Integrity Legal

The issue of LGBT Immigration rights for the loved ones of American citizens is an often discussed topic on this blog. This is mostly due to the fact that this issue is a pressing concern for many bi-national families and it is also an interesting and important legal issue that will likely be resolved by the Federal judicial branch of the United States of America. The provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act currently bar family visa applications for LGBT couples, even those lawfully married in a US jurisdiction which recognizes same sex marriage. There are other areas of American immigration law which touch upon this important issue. The following quote comes from Mr. Matthew J. Bajko writing on the Bay Area Reporter website:

LGBT immigrants in the United States face many hurdles to seeing their applications for asylum be granted. The first of which is a ticking clock.

Under U.S. immigration law, a person seeking asylum has one year from the first day they step foot on American soil to file their paperwork. The deadline presents quite an obstacle for many LGBT people, who either are unaware of the time limit or often have yet to grapple with or come to terms with their own sexual orientation or gender identity.

Even if an asylum seeker does get their paperwork in on time, then they face another series of challenges. Foremost is proving that they are indeed gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender, and if sent back to their home country, that they are likely to face persecution for being an LGBT person.

Many lack the resources to hire an immigration lawyer to represent and guide them through the process. And language barriers can further complicate matters.

Although this issue is somewhat novel in an immigration context, there are many who feel that LGBT issues will be at the forefront of certain aspects of the overall debate on Comprehensive Immigration Reform as current restrictions imposed by the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) have a tremendously negative impact upon bi-national same sex couples.  This author is of the opinion that the immigration restrictions imposed by DOMA are unconstitutional because they violate the doctrine of States’ Rights which is embodied in the Constitution of the United States. It would appear, that some US Courts are currently in agreement with this assertion although the issue is likely to remain unresolved until the matter is brought to appeal and the question of Federal and interstate recognition of same sex unions is answered.

In the context of asylum, the Constitutionality of DOMA and issues surrounding immigration benefits for the partners of American Citizens are less prevalent. As the aforementioned publication went on to note:

But advocates and lawyers who handle immigration cases say the issue will only grow as more people around the world come out and flee anti-gay persecution.

“There is a lot of work out there,” said Ann Lewis, an attorney in the New York office of Ropes and Gray, which was the recipient of the 2010 Safe Haven Award from Immigration Equality for its pro bono work assisting LGBT asylum seekers.

In 2009 the firm won asylum for 10 clients referred to it by Immigration Equality, more than any other law firm in the country. The asylum seekers included a lesbian from India; a gay HIV-positive Jamaican and his son; a gay HIV-positive Ghanaian; a gay Ukrainian; and a gay man from the Dominican Republic.

Lewis told the Bay Area Reporter that a key first step in a successful asylum case is to meet the one-year filing deadline. By doing so the process is friendlier than fighting a deportation, she said, and moves rather quickly. Most applicants will wait up to five weeks to be interviewed by immigration officials, and most receive an answer within two weeks, said Lewis.

“People should be aware if you file an affirmative application you are not in immigration proceedings,” said Lewis. “It is a lot less scary and adversarial than federal removal proceedings.”

This is a significant issue that warrants further explanation. Expedited removal or general removal proceedings can be a daunting experience for foreign nationals in the United States. These types of adjudications differ substantially from asylum proceedings and should not be viewed as the same type of adjudication. The article went on:

Just as important is for the asylum seeker to be as truthful as possible during their interview about the anti-gay treatment they have faced. At times, Lewis acknowledged, it is not easy for an LGBT person to recall past ill-treatment or to understand what sorts of experiences would apply to their asylum case.

“It is very painful. To make a case like this it is difficult; these people often have been closeted since early adolescence or learned to keep their feelings to themselves,” said Lewis. “We were just talking about a specific case I am working on where the young man didn’t actually think he suffered past persecution. But he had been sexually abused because he was effeminate.”

Truth is a critical factor in any immigration proceeding. Although the facts surrounding an asylum claim can be difficult for some individuals to relive as persecution of LGBT communities can be truly terrifying in some locales. That said, it is admirable and reassuring to see American attorneys, such as Ann Lewis mentioned above, taking the initiative to pursue US LGBT immigration benefits on behalf of others in an effort to provide assistance to those seeking asylum and forestall possible further persecution by governments, individuals, communities, and regimes abroad.

For further related information please see: LGBT Immigration or US Visa Thailand.

