The aphorism that news is
hard to come by during the holiday season is contradicted in today's issue of Immigration Daily. The White House once again
reiterated its support of
245(i), the INS provided detailed guidance on
adjudications of H-1B petitions for registered nurses, the DOS issued
regulations on Uncertified Foreign Health-Care Workers and also on
Registration, and the 8th circuit ordered an inquiry in an unusual sequence
of events in an immigration case. In today's Featured Article, Richard S.
Goldstein writes about significant upcoming changes in the processing of
Non-immigrant Visa applications at the US Embassy in London. There is much
else in today's Immigration Daily. Just scroll down to find the item(s) of interest to
you, and click to find the original source material.
200,000 Attorney Searches Per Year!
Approximately 200,000 searches are made each year for immigration attorneys on ILW.COM. That's almost 400 searches per year per attorney listed in our lawyer directory. Which means that if you are listed with ILW.COM, then your listing will be searched once each day throughout the year. You need only one client a year to make a profit on your listing! For a personal discussion on listing your practice in our directory, please send an e-mail with your phone number to email@example.com. Alternatively, if you prefer to list yourself on-line, please click here: http://www.ilw.com/membership/.