A Note from the Editors:

Immigration And Socialism Are Opposites

In one of this week's articles, attorney Greg Siskind presents a point-counterpoint email exchange with a noted anti-immigrationist. A salient issue the Mr. Siskind highlights is the fact that many anti-immigrationists, including many opposed to the H-1B visa, are in fact socialists opposed to free markets and to capitalism. For those on the right who value the blessings of freedom (among which are free markets and capitalism), the fact that most anti-immigrationists consider themselves on the political right should be cause for embarrassment. Among its many other fine arguments, Mr. Siskind's article brings out this oft-ignored point in detail and color. We commend Mr. Siskind for taking the time to make several cogent points in his intelligently argued letter to the anti-immigrationists, and we hope that more immigration attorneys will follow his example.

Articles

Employment Options For Students, Part 1 of 4
Gregory Siskind offers a comprehensive look at employment options for students.

Point – Counterpoint: Greg Siskind v. Rob Sanchez On The Immigration Debate
Gregory Siskind provides our readers with a letter exchange that resulted from recent comments I made criticizing an unbalanced CNN report on the H-1B cap debate.

How Do I Increase My Web Site's Ranking In Search Engines?
Peter Boyd, Esq. discusses how to improve your web site's rankings through four basic techniques.

VISIT Entry/Exit System Announced
Maurice Belanger writes "To the extent that the VISIT program is applied to all visitors and replaces the more nationality-specific NSEERS program, reaction has been positive, with qualifications. A number of questions remain unanswered."

DHHS Launches Physician Waiver Program
Gregory Siskind provides an overview on today's Federal Register announcement concerning DHHS's J-1 Physician Waiver Program, along with some helpful points.

California Bar Seeks Disbarment Of 3 Attorneys
The San Francisco Chronicle reports "Three Beverly Hills [CA] attorneys face disbarment for allegedly shaking down thousands of immigrant-owned businesses for settlements in exchange for dropping consumer protection lawsuits, officials said. Authorities said they targeted businesses run by immigrants and threatened to report them to immigration officials if they didn't settle."

13,000+ To Be Expelled, Likely The Largest Wave Of Deportations In Wake Of 9/11
The San Francisco Chronicle reports "More than 13,000 of the Arab and Muslim men who came forward earlier this year to register with US immigration authorities, roughly 16 percent of the total, now may face deportation, government officials say."

Asylum For 38 Golden Venture Chinese Refugees Still Pending
New York Newsday reports "Ten years after the Golden Venture freighter ran aground off New York, [Rep. Platts (R-PA)], who has been fighting for asylum for the Chinese refugees it carried says he is growing "impatient" with the delay in resolving their residency status.

Washington Post Op-ed Says Attorney General Ashcroft Has Serious Attitude Problem
A Washington Post op-editorial writes "Attorney general [Ashcroft] is far more dangerous than any of the immigrants he wrongly detained."

3 Immigration Agents Convicted Of Violating Immigrant's Civil Rights
The Boston Globe reports "Three US immigration agents were convicted yesterday of violating the civil rights of a Mexican immigrant who died after his neck was broken in a raid."

Planes Equipped With Cameras Could Be Used To Monitor Undocumented US Border Crossings
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that Claudia Smith, a lawyer for California Rural Legal Assistance said, "If the government chooses to seal the entire [Mexican-US] border, they are within their rights to do so," said Smith. "What they cannot do is channel migrants do their deaths by diverting them away from populated urban areas."

Labor Law Violations Are On The Rise
BusinessWeek Online reports "Labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas, which are designed for skilled employees, have jumped more than fivefold since 1998, according to the Labor Dept. Back-pay awards for such employees have soared by more than ten times."

Special Juvenile Immigrant Status From BCIS May Save Student From Deportation
The Key West Citizen of Florida reports "The 17-year-old girl who arrived from Poland at the age of 8, blonde and wide-eyed, clinging tightly to her mother's hand and trying to decipher an unfamiliar language, is seeking Special Juvenile Immigrant status from the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services."

Attorney General Ashcroft Defends Detention Of Undocumented
The New Haven Register of Connecticut reports that Attorney General Ashcroft defended tougher legislation related to undocumented aliens saying, "People violating the laws of immigration are subject to being asked to leave the country. We have not detained anyone who was not charged with a violation."

How can I study in the US?
Read a comprehensive answer from BCIS on the Student and Exchange Visitors Program.

ILW Highlights

Processing Times Updated

Department of State Priority Dates have been updated.

Letters to Editors

To write to Editors, send emails to weeklyeditor@ilw.com.

Dear Editor:
I fully support your recent editorial on the FB-2A visa application. I am personally affected. I am a Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) that petitioned my family to also become LPRs. It takes such a long time. My family cannot stay in US for more than 6 months when they tried to visit me in San Jose.

My family wants to obey US laws by not overstaying in US but the separation is very tough for me. I have no choice but to leave to be with my family as I miss them very much. Also, I cannot find a job here due to this economic gloom. Now I run the risk of losing my LPR because I am out of US.

I am in a double bind and I hope Congress can change the law.

David Ong

Dear Editor:
I was not only disappointed but shocked to read your editorial "Why the Law Should Be Broken" about the long wait for spouses and children of permanent residents. A more appropriate title would have been "Why the Law Should Be Changed," thus respecting the sacredness on the law. This opinion is similar to an opinion shared by the Industrial Barons of England and the US back in the mid 1800s. As long as they made a profit, it did not matter that black soot belched from their chimneys, that children as young as 10 slaved 12-14 hours a day in their factories.