Tags: American LGBT Asylum, Ann Lewis, Bay Area Reporter, bi-national couple, Bisexual Immigration Rights, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Gay Immigration Rights, Lesbian Immigration Rights, LGBT asylum, lgbt immigration, Matthew J. Bajko, same sex visa, Transgender Immigration Rights, US LGBT Asylum, US same sex visa
Posted in lgbt immigration, same sex visa | No Comments »

This blog frequently discusses topics related to LGBT rights and United States Immigration. At the time of this writing, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) creates a legal bar upon immigration rights for same sex couples as opposed to different-sex couples who may receive US Immigration benefits based upon a marital relations ship (US Marriage Visa) or an intended marital union in the United States (Fiance Visa). In recent months, there have been many developments which are leading many to believe that a repeal of DOMA will likely come soon. In a recent posting on the Immigration Equality blog that author noted a recent California Court decision which upheld same sex couples’ right to marry in the State of California:

In a recent Massachusetts Federal Court decision a Judge held that the Federal government’s failure to recognize a duly formalized same sex marriage in Massachusetts was unconstitutional. However, there will not likely be any practical effect of this decision in the near term as that Judge placed a stay on his Judgment pending appeal. As the above quote noted, there will likely be a stay on this decision, at least for immigration purposes, until a higher court decides the outcome of the case on appeal. That said, the following is quoted from a recent press release from UPI:

“SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 6 (UPI) — Same-sex marriage backers filed court motions Friday urging a judge to allow such marriages in California immediately while his ruling in the case is appealed.

U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker has said he would issue a ruling on the matter after he reviews written arguments submitted by proponents and opponents of same-sex marriage, the Los Angeles Times reported.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown submitted arguments urging the judge to authorize same-sex marriages during the appeal process. Schwarzenegger noted the state performed about 18,000 same-sex marriages before the practice was banned with the November 2008 voter approval of Proposition 8.

“Government officials can resume issuing such licenses without administrative delay or difficulty,” the governor’s office said in its submission to the court.

Brown, the Democratic nominee for governor in the November election, argued in writing there is “the potential for limited administrative burdens should future marriages of same-sex couples be later declared invalid” but he said “these potential burdens are outweighed” by the constitutional rights Walker spoke of in his ruling that Proposition 8 violated the U.S. Constitution.

Lawyers for Proposition 8 backers argued same-sex marriages performed in California before the case is heard by the U.S. Supreme Court would be at risk of instability.”

Although the recent decision may not have an immediate direct impact on LGBT Immigration rights, if the Judge grants same sex couples the right to marry in California while the case is pending appeal it would provide a large number of couples with an opportunity to solemnize a marital relationship.

How this issue will ultimately be resolved remains to be seen. However, this issue is quickly becoming a major focal point for interpretation of legal doctrines such as Federalism, States’ Rights, and Substantive Due Process. Ultimately, all of the issues associated with same sex marriage and Same Sex Visa Benefits may need to be adjudicated by the United States Supreme Court.

Tags: California Court LGBT Rights, California Court Proposition 8, Defense of Marriage Act, gay immigration, gay visa, LGBT, lgbt immigration, LGBT Rights, lgbt visa, Prop 8, Prop 8 California, Proposition 8, same sex fiance visa, Same Sex K1 visa, Same Sex K3 Visa, Same Sex Marriage, same sex marriage visa, same sex us visa, same sex visa
Posted in lgbt immigration, same sex visa | No Comments »

In recent postings on this blog this author has discussed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and the ongoing US Court proceedings that are aimed at overturning this legislation in order to accord same-sex bi-national couples with privileges equal to their different-sex counterparts. Recently, a Court in Massachusetts found that the provisions of DOMA run contrary to the United States Constitution. As a result, this decision could greatly modify the framework by which Immigration petitions are adjudicated. Apparently, the Court wishes to delay radical modification of US Immigration law and procedure until such time as all issues can be addressed in an appellate proceeding. It would appear that many same-sex bi-national couples are waiting with baited breathe to see the practical implications of the recent Court decision overturning certain aspects of DOMA. However, there is some delay as the Immigration Equality blog explains.  To quote directly from the Immigration Equality blog as of July 27, 2010:

Many of you have had questions about the status of the DOMA case. Just like you, we are waiting for the court to issue an order which should be happening any day now. Once the order is issued, there will be an automatic 14 day stay. We are almost certain that during that 14 day period, the government will file an appeal and we are almost certain that the stay will remain in effect during the course of the appeal. But we will keep you updated as soon as we learn of any further developments.

