
Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Posts Tagged ‘US Immigration’
14th January 2010
Department of Homeland Security Suspends Removals to Haiti
Posted by : admin
Virtually all American news media outlets are reporting on the devastation and destruction brought on by the Earthquake in Haiti. We at Integrity Legal would like to take this opportunity to extend our heartfelt sympathies to all of those who have been adversely impacted by this tragedy. For those of Haitian descent or nationality currently living in the United States, the Earthquake has also had an impact upon Department of Homeland Security (DHS) policy. In a recent press release, the Deputy United States Press Secretary Matt Chandler made the following statement:
“Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Assistant Secretary John Morton today halted all removals to Haiti for the time being in response to the devastation caused by yesterday’s earthquake. ICE continues to closely monitor the situation.”
We at Integrity Legal would like to let the United States Department of Homeland Security as well as Secretary Napolitano know that we appreciate their compassion in this matter as the situation places that agency in a difficult position.
When an alien in the United States is removed, they are generally sent back to their country of origin. In the case of Haitians they are sent back to Haiti, but sending a deportee back to Haiti under the current circumstance would, at the very least, be considered by most to be a rather callous initiative. By suspending removals, DHS has shown that they can respond to a difficult situation in a decisive and compassionate manner.
Removal from the United States can occur as a result of deportation proceedings in United States Immigration Court or expedited removal can occur at a United States port of entry after the finding by a Customs and Border Protection Officer that the prospective entrant should be removed from the United States.
Depending upon the method of removal, the alien will be inadmissible to the United States for a statutorily prescribed period of time. However, there may be a remedy to the issue of inadmissibility either through use of an I-601 waiver or an I-212 application for advance permission to reenter the United States. Those who have previously been removed from the US may face even stiffer penalties for trying to reenter after removal if they do not seek a waiver or advance permission to reenter.
For those who have been previously removed from the United States and wish to seek reentry, it would probably be wise to contact a licensed US Immigration lawyer in order to obtain advice about how best to proceed in attempting to obtain US Immigration benefits.
22nd December 2009
AILA Praises Proposer of New Immigration Reform Bill
Posted by : admin
In a recent blog posting the former President of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA), Mr. Charles Kuck, praised Congressman Luis Gutierrez for proposing an Immigration Reform Bill in the United States House of Representatives. Currently, some members of AILA feel that the American Immigration system is highly flawed and, to quote Mr. Kuck’s blog posting:
“The results are tragically similar, children separated from their parents, husbands separated from their wives, businesses unable to secure their future because of a lack of talent and skilled employment, and an economy unable to nimbly shift from the 19th and 20th century into the 21st century. As a country, we can no longer tolerate what has become a human disaster.“
The human perspective of United States Immigration policy is an aspect that some lawmakers fail to consider, but one that they probably should not overlook because America is a nation founded by immigrants and it is our immigrant heritage that makes America a vibrant and innovative nation. The most disturbing facet of the current United States Immigration infrastructure is the fact that it does have a tendency to keep family members separated for, what can turn out to be, a substantially long period of time. For those couple who follow the proper immigration procedures it could still take longer than one year to re-unite a couple.
Of further importance is the need to rectify the US Immigration apparatus with regard to same-sex couples. Unfortunately, due to provisions in the Defense of Marriage Act, it is not possible for same-sex married couples to obtain US Immigration benefits based upon a lawfully executed marriage. There are advocates in the House of Representatives and Senate who wish to change this unfortunate state of affairs, but it seems that they have an uphill battle ahead of them.
Another critical aspect of US Immigration that is desperately in need of an overhaul is the area of employment based visas. Although America is only slowly coming out of “The Great Recession” and is still reluctant to allow more foreign workers into the American labor force, this is a necessity as foreign highly-skilled workers keep the US economy on the cutting edge of both innovation and technology. The United States does itself a disservice by prohibiting foreign skilled workers from entering the country. Hopefully Congressman Gutierrez will be able to get this much needed bill passed and usher in a modern era in US Immigration.
12th December 2009
Customs and Border Protection Says H1N1 Vaccine Not Necessary
Posted by : admin
After the tragedy of 9/11 many changes were made with regard to Homeland Security. Specifically, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created and many tasks previously undertaken by other agencies were brought under the jurisdiction of DHS. One example is the United States Customs Service which was reincorporated into the Department of Homeland Security as the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service. This agency is responsible for patrolling the borders and ports of entry to the United States of America. They are also responsible for screening those who enter the United States of America either on a US passport, US visa, or US visa waiver. CBP plays an integral part in the US Immigration process.