Apply that analogy to your view of immigration. America's immigration system is so wrecked that one day (in a history repeating way) American citizens will eventually vote in angry immigration restrictionists who not only slow down immigration but shut it off altogether. Just look at the House, which now has 65 members of the Immigration Reform Caucus. And in the Senate, Gramm of South Carolina and Chambliss of Georgia are committed to curbing immigration.

If you would stop lobbying for amnesties, which most Americans are vehemently against, then the future might hold a more gentle change in the immigration laws. If we had a tightly regulated system, which put a premium on productive and educated immigrants instead of desperate peasants, no one in this country would even think about immigration policy.

We shall see what the future holds to determine if I am right.

Robert B.
El Paso, TX

Dear Editor:
In your editorial, you state: "The spouses and children of US citizens are treated completely differently - these are subject to no quota. What moral basis exists to treat nuclear families differently? Is the bond between a husband and wife, or between parent and child, any different when seen in US citizens or green card holders?" This statement ignores the fact that within US law, there is currently an unfair and discriminatory distinction that treats certain spouses of US citizens differently. Same-sex permanent partners are ineligible for any derivative immigration benefits since current immigration law defines "spouse" as a partner of the opposite sex. Thousands of binational couples are forced to break the law, leave the US, or live apart, even when one is a US citizen, simply because of they are of the same sex.

Your statement: "Is the bond between a husband and wife, or between parent and child, any different when seen in US citizens or green card holders?" would be more equitably phrased: Is the bond between permanent partners, or between parent and child, any different when seen in US citizens or green card holders or when seen between couple of the opposite or same sex? It is equally as immoral to separate gay and lesbian nuclear families as it is to separate nuclear families of those who hold a green card. Fifteen countries around the world already recognize lesbian and gay couples for the purposes of immigration. As stated by the Lesbian and Gay Immigration Rights Task Force (www.lgirtf.org): "There is no excuse for the US to lag so far behind in providing fair and humanitarian immigration rights to same-sex binational couples."

I support the removal of the FB-2A quota to strengthen the principle of family reunification to US immigration law. I also call for the passage of HR832, the Permanent Partners Immigration Act. The bill would simply add the words "Permanent Partner" to current immigration law and would therefore allow for the legal recognition of gay and lesbian binational relationships for the purpose of immigration benefits.

Debby Morgan

Dear Editor:
This is my case: I'm a permanent resident,I have three children two are US Citizens and the little one was born in Mexico.I don't have anybody to take care of my youngest son, so I have to live here in Mexico and my two american citizen kids are here with me.

I feel that they are losing too many opportunities as citizens,Why does the Government do it,is it so complicated to see when a family is honorable or not? I'm a single mother that just wants to do right things and raise a family with the best that she can.

Ana Caballero
Mexico City

Dear Editor:
Is there anyone out there who has a definitive answer as why the British are banned from applying for the Green Card Lottery? I have heard various theories, the Department of State says its to do with the 50,000 quota rule, countries who have sent 50,000 people over the previous 5 years are banned, yet Britain has been banned to the past 4 or 5 years to my knowledge, so how does that argument apply? At the present time, when Britain has been described by President Bush as a true friend, is it really acceptable to ban Brits from applying for the lottery? Post 9/11 Britain and the British people have stood shoulder to shoulder with US and its citizens. the first nation to support the US following 9/11. The first nation to support the US in Afghanistan and send in special forces troops, who incidentally were on the ground fighting before the first US troops arrived. The first nation to support the US over Iraq. So why are Brits banned from taking their chances in lottery?

It's ironic that a section of the UK that is allowed to apply is Northern Ireland, a region of Britain that for decades has been a hot bed of terrorist activity and continues to be so with the IRA still steadfastly refusing to publicly proclaim arms decommissioning. A section of the UK that has had links with other terrorist organizations, has trained middle eastern terror groups amongst others. Yet they can apply, whilst those who supported the US continually can not. Where is the logic or sense in this policy? To many Brits the message that is being sent to them by America is that it's okay for Brits to fight with Americans, die in combat with Americans, but we don't want you to live in America. Is this a way to treat, and I quote President Bush, true friends?

As a Brit, a tax paying E2 Visa holder, not considered a permanent resident, I'm not looking for special favors or to be handed a green card on a plate in preference to all others, just a an opportunity to take my chance in a lottery, a game of chance, is that so much to ask for? My personal view is that the immigration policy should be changed and that those who apply for the lottery, if successful, should after a 3 or 5 year period as green holders, apply for citizenship. If they don't then their green card gets cancelled. If people really want to live in the US and be an integrated part of American society, then that commitment should be total citizenship. I am making an assumption, but I bet if the rules were changed in this way, there would be a dramatic drop in the number of applicants for the lottery. Only those who were serious would apply, uproot their families and make the full commitment.

If you think I may have a valid point, write to your Senators and Congressmen and ask why the Brits are banned and how about changing the rules, so that only those who are prepared to make a full commitment to become part of US society need apply for the game of chance, the green card lottery.

David Walker
Naples, Florida

Immigrant Life

What is a federal tax return?

A federal tax return is a form taxpayers must file, under penalty of law.

Why is a tax return important?

It is the law that every taxpayer must complete and submit a tax return to the IRS. In the US, estimated taxes are withheld from a taxpayer's pay check. Tax returns provide documentation and proof that a taxpayer has paid the correct amount of taxes. If your return shows that you have overpaid your taxes over the year, you will receive a refund from the US government. If your return shows that you have underpaid, you must send payment with your return by the deadline date. If your tax return does not correspond to your true earnings and entitled deductions, you will be penalized. Continued.

Have a story that you'd like to share with us? Send your story as an immigrant to weeklyeditor@ilw.com.

This week's chat schedule

When Attorney Week of June 16 No chat this week due to AILA's Annual Conference

Classifieds

For information on advertising in the classifieds please click here.