Those reading this post are probably curious about the practical ramifications of the “stay” of this decision. The “stay” means that the current mechanism for adjudicating US Immigration petitions will remain in place, at least for now. Therefore, those Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents with a same sex loved one living abroad will still be unable to petition and apply for same sex family visa benefits pursuant to the provisions of DOMA. Many feel, and this author concurs, that the American appellate courts, including the United States Supreme Court, are likely to find DOMA unconstitutional pursuant to American legal doctrines such as “Full Faith and Credit” and “States’ Rights“. However, as the issue remains unresolved it is unwise for anyone to make any irrevocable decisions regarding US LGBT Immigration until a final judgment is handed down without reservation.

It should be noted that judicial intervention is not the only method available for those wishing to see same sex visa benefits accorded in the same manner for those in a same sex marriage or relationship as those in a different sex marriage or relationship. The Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) would provide a statutory framework whereby same sex “permanent partners” could be granted the same Immigration benefits as those in a different-sex marriage or relationship. Although UAFA-like legislation has seen unfailing support from legislators such as Jerry Nadler, many feel that the issue of LGBT Immigration rights will ultimately be adjudicated by the US Courts.

Tags: Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, Federalism, Full Faith and Credit, Gay K1 visa, gay us visa, lgbt immigration, LGBT K1 visa, LGBT US Visa, Same Sex K1 visa, Same Sex Marriage, same sex visa, States' Rights, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, US Constitution, US Court DOMA, US LGBT Immigration
Posted in lgbt immigration, same sex visa | No Comments »

This blog routinely posts information regarding LGBT Immigration and announcements regarding the campaign for equal immigration rights for same-sex bi-national couples. In a recent blog posting on the Stonewall Democrats blog, it was announced that members of the United States House of Representatives are continuing to call for equal immigration rights for same-sex as well as different-sex couples. To quote directly from the blog:

Supporters of immigration and LGBT rights are renewing their calls on Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform legislation this year that includes protections for bi-national same-sex couples.  At a press conference Thursday on Capitol Hill, several U.S. House members emphasized the importance of passing legislation to make the nation’s immigration laws more fair and enable LGBT Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States.  The strengthened call for passing comprehensive immigration reform comes as limited time remains in the legislative calendar for this Congress, raising questions about whether lawmakers will be able to address major legislation such as immigration reform this year.  Same-sex partners currently have no recourse under any portion of family law in the U.S. immigration code. The policy threatens to keep an estimated 36,000 bi-national same-sex couples from remaining together in the United States.  Among those who spoke in favor of passing immigration reform inclusive of this language is Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who sponsors the Uniting American Families Act, a standalone bill that would address the situation for LGBT families.  Nadler said passing immigration reform that includes protections for the LGBT community is “absolutely essential.”  “In particular, binational LGBT couples must be granted the right to sponsor their permanent partners for immigration, just as other committed and straight married couples can,” he said. Rep. Mike Honda (D-Calif.), the sponsor of another UAFA-inclusive bill known as the Reuniting Familes Act, also addressed the importance of passing such legislation.  Honda said “ending discrimination” against bi-national same-sex couples is “in line with American values and is good for our economy.”

Frequent readers of the blog will recall the the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) is considered to be a key piece of legislation for those Americans seeking immigration benefits for their same sex foreign partner.

It should be noted that many States in the USA have either promulgated legislation legalizing same sex marriage or creating civil unions for same sex partners. However, notwithstanding the fact that same sex marriages may be solemnized and recognized by a State, the Federal government, based upon legislation such as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), refuses to recognize these marriages for purposes of awarding immigration benefits. Therefore, as of the time of this writing, there is no “Same Sex Visa” accorded to LGBT bi-national couples. However, there are currently cases pending in the US Courts which may overturn this practice as many feel that this type of discrimination violates States’ Rights as well as the Equal Protection Clause of the US Constitution. However, the ultimate adjudication of these issues may have to be addressed by the United States Supreme Court if legislation is not promulgated which would grant equal immigration benefits to the same sex partner of a US Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident.

For further details about US visas for different-sex couples please see: K1 visa.

