequately communicate with the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Officers. Therefore, it may be wise for the American citizen loved one to research the situation in order to explain to the Thai entrant the possible issues that may arise at the port of entry into the United States.

One interesting aspect of this rule change deals with the right of the person being searched to be present while the search takes place:

Searches of electronic devices should be conducted in the presence of the individual whose information is being examined unless there are national security, law enforcement, or other operational considerations that make it inappropriate to permit the individual to remain present. Permitting an individual to be present in the room during a search does not necessarily mean that the individual will be permitted to witness the search itself. If permitting an individual to witness the search itself could reveal law enforcement techniques or potentially compromise other operational considerations, the individual will not be permitted to observe the search itself.

It is important to note that the United States government has a great deal of unfettered search authority because they consider someone who has not actually been admitted into the US to be outside of the jurisdictions of the US constitution. Therefore, since the constitution does not apply, then normal rules restricting unlawful search and seizure do not apply. This can have a major impact upon an alien seeking entry to the USA, because they will not be accorded the same legal protections as they would after having been admitted.

Tags: CBP, Customs and Border Patrol, Department of Homeland Security, DHS, ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Search and Seizure
Posted in Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Thailand, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous | No Comments »

In recent news the Thailand property market has been placed under increased scrutiny for fear that foreigners are using Thai companies as a way of owning land and thereby circumventing the de facto prohibition placed upon non-Thai citizens seeking to buy Thai real estate. In some cases, the Thai government authorities are forcing companies which are not in compliance to sell their Thai property.

In a recent edition of the Bangkok Post, the aforementioned phenomenon was reported on at length:

“If the investigation [by the land department] reveals that the firm holding the land have an illegal shareholding structure, the Lands Department will ask it to transfer the plots within 180 to 365 days.Recently, the Lands Department found a company in Phuket whose foreign ownership exceeded the legal limit. The firm had formerly registered with a legal ownership – with foreigners holding a 49% stake and Thais the balance. However, it later increased its capital, with foreign nationals taking up all new shares, making it ineligible to own land. After the department learned about this case, it took action to have the firm transfer the land it owned.”

The situation described above is the classic case of a scenario in which those operating the Thai company opted for the expedient route without making certain that the legalities were respected. There are ways in which Thai companies can own land, but they must be carefully structured in order to comport to the laws of the Kingdom of Thailand. That being said, one should not try to set up any type of corporate device purely for the purpose of getting around the laws of the Kingdom of Thailand.

It remains to be seen whether this increased scrutiny will continue, but those wishing to acquire property in Thailand ought to be aware that there are other perfectly legal methods of acquiring interest in Thai real estate. Long term Thailand leases can be a benefit to those wishing to acquire a leasehold. For those who insist upon obtaining a freehold title to a piece of Thai property, foreigners are entitled to take freehold title to a Thai condo. However, there have been regulations passed recently which place more restrictive legal definitions upon what is considered a “condo.”

There is also a very specialized property instrument known as a usufruct, which allows the usufructuary to hold a lifetime usage right in the structures located upon a designated piece of property. Some people opt to split the title to a house from the title to the land. This can be very difficult, but has been done when executed by professionals.

Tags: Thai Condo, Thai Lease, Thai Nominee Shareholders, Thai usufruct, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Thailand Business, Thailand Property, Thailand Real Estate | No Comments »

Apparently, the State of New York has made the decision to crack down on Immigration Consultants and so-called “visa agencies.” Only a licensed attorney or USCIS approved representative is entitled to prepare visa applications and petitions on behalf of clients pursuing United States Immigration benefits. In flagrant transgression of this rule, many companies in the United States of America provide unlicensed immigration advice. The State of New York has opted to take an aggressive position regarding this practice. To quote the a publication by the State of New York, promulgated through the American Immigration Lawyers Association:

“In thousands of cases across New York City and Long Island, these companies unlawfully filed immigration petitions with United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) on behalf of immigrants and their families, jeopardizing efforts to obtain legal status.”

Many people do not recognize how detrimentally these unscrupulous agencies can affect prospective immigrants’ chances of obtaining an American visa. The aforementioned publication quoted the New York Attorney General as saying:

“The consequences of bad legal advice can be absolutely devastating,” said Attorney General Cuomo. “Fraudulent legal services can haunt individuals and their families for a lifetime. Companies and individuals that represent someone in a legal proceeding without having the authority to do so must be stopped, and my office will hold them accountable.”

It is good to see that local authorities in the United States are taking a firm stand against these practices. In a way, cracking down on these types of enterprises is of assistance to all immigrants and prospective immigrants because United States Immigration is a field that has been somewhat plagued by “fly by night” operations masquerading as attorneys and law firms in an effort to swindle clients out of their hard earned money.