Prior to this publication, there has been a rumor circulating that those who wish to enter the United States of America must fist obtain a vaccination for the H1N1 influenza vaccination. As a matter of fact, this is not true. Apparently this rumor is unfounded. AILA has provided a quote from a statement from the Customs and Border Protection Service:
“[United States] Customs and Border Protection would like to address rumors regarding U.S. entry requirements and the H1N1 virus: Travelers do NOT need to present proof that they received the H1N1 flu vaccine in order to enter the United States. No such vaccination requirement exists. Travelers are encouraged to visit the Department of Health and Human Services Flu Web site for current information on seasonal flu prevention, and the “Know Before You Go” section under the Travel tab of the CBP Web site for helpful traveler tips.”
For those seeking entry to the United States a flu vaccination is not required at this time.
In recent years CBP has been granted more and more authority to deal with real time situations. This leads many to wonder just how much authority CBP has. This is an interesting question as they are given major discretionary powers with regard to those seeking entry to the United States. For example, CBP is authorized to place foreign nationals into expedited removal (deportation) proceedings if they deem it necessary. One who has been removed through expedited removal could be barred from reentering the USA for as long as five years. That being said, this only seems to come up in the context of US Family Immigration when the loved one of a US Citizen is improperly using a US tourist visa for undisclosed immigration purposes. In situations such as this, CBP may feel it necessary to use expedited removal to send the subject back to their home country. Therefore it is usually wise to process things correctly and utilize the proper visa for a loved one traveling to the United States.
5th November 2009
K1 Visa Thailand: Marriage to the K1 Visa Petitioner
Posted by : admin
An interesting hypothetical question that is sometimes posed when researching the K1 visa is: who can my Thai fiancee marry once she arrives in the United States of America?
After issuance of a fiance visa, a beneficiary has six months to use the visa for travel to the US. The K1 visa is a single entry visa. Therefore, the beneficiary will only be allowed to enter the United States one time (if multiple entries are necessary, then the beneficiary must obtain an advance parole travel document). After entry, the beneficiary must marry the petitioner and apply for adjustment of status to conditional lawful permanent residence in the USA, but what happens if the beneficiary and petitioner decide not to get married? This occasionally occurs and in this situation the foreign fiancee must leave the USA within 90 days from their date of arrival.
In rare cases, a foreign fiancee will meet another individual and a romantic relationship arises. In this situation, there is not a way for a for fiancee to adjust status to permanent residence based upon marriage to another US Citizen or lawful permanent resident), if that US Citizen (or lawful permanent resident) is not the person specifically named on the K1 visa. In order to adjust status in this situation, the foreign beneficiary would need to leave the USA, obtain a new visa, and reenter.
The K1 visa was designed to provide the foreign fiancee of a US Citizen with a travel document to be utilized for the sole purpose of specifically marrying the US Citizen petitioner. Therefore, an adjustment of status cannot be executed based upon a marriage to anyone else. There is a misconception that a K1 visa beneficiary can marry anyone in the USA and use that marriage as a basis for adjustment. This author believes that this misconception is based upon the fact that sometimes US Citizens will marry and adjust status with a foreign national present in the US on a tourist visa. Although this practice is very frowned upon by the Department of Homeland Security, it is possible to adjust status this way provided the foreign national did not enter the country with that undisclosed intention. That being said, in the case of the K1, the beneficiary may only adjust status based upon a marriage to the K1 petitioner.
On a related note, after adjustment of status, the foreign spouse will be considered a conditional lawful permanent resident (CR1) of the USA. The conditionality is based upon the continuation of the underlying marital relationship. Should the parties divorce while the beneficiary is in CR1 status, then the foreign spouse’s permanent residence will expire at the 2 year anniversary of the adjustment of status. However, a foreign spouse could remarry during this time period and apply for an adjustment of status based upon a marriage to another US Citizen. In this scenario, it would be highly likely that the officers at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) would carefully scrutinize the bona fides of both relationships in order to be certain that the relationship is genuine.
No one should attempt to utilize a visa based upon false pretenses, the above scenarios are meant to provide insight into how the Immigration rules apply in practice. Applying for a visa based upon false statements of fact could be construed as an attempt to defraud the US Immigration service.
25th October 2009
Director of USCIS says Family Unification is the Goal of Immigration
Posted by : admin
Recently, Alejandro Mayorkas was appointed as the Director of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service within the United States Department of Homeland Security. Mr Mayorkas was recently interviewed by members of the United States and foreign press corps in an effort to hear his views on United States Immigration policy and the future of US Immigration law.