Tags: Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, Gay Immigration Rights, Gay K1 visa, Gay Rights, Gay Visa Rights, lgbt immigration, LGBT K1 visa, lgbt visa, Re-Uniting American Families Act, Same Sex K1 visa, Same Sex Marriage, same sex visa, Stonewall Democrats blog, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, US Courts, US Immigration, US Visa
Posted in K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, lgbt immigration, same sex visa | No Comments »

This blog frequently discusses issues that are relevant to those who are in same-sex or LGBT relationships seeking United States immigration benefits for their loved ones overseas. In a posting on the blog Immigration Equality the recently handed down decision in a Massachusetts Court case challenging the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was discussed. The following is a direct quote from the July 9th posting:

Yesterday a Massachusetts federal district court judge sided with the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders and with the state of Massachusetts and found that it is unconstitutional for the U.S. federal government to refuse to recognize same sex marriages that are validly entered into in the couple’s state. This is a huge victory and we should all take a moment to celebrate! But, this battle is far from over.

Apparently, this ruling will not have a practical impact in the short term as the Court opted to “stay” the decision until the appeal process is exhausted.   The report went on to analyze the possible outcome should the United States Judicial Branch ultimately find that DOMA is unconstitutional:

If, eventually, the Supreme Court upholds the ruling that DOMA is unconstitutional, same sex couples that are validly married, would be able to receive federal benefits, including immigration, based on their marriage. Basically, this would mean that binational couples who live in the handful of states that allow same sex marriage could get immigration benefits, and couples who live in states with mini-DOMAs could not.

Many feel that the main issue in this case is that of States’ Rights. Presently, the United States government does not recognize the legality of a same sex marriage even where such a marriage was validly solemnized pursuant to the laws of a sovereign US state. This tension between the Federal and State power is often an issue in matters involving conflicting state and federal regulations. That said, where such conflict has an adverse impact upon individual rights, equal protection under the law, substantive due process, and Federal benefits, then the issue may be ripe for judicial review.

As the Immigration Equality blog accurately noted, this decision does not mark the end of the pursuit for those seeking equal US immigration rights as, at the time of this writing, those seeking a US family visa based upon an LGBT relationship (sometimes referred to as a same sex visa) still cannot obtain visa benefits notwithstanding the recently promulgated decision.

Although a judicially created solution for same sex couples may not be available for a relatively long period of time, the passage of legislation similar to the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) either within the provisions of a Comprehensive Immigration Reform Bill or as stand alone legislation could create a new family based visa category for “Permanent Partners” of US Citizens or Lawful Permanent Residents.

For those interested in learning more about US Immigration issues for same sex couples in Thai please see: LGBT immigration.

Tags: Bisexual Visa, CIR, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, gay visa, Lesbian Visa, lgbt immigration, lgbt visa, same sex us immigration, same sex us visa, same sex visa, Transgendered Visa, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, us immigration gay couple, us immigration lesbian couple, us visa gay couple, us visa lesbian couple, us visa same sex couple, us visa transgendered
Posted in lgbt immigration, same sex visa | No Comments »

A frequently discussed topic on this blog is that of LGBT immigration rights. Recently the United States Department of State made an announcement about new guidelines that will be implemented with regard to those seeking corrected passports and Consular Reports of Birth Abroad to reflect gender change. The following is a direct quote from the announcement:

The U.S. Department of State is pleased to use the occasion of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Pride Month to announce its new policy guidelines regarding gender change in passports and Consular Reports of Birth Abroad. Beginning June 10, when a passport applicant presents a certification from an attending medical physician that the applicant has undergone appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition, the passport will reflect the new gender. The guidelines include detailed information about what information the certification must include. It is also possible to obtain a limited-validity passport if the physician’s statement shows the applicant is in the process of gender transition. No additional medical records are required. Sexual reassignment surgery is no longer a prerequisite for passport issuance. A Consular Report of Birth Abroad can also be amended with the new gender. As with all passport applicants, passport issuing officers at embassies and consulates abroad and domestic passport agencies and centers will only ask appropriate questions to obtain information necessary to determine citizenship and identity.

The new policy and procedures are based on standards and recommendations of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), recognized by the American Medical Association as the authority in this field.