Many of these organizations advertise “guarantees” and “full refunds” for failure to achieve desired results. In many cases, these too good to be true propositions are simply gimmicks to get unsuspecting immigrants to part with their money. Unfortunately, in Thailand “visa agencies” and those pretending to be lawyers prey upon uninformed foreigners and Thais. This practice is particularly prevalent in Thailand because many applications for visas are filed on behalf of family members who are of Thai extraction. Since Thailand is a sovereign nation independent of American legal jurisdiction, it is difficult for American authorities to apprehend those falsely claiming to be American attorneys. Therefore, the consumer environment in Thailand with regard to legal services is: Buyer Beware. Always ask if the attorney can provide a copy of their license to practice law from at least one jurisdiction in the United States.

Tags: AILA, American Immigration law, Immigration Consultants, New York Attorney General, USCIS, Visa Agencies, visa agent
Posted in General Legal Information, Miscellaneous, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Thailand, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand | No Comments »

Last week, United States President Barack Obama stated that reform of the US Immigration system is an important issue and one that will not be placed on the “backburner.” In the United States Congress and Senate, the Immigration debate is coming to the forefront with two proposed bills being brought to the floor in the next session. One proposed bill would stiffen enforcement and security measures with regard to illegal immigrants while creating more opportunities for immigrants to enter the United States legally.

The publication Businessweek reports that another proposed bill would, “limit the granting of H-1Bs, visas that are especially popular among U.S. tech companies like Microsoft as well as Indian IT services outsourcers like Infosys and Wipro.”

This same article makes note of the major contributions that many immigrant groups have made to the economy of the United States of America. There is a pervasive belief that only immigrant groups in the distant past have made a substantial positive impact upon the United States economy. As Businessweek points out, the Technology sector of the American economy has been greatly enhanced by immigrants to the United States as companies such as Google, Coca Cola, Pepsi, Motorola, and Berkshire Hathaway were either founded by, or currently managed by members of the American immigrant community.

An interesting aspect of the current immigration debate is the fact that it will occur at a time of decreased immigration to the USA. To further quote Businessweek:

“Ironically, the latest immigration fight will take place at a time when the U.S. has become a less attractive destination for many immigrants. Because of the recession, there’s less demand for low-cost labor. But the U.S. is also turning out to be less attractive for highly educated workers, too.”

As the People’s Republic of China and Asia generally becomes a more important region of the global economy, it stands to reason that more immigrants will be drawn to that continent in order to seek business opportunities. Hopefully, this fact will be taken into account when legislation regarding comprehensive immigration reform is drafted because in order to remain on the cutting edge of innovation the United States must continue to be viewed as the “land of opportunity,” by talented and ambitious prospective immigrants. Ideally, the proposed legislation to reform the American Immigration system will contain provisions that will make it easier for highly educated and highly skilled foreign labor to enter the United States.

For related information please see:

K1 visa

K3 visa

Tags: Comprehensive Immigration Reform, US Immigration, US Immigration Law, US Immigration Policy, US Visa
Posted in General Legal Information, Upcoming Legislation, US Visa and Immigration | 1 Comment »

There appears to be growing frustration among many groups who supported President Barack Obama when he was campaigning for the White House. During his bid for the Presidency, Mr. Obama was quite vocal about the need to reform the current immigration system in the United States of America. However, as Mr. Obama’s Presidency has begun as a very busy administration, Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) has seemed to have been shunted to the “back burner.”

In a recent web posting entitled, “Obama Pushes Immigration Reform to 2010, Jokes About Being Called ‘an Illegal Immigrant’” the author, Diego Graglia,wrote:

“Obama added he can’t get immigration reform passed on his own. “It’s important that people realize that things don’t happen because the President snaps his fingers. I can’t do all this by myself,” he said. He asked that grassroots groups continue to organize and mobilize for reform and that members of Congress face the political risks involved.”

Although it is correct that the President cannot solve all political problems by snapping his fingers, this comment does beg the question: then what can he do? Certainly it takes more than simply snapping one’s fingers, but at the same time the President wields a great deal of hard, soft, indirect legislative, and overt executive power. Certainly, he of all people could at least attempt to bring about some sort of compromise measure that would not require as much political capital.

At the same time, there are those who argue that Obama has too many current problems to deal with and Immigration reform is an issue that should be dealt with when the President has enough time to devote his full attention to this incredibly important issue. With the economy only beginning to show signs of recovery and foreign commitments to sort out, the President has many urgent and pressing problems to deal with. However, many have argued that Immigration reforms are more important as Immigration problems have an impact upon both the domestic economy and foreign policy.