Below are some of the important quotes that this author found both interesting and insightful, the full interview transcript can be read here.
This blog is mostly dedicated to United States family immigration and visas. Therefore, it was a pleasure to hear that Mr. Mayorkas considers US Family Immigration to be a major priority of his agency:
“…One of the goals of an immigration system[:] family unification. Do the laws that we have now achieve that most ably? That’s a question that is — that I think is a valid one to ask. And so we have to take a look at the goals, as a nation, of our immigration system and ask does the structure that we have in place – or do the mechanisms that we have in place accomplish those goals most ably, most completely and most efficiently? And where there are shortcomings, that is, indeed, what immigration reform is in part about.”
As we have posited previously on in this forum, the current system of adjudicating non-immigrant family visas could be considered redundant and a poor distribution of resources. In the case of the K1 visa and the K3 visa one could make a valid argument that such visas, as they involve the doctrine of dual intent, could be completely adjudicated at the Embassies and Consulates abroad while letting USCIS deal with more pressing issues at home. If K visa non-immigrant family members do decide to adjust status, then the USCIS will need to deal with the case as the adjudication will occur under their domestic authority.
Mr. Mayorkas was also quoted as saying, “The fact that I myself was once a refugee to this country informs my views of our agency’s mission and the priorities that we will carry forward, during the time that I am privileged to serve.” This author is definitely happy to see a Director who has personal knowledge of the Immigration system. Hopefully, these personal insights will result in a net benefit for everyone who has dealings with USCIS.
The Director was further quoted as saying,
“The goal of family reunification is indeed one that we hold dear to our efforts as we try to administer the immigration laws fairly and with justice always in mind. Ultimately, our adjudications are indeed on an individualized basis, and there are mechanisms that the law acknowledges to achieve family reunification in particular cases. And that is very much a part of the work that we do.”
This author is happy to hear such sentiments from the Director of USCIS and hopefully this is a sign of things to come as the Immigration system becomes a more compassionate and efficient agency of the US government.
25th September 2009
“Immigration Consultant” Gets 41 Months in United States Prison
Posted by : admin
On this blog we often try to point out the difference between retaining the services of a licensed American Immigration lawyer and using a “fly by night” operator posing as a lawyer or calling himself an “Immigration Consultant.” In recent years, the United States government and various state governments have taken a firm stand by increasing their diligence in stamping out the activities of these scam artists. In a recent development a person in Virginia was arrested, charged, convicted, and sentenced for fraud based upon the fact that they stole 1 million US dollars while claiming to be a competent specialist in the field of immigration.
The scam artist in question, “was sentenced last week to 41 months in prison for defrauding vulnerable immigrant applicants of approximately $1 million from June 2000 through December 2005.”
The above linked article further noted what is seen by some as something of a new attitude in the Federal law enforcement community with regard to Immigration fraud:
“Immigration fraud poses a severe threat to national security and public safety because it creates a vulnerability that may enable terrorists, criminals, and illegal aliens to gain entry to and remain in the United States. ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] uproots the infrastructure of illegal immigration by detecting and deterring immigration fraud.”
This situation further highlights the need to conduct due diligence in order to make certain that a person claiming to be an Immigration specialist is truly certified to handle United States Immigration cases. Many confused Americans often ask, “How can I ensure that my Thai fiancee and I are dealing with a reputable attorney who is licensed to practice American Immigration law?”
Even in cases where an individual claims that they are an attorney, it is always wise to ask to see a license to practice law from at least one US state or US territory. Seeing this document will provide evidence that the person one deals with is, in fact, a lawyer. Further, it might be beneficial to further inquire as to the “lawyer’s” educational background. Make certain that they not only graduated from an ABA (American Bar Association) accredited law school, but that they passed the bar in at least one state, territory, or district in the USA. Any licensed attorney should also be registered in their state’s Supreme Court database or with their state bar association.
An unfortunate fact regarding the hiring of an unlicensed “lawyer” or “consultant” is that those type of operators are not bound by any type of ethical code. Licensed attorneys must comport their behavior to an ethical standard and are therefore obligated to do no harm to their clients. This code of conduct is not imposed upon those with no license to practice law.
Unfortunately the internet has played a role in the proliferation of so-called “visa companies,” and unlicensed lawyers. With that in mind, the prospective applicants should insist upon seeing a license in order to ensure they are dealing with a reputable operator.