Although this announcement marks a watershed moment for transgender rights, there are many who feel that a more pressing issue is that of US visa benefits for those couples in a bona fide LGBT relationship. At present, statutes such as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) preclude Immigration benefits for bi-national same sex couples. Meanwhile, different sex couples enjoy immigration benefits notwithstanding the fact that same sex couples may have been married under exactly the same conditions as their different sex counterparts. Many feel that this disparity is unconstitutional and illegal. However, this assertion has yet to be fully analyzed by US Courts.

There are some American legislators who are attempting to deal with this perceived inequality through passage of legislation such as the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA). Some hope that so-called Comprehensive Immigration Reform will include some provision for same sex bi-national couples hoping to obtain same sex visa benefits.

Tags: consular report of birth abroad, CRBA, lgbt immigration, Same Sex Marriage, same sex visa, Transgender Passport, us passport, US Visa
Posted in lgbt immigration, same sex visa | No Comments »

A frequent topic on this blog is same sex marriage and the intersection of that issue with US Immigration law. Currently, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) effectively prevents Federal recognition of Same Sex Marriages when adjudicating US Immigration petitions. Therefore, different sex couples who are validly married in a jurisdiction in the United States can petition for Immigration benefits if one of the partners is foreign national. This is not the case for same sex couples as same sex partners are currently barred from obtaining US Immigration benefits based upon a bona fide same sex marriage. This issue is being widely discussed in US Immigration circles. An example of this discussion can be found in the most recent edition of The Voice, a publication promulgated by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). The following is an excerpt from a recent article discussing LGBT immigration issues:

“At present, gay and lesbian marriages are recognized in 10 countries. The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, and Sweden recognize marriage equality uniformly throughout their territories.5 Same-sex marriages
also are recognized in some parts of Argentina and Mexico.6 However, DOMA closes the door to same-sex marriage recognition under any federal law, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). So for those couples who have united legally in one of the many countries stated above, DOMA would keep federal immigration laws from legally recognizing those unions upon their immigration to the United States.

Many courts have found that the language of DOMA is clear and unambiguous. But can DOMA be struck down? In addition to suits filed in Massachusetts,8 at least one other high-profile case in California, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, D.Ct.N.D.Cal. case 3:2009cv02292 (filed May 22, 2009), is currently challenging the constitutionality of discrimination against same-sex marriages more generally. If such a case were successful, it might lead courts to strike down DOMA and all anti-gay state marriage amendments, presumably resulting in the clear recognition of all bona fide same sex marriages in the United States.”

Although there are many legal obstacles in the path of equal Immigration rights for same sex couples, there may be a light at the end of the tunnel as a repeal of DOMA would create an opening that could be exploited by advocates for same ex immigration. To quote the aforementioned article:

“In a world without DOMA, U.S. immigration law would clearly recognize the same-sex marriage of a couple residing in a U.S. state that recognizes the marriage. It is also highly likely that the marriages would be recognized for residents of other states with no laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.”

Although repeal of DOMA may not be a perfect legal solution from an Immigration standpoint, a repeal of DOMA in conjunction with the adoption of a statute such as the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) would likely be an optimal solution to the current legal impasse.

For more information please see: Same Sex Visa.

Tags: AILA, American Visa, American Visa Same Sex Couple, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, lgbt immigration, Same Sex Marriage, same sex us visa, same sex visa, The Voice, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, US Immigration, US Immigration Law, Us Visa Same Sex Partner
Posted in lgbt immigration, same sex visa, US Visa and Immigration | No Comments »

This blog routinely discusses issues surrounding United States Immigration Law. However, this author must admit that we often fail to mention the human side of the Immigration and visa process. At the time of this writing the United States appears to be on the verge of making radical changes to the makeup of American Immigration law. This will likely occur through Comprehensive Immigration Reform of the US Immigration and Nationality Act and other pertinent legislation. The reasons for seeking reform vary depending upon the individual or organization. That said, the following excerpt from a news story posted on Yahoo.com poignantly elucidates the human aspect of the issues surrounding Comprehensive Immigration Reform (also known as CIR):

Seven-year-old Daisy Cuevas, thrilled to see herself on television with U.S. First Lady Michelle Obama, didn’t quite understand the predicament in which she had innocently placed her undocumented Peruvian parents. “She laughed, she jumped up and down. She was excited” after the encounter at Daisy’s suburban Washington, D.C., elementary school, the girl’s maternal grandfather, Genaro Juica, told The Associated Press. The TV appearance made the pigtailed second grader a voice of the estimated 12 million immigrants living in the United States illegally — and a source of pride for Peru’s president, who visits Washington on Tuesday. “My mom says that Barack Obama is taking away everybody that doesn’t have papers,” Daisy told the U.S. first lady on May 19 at the New Hampshire Estates Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland. “Well, that’s something that we have to work on, right, to make sure that people can be here with the right kind of papers,” Michelle Obama replied. “But my mom doesn’t have papers,” said Daisy, a U.S. citizen by virtue of her birth. The color immediately drained from her mother’s face. She ran crying to call her parents in Lima, then went into hiding, fearful of being deported. These are tense times for people like Daisy’s mother, a maid who arrived in the United States with her carpenter husband when she was two months pregnant with Daisy. Daisy’s parents are fearful of U.S. anti-immigrant sentiment, which for many Latin Americans is epitomized by an Arizona law taking effect in July that gives police the right to demand ID papers of anyone suspected of being in the country illegally. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has said it is not pursuing Daisy’s parents. Immigration investigations, it said in a statement, “are based on making sure the law is followed and not on a question-and-answer discussion in a classroom.” Nonetheless, Daisy’s mother asked the AP after the May 19 incident not to name her or her husband.

Many of those hoping for a “path to citizenship” for undocumented aliens in America feel that rectification of US Immigration policy can only be effected through reforming the Immigration laws. There are others who feel that the recently proposed CIR legislation does not go far enough in rectifying the inequities that currently exist under American Immigration law. A clarion call for further reform is especially noticeable from the LGBT immigration movement.

Hopefully, we will see Immigration reform soon, but in the meantime we may be able to learn something from this incident as it would appear that even children can see the “Equity Gap” that currently seems to exist in the realm of United States Immigration.

Tags: American Immigration, American Immigration law, American Visa, CIR, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Daisy Cuevas, Department of Homeland Security, Equity Gap, lgbt immigration, Michelle Obama, US Department of Homeland Security, US Immigration, US Immigration Law, US Visa
Posted in Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Department of Homeland Security, General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, lgbt immigration, News | No Comments »

For those who read this blog on a regular basis a common theme is that of LGBT immigration rights. US Immigration law, under current regulations including the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), dictates that Same-Sex Bi-National Couples are legally precluded from receiving US Immigration benefits based upon a legally solemnized same sex marriage, civil partnership, or civil union. That said, in recent years, Congressional Representatives such as Jerry Nadler have introduced legislation, often referred to as the Uniting American Families Act or simply UAFA, that would provide a means of applying for Immigration benefits for same-sex “permanent partners.” In previous blog posts, this author has discussed Comprehensive Immigration Reform and how changes in American Immigration law may, or may not, change the current rules in order to allow bi-national same sex partners to apply for family immigration benefits. In a previous blog post, we discussed recently proposed Comprehensive Immigration Reform legislation introduced by Illinois Representative Luis Gutierrez and how said draft legislation did not include provisions for same sex immigration benefits. On that note, the following was posted on the WashingtonBlade.com:

An influential pro-immigrant U.S. House member has endorsed including protections for LGBT bi-national couples as part of comprehensive immigration reform legislation. In a statement Thursday, Rep. Luiz Gutierrez (D-Ill.) said inclusion of language allowing LGBT Americans to sponsor foreign partners for residency in the United States is an important part of a broader reform bill. “Our efforts to fix our broken immigration system and protect basic civil rights are not truly comprehensive if we exclude same-sex couples,” he said. Standalone legislation that would enable an estimated 36,000 bi-national same-sex couples to stay together in the United States is known as the Uniting American Families Act. Proponents of the legislation have been seeking inclusion of UAFA as part of upcoming comprehensive immigration reform legislation in Congress. Gutierrez is schueduled to announce officially his support for inclusion of UAFA on Monday at a press conference in Chicago, Ill. Joining him at the conference will be Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) and gay Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.), who also support inclusion of LGBT couples in immigration reform. Late last year, Gutierrez introduced his own version of comprehensive immigration reform legislation that was seen an alternative to the working bill expected later. However, even though Gutierrez is a co-sponsor of UAFA, the legislation didn’t include UAFA-like language. According to the statement from Gutierrez’ office, the lawmaker’s recent announcement means he’s “recommitting himself” to inclusion of specific UAFA-like language as part of comprehensive reform…

In the previous post in which this proposed Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) legislation was discussed this author found it unfortunate that LGBT Immigration issues were not mentioned in the provisions of the draft legislation. That said, this author is happy to see that the issue of Same-Sex and LGBT Immigration rights is being discussed within the context of CIR. Should it come to pass, Comprehensive Immigration Reform will likely represent one of the most important changes to Federal Immigration law in, at least, the past 25 years. With this in mind, the fact that LGBT Immigration is currently being discussed within the context of CIR at least hints at the possibility that US Immigration law will be modified in order to grant benefits to those couples who, at the time of this writing, cannot be re-united in the United States in the same manner as so-called “different-sex” couples.

