Integrity Legal

This author has frequently discussed the myriad problems that Immigrants can face when dealing with an unlicensed American immigration “agent” or “specialist“. American law and Federal Regulations are clear regarding the issue of who is allowed to provide legal services in matters arising before the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) specifically; or any of the other agencies which are overseen by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Only licensed attorneys from the United States of America are able to provide consultations about US Immigration matters for a fee. Furthermore, only an attorney licensed by the Highest Court of least one US State, Commonwealth, or outlying territory is allowed charge fees to represent clients before DHS, including USCIS.

Unfortunately, there are some unauthorized organizations throughout the world claiming to be able to provide advice and assistance in American Immigration matters. The internet has proven to be a great tool for those wishing to research matters pertaining to United States Immigration. Meanwhile, it has also provided a platform for some operations which claim legal expertise without appropriate training or licensure. Such individuals and entities ought to be avoided at all costs since information transmitted to such individuals and entities may not be protected by the usual legal protections accorded to communications conveyed between an American attorney and their client. Furthermore, one who is not legally trained or not licensed to provide legal services in a given jurisdiction or about a particular subject cannot provide effective counsel nor lawful confidentiality to those seeking their assistance. This can be especially important to those conveying sensitive information about a case pending before an immigration tribunal, agency, US Embassy, or US Consulate abroad. Those engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in the aforementioned manner are thereby placing their own interests, as well as those of their unsuspecting “clients’”, in jeopardy.

When comparing the costs of legal service it is important to understand the pivotal role of licensure when making a decision to retain counsel. No licensed legal professional is likely to have a problem with prospective clients shopping for a reasonably priced service with a professional that they feel comfortable dealing with. In general, licensed American attorneys find that competition with other professionals makes for a healthy and prosperous business environment, but to compare the services of a licensed American immigration attorney with one who is not licensed to practice law creates a false comparison as US law is clear that those without licensure cannot provide the services which they claim they can provide in an immigration context. In short: one cannot compare a legal service with an illegal service from a price standpoint as an illegal service provider simply cannot provide such services at any price.

For further information please see: licensed lawyer. To learn more about US Immigration from Southeast Asia please see: US Immigration Law Thailand.

Tags: American Attorney, American Immigration, American Immigration law, American law, American Lawyer, American Visa, immigration specialist, licensed lawyer, Unauthorized practice of law, unlicensed practice of law, US attorney, US Immigration, US Immigration Law, US Immigration Law Thailand, US Immigration Lawyer, US Law, US lawyer, US Visa, visa agent
Posted in American Institute Taiwan, CR1 Visa, Department of Homeland Security, E1 visa, E2 Visa, EB5 Visa, F1 Visa Thailand, Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, I-601 Waiver, IR1 Visa, J1 visa, J1 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K2 Visa, K2 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, L1 Visa, lgbt immigration, National Visa Center, same sex visa, Thailand Business, US Citizenship, US Consulate ChengDu, US Consulate Chennai, US Consulate Chiang Mai, US Consulate Guangzhou, US Consulate HCMC, US Consulate Hyderabad, US Consulate Kolkata, US Consulate Mumbai, US Consulate Shanghai, US Consulate Shenyang, US Consulate Singapore, US Consulate Wuhan, US Emassy Mongolia, US Embassy Australia, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Bangladesh, US Embassy Beijing, 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 Jakarta, US Embassy Japan, US Embassy Kathmandu, US Embassy Kiribati, US Embassy Kuala Lumpur, 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 Papua New Guinea, US Embassy Philippines, US Embassy Phnom Phen, US Embassy Port Moresby, US Embassy Rangoon, 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 Tuvalu, US Embassy Vietnam, US Embassy Yangon, US State Department, US Tourist Visa, US Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCBP, USCIS, USICE, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

Those who read this blog frequently would likely notice that we sometimes quote text, either directly or indirectly, from American “rules, proposed rules, and notices of Federal agencies and organizations, as well as executive orders and other presidential documents“. Regulations in the United States are often noted in the Federal Register. In the past, the public service of keeping the public informed about pending regulations and policies was provided in print form. As the world becomes increasingly digital, more and more informational resources are being provided on virtual platforms. It would appear that this is also true for the Federal Register as the following quote from an announcement issued by the Government Printing Office would indicate:

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO) and the National Archives’ Office of the Federal Register (OFR) launch the Federal Register 2.0 prototype, a user-friendly online version of the Federal Register. This daily journal of government has provided the public with access to government information and federal regulations for the past 75 years. Federal Register 2.0 features a new layout that organizes the content by topics similar to a newspaper Web site. The site displays individual sections for Money, Environment, World, Science and Technology, Business and Industry, and Health and Public Welfare. The Web site has improved search and navigation tools to guide readers to the most popular topics and relevant documents. Users can submit comments and stay connected through social media.

Although this news is quite interesting and evidences a strong commitment on the part the American government to keep the public informed about those regulatory matters which may have an impact upon the lives of US Citizens and/or lawful permanent residents, it should also be noted that the Federal Register has a distinguished history of providing information to the public in print form. To quote the aforementioned publication further:

The first copy of the Federal Register came off GPO presses on March 14, 1936. GPO partners with OFR to provide the information in the Federal Register to the American people in both print and electronic form. GPO coordinated the development aspects of the new Web site in collaboration with OFR. GPO’s Federal Digital System (FDsys), a content management system and preservation repository, feeds content into Federal Register 2.0 and acts as the holder of the official content and archived information.

“Federal Register 2.0 is a landmark achievement for the National Archives, OFR and GPO,” said Public Printer Bob Tapella. “This is an example of how the legislative branch and executive branch work together to make government information available and easily accessible for the American people. For 75 years, GPO has never missed a print deadline for the Federal Register and now we look forward to working with OFR to support Federal Register 2.0.”

“Federal Register 2.0 is an advance in the open government initiative of the Obama administration by being able to make the  Federal Register readily available and easily understood,” said Director of the Federal Register Ray Mosley. The GPO is the federal government’s primary centralized resource for gathering, cataloging, producing, providing, authenticating, and preserving published U.S. government information in all its forms. GPO is responsible for the production and distribution of information products and services for all three branches of the federal government.

In the information age, knowledge truly equates to power. Therefore, it is admirable that the government took the initiative in attempting to provide a user friendly platform for those seeking information about pending, as well as enacted, Federal rules. Although there are some who believe that the Federal Register should remain exclusively in print form, it seems prudent and far-thinking for the government to provide online services to Americans as well as other interested parties. With that in mind, there are those who feel that there could be a possible “information overload” scenario in which Americans, inundated by a constant barrage of news and media, will not be receptive to initiatives such as this. It is this author’s opinion that increasing information for public consumption will generally have a net positive impact upon the American population as a whole.

Tags: American law, American legislation, Federal Register, Federal Register 2.0, Federal Register online, Government Printing Office, GPO, the government printing office
Posted in General Legal Information, Legal Opinion, News | No Comments »