10th September 2009
Thailand Immigration Officials To Scrutinize Tourist Visa Applicants
Posted by : admin
In an apparent effort to deal with a are number of foreign nationals using Thai Tourist visas for unintended purposes, the authorities at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are instructing Consular Officials at Royal Thai Embassies and Consulates to heavily scrutinize applicants for tourist visas. This edict seems especially targeted at Consulates and Embassies in the Southeast Asia region. Thaivisa.com is covering the story and quotes the edict directly:
“As there has been a number of visa applicants having entered Thailand via tourist visa and misused it to illegally seek employment during their stay and, upon its expiry, sought to re-apply their tourist visas at the Royal Thai Embassy or the Royal Thai Consulate in neighboring countries, requests for visa renewal by such applicants are subject to rejection as their applications are not based on tourism motive, but to continue their illegal employment, which is unlawful.
This is in accordance with the Immigration Act, B.B. 2552 which stipulates that visa applicants are required to clearly express their real purpose of visiting Thailand. Should the case be found that the applicant’s real intention were concealed, the application will be rejected.
Please be informed that the intention of applicants to repeatedly depart and re-enter Thailand via tourist visa issued by the Royal Thai Embassy or the Royal Thai Consulate in neighboring countries in recent years upon its expiry, is considered as concealment of real purpose of visiting Thailand. Thus their visas applications will be rejected.”
Unlike the Thai O visa and the Thai Business visa, the Thai Tourist visa is not designed for those who wish to work in the Kingdom. One present on a tourist visa is not entitled to apply for a Thai work permit. Due to this restriction, many foreigners opt to stay in Thailand and work illegally or “off the books.” Although tolerated at one time, this practice is viewed with increasing animosity by Thai Immigration officials particularly since the world wide economic downturn.
Thailand’s policy regarding this practice is similar to Section 214b of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. This statute creates the presumption that those entering the United States on a non-immigrant visa, like a US Tourist visa, are in fact intending immigrants. United States Consular officers often reject tourist visa applicants because they cannot demonstrate true “tourist intention,” meaning that they do not have sufficiently strong ties to a country outside of the US which would compel them to depart the United States. Working in the United States on a tourist visa without work authorization is also considered to be a major violation of non-immigrant status (although not a ground of inadmissibility). Thailand seems like it is beginning to tighten up immigration protocols and coincidentally these measures are making the system resemble the US Immigration system.
3rd September 2009
USCIS to grant deferred action to widows of American Citizens
Posted by : admin
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.
31st August 2009
US Authorities Deport American Citizen…Twice
Posted by : admin
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.
28th August 2009
Death of Edward Kennedy means loss of Immigration Proponent
Posted by : admin
As many people around the globe have no doubt heard, the venerable Senator Kennedy recently passed away. We on this blog would like to offer our heartfelt condolences to his family as they mourn his death. The loss of Senator Kennedy is something of a setback for the immigrant rights movement as he was a staunch supporter of many initiatives aimed at helping those who had immigrated to the United States of America. To quote an email sent out by the American Immigration Law Foundation:
Senator Kennedy was the driving force behind every significant piece of immigration legislation over the past 40-plus years. Most recently, Senator Kennedy co-authored a comprehensive immigration reform bill which failed to pass in 2007. Upon its defeat Senator Kennedy said, “Immigration reform is an opportunity to be true to our ideals as a nation. Our Declaration of Independence announces that all of us are created equal. Today, we failed to live up to that declaration for millions of men and women who live, work, and worship beside us. But our ideals are too strong to be held back for long.”
With an impending debate upon the future course of American Immigration policy one wonders if the loss of Mr. Kennedy will have an impact upon the ultimate outcome of Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
Senator Kennedy was an ardent defender of same sex couples. Senator Kennedy took many stands in support of the Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual, and Trans gender (LGBT) community.To quote another website:
“In the 1990′s Kennedy became the clear Senate leader in the fight to end discrimination against members of the LGBT community, and to fund programs for HIV/AIDS prevention and treatment. He was also one of the very few senators to vote against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).”
As we have mentioned previously on this blog, one of the interesting issues involved in the current debate about US Immigration Reform is that of same sex couples who are currently barred from reuniting with loved ones due to the fact that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) precludes Federal acknowledgment of their relationship. This means that a same sex couple who validly marries and tries to obtain Immigration benefits will be denied because DOMA does not recognize their marriage, even if the marriage occurred in a US state which recognizes same sex marriage (like Massachusetts). Further, under current legislation the same sex couple cannot obtain a K1 visa if the underlying intention is to marry in the US.
Mr. Kennedy’s death is sad, but his spirit lives on in the continued debates about Immigration reform.
The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisement. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. The information presented on this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.