For further related information please see: US Visa Thailand, K1 visa, same sex visa or same sex marriage.

Tags: CIR, Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Defense of Marriage Act, different-sex Immigration, different-sex marriage, DOMA, Jerry Nadler, K1 Visa, lgbt immigration, lgbt visa, Same Sex Marriage, same sex visa, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, US Immigration Law, US Visa Thailand
Posted in Comprehensive Immigration Reform, K1 Visa, lgbt immigration, News, same sex visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand | No Comments »

The issue of Comprehensive Immigration Reform seems to be more hotly debated as the mid-term Congressional elections in the United States approach. Recently, President Barack Obama was quoted as saying:

What has become increasingly clear is that we can no longer wait to fix our broken immigration system, which Democrats and Republicans alike agree doesn’t work. It’s unacceptable to have 11 million people in the United States who are living here illegally and outside of the system. I have repeatedly said that there are some essential components that must be in immigration legislation. It must call for stronger border security measures, tougher penalties for employers who hire illegal immigrants and clearer rules for controlling future immigration. And it must require those who are here illegally to get right with the law, pay penalties and taxes, learn English, pass criminal background checks and admit responsibility before they are allowed to get in line and eventually earn citizenship. The outline presented today includes many of these elements. The next critical step is to iron out the details of a bill. We welcome that discussion, and my Administration will play an active role in engaging partners on both sides of the aisle to work toward a bipartisan solution that is based on the fundamental concept of accountability that the American people expect and deserve.

Many argue that the United States Immigration system needs to be modified as it is proving to be too inflexible when it comes to dealing with some of the important immigration problems of the day. A case in point is the debate on Same Sex US Immigration benefits for bi-national couples. At present, same-sex bi-national couples cannot receive the same family immigration benefits as different sex couples due to provisions in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). In short these couples cannot receive a same sex marriage visa. Many hope that by placing specific legislative language akin to the provisions of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) into the Comprehensive Immigration bill this policy of providing disproportionate benefits will come to an end.

Overall, the current immigration system has improved for those seeking immediate relative immigration benefits (IR1, CR1, IR2, etc). For example, the  National Visa Center has begun administratively closing K3 Visa applications as the need for such expedited travel documents is felt to be no longer necessary for those seeking immigrant benefits since USCIS no longer has a high backlog for such petitions. The K1 visa is still processing in the same manner as it has in the past. However, some of the preference petition categories are still processing quite slowly. Also, this brief assessment does not look at employment based immigration issues associated with visa categories such as the L1 visa and the E2 visa nor does it begin to tackle to issue of undocumented workers and immigrants in the USA.

For further information on this issue please see: Fiance Visa Thailand.

Tags: Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Defense of Marriage Act, DOMA, Fiance Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K3 Visa, lgbt immigration, LGBT US Immigration, LGBT US Visa, lgbt visa, Same Sex CR1 Visa, Same Sex IR1 Visa, Same Sex K1 visa, Same Sex K3 Visa, same sex visa, uafa, Uniting American Families Act, US Visa, US Visa Thailand
Posted in CR1 Visa, Department of Homeland Security, Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, IR1 Visa, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K2 Visa, K2 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, lgbt immigration, National Visa Center, same sex visa, Upcoming Legislation, US Consulate Chiang Mai, US Consulate HCMC, US Consulate Singapore, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Cambodia, US Embassy Hanoi, US Embassy India, US Embassy Indonesia, US Embassy Jakarta, US Embassy Kathmandu, US Embassy Kuala Lumpur, US Embassy Malaysia, US Embassy Myanmar, US Embassy Nepal, US Embassy New Dehli, US Embassy Phnom Phen, US Embassy Rangoon, US Embassy Singapore, US Embassy Thailand, US Embassy Vietnam, US Embassy Yangon, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS | No Comments »