An issue that is increasingly becoming entangled with Comprehensive Immigration Reform is that of US Immigration benefits for same sex couples. There are some who believe that United States Immigration benefits for same sex bi-national couples will likely be dealt with in provisions of CIR legislation. It is too soon to tell, but it seems logical that if Comprehensive Immigration Reform is considered to be a secondary issue, then Immigration benefits for same-sex couples may get short shrift as well, at least for now.

Tags: CIR, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, same sex visa, US Immigration Law, US Visa
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Upcoming Legislation | No Comments »

As mentioned in previous posts on this blog, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service  (USCIS) is the relatively new incarnation of the agency formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Currently USCIS is headed by a director who reports to the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Since the election of President Barack Obama there have been many new appointments to the upper echelons of the United States Federal bureaucracy. This week has seen the appointment of  a new Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service. Through their website, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is reporting information on the appointment:

“Director Alejandro Mayorkas was confirmed on August 7, 2009, to lead the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. A hearing to consider his nomination was held on June 24, 2009. On July 28, 2009, the Judiciary Committee ordered the nomination reported to the Senate for consideration.”

We here at Integrity Legal wish to congratulate Mr. Mayorkas on his recent appointment and wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors as Director of USCIS. Many proposed changes are in store for USCIS in the coming months and years and Mr. Mayorkas will oversee what will likely be great change within the agency.

Until reading this report, I was unaware that USCIS Director’s even needed Senatorial approval before taking office. Many United States Federal appointments must be confirmed by the United States Senate before the appointee will be allowed to take office. I was aware that this process was common for high ranking American officials like cabinet appointees or Supreme Court Justices, but I was under the misperception that the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service was headed by a career federal civil servant and was not a political appointment. That being said, it makes a certain degree of sense to have the holder of this office politically appointed. USCIS is charged with bringing immigration policies into practice on behalf of the administration and as a result USCIS wields a tremendous amount of power with regard to how federal immigration law is practically implemented. Therefore, to keep USCIS policy in line with that of the administration it makes sense to politically appoint the head of that agency.

There are career civil servants who work for USCIS as the agency must remain functional during periods in which a director has yet to be confirmed by the US Senate. Career officers are appointed largely based upon merit and politics likely does not factor into their advancement within the agency.

Tags: AILA, US Immigration, US Immigration Policy, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, USCIS Director
Posted in General Legal Information, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »

Many people get married in Thailand each year. As a result, one of the most common questions received from clients and potential clients involves foreign recognition of a Thai marriage.  Thailand is not a common law system and therefore, the idea of common law marriage is not a concept upheld by courts in the Kingdom of Thailand. That being said, even though Thailand is a civil law system “customary or religious” marriages are still quite commonplace. This is probably due to the fact that marriage registration can be somewhat difficult, particularly for those who have never dealt with the Thai legal system and bureaucracy in the past.

In Thailand, marriages are registered at the local Amphur office. This office is kind of a combination of continual census taker and what in the American system is called a “court clerk.” The Amphur keeps records of the vital statistics of those living within that office’s jurisdiction. Therefore, the Amphur will record name changes, marriages, births, and deaths in Thailand. It is possible for two non-Thais to marry in Thailand. That being said, each office has their own internal protocol. Therefore, it may be wise to contact an attorney in order to assist with the Thai marriage registration process.

Once a Thai marriage is registered the question is: will the United States of America recognize the union. Put simply, yes. According to the website of the US Embassy Thailand, in cases involving marriages legalized in the Kingdom, “the United States does recognize the validity of such a marriage.” This is a critical question particularly in the context of USA visas. If a couple’s marriage is not recognized by the United States, then a visa application for a CR1 visa or a K3 marriage visa would likely be rejected because the couple does not meet the marriage requirement for visa issuance. Also, a couple who wishes to apply for a k1 fiance visa may create a situation where the application gets rejected because the couple got married in Thailand thinking it would not be recognized in the USA.  In that scenario, USCIS would be compelled to reject the application because the requirement is “intent to marry,” and not actual marriage.

One interesting side note regarding Thai marriage registration deals with prenuptial agreements. In Thailand, the prenuptial agreement is actually registered with the marriage and in a way is incorporated into the marital agreement at the time of registration at the Amphur. For more on this issue please see Thai prenuptial agreement

To sum up, marriages properly executed in Thailand will be viewed as valid in the United States and for purposes of obtaining a US visa or other Immigration benefits. Therefore, marriage in Thailand is not something that should be taken lightly. When thinking of entering into a marriage in Thailand keep in mind that the marriage will be treated just the same as if it had been conducted in the United States.

Tags: K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa Thailand, marriage in Thailand, Register a Thai marriage, Thai Marriage, Thailand Marriage Registration, US Visa Thailand
Posted in General Legal Information, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Thailand, Thai Family Law, Thailand Marriage Registration, US Visa Thailand | 23 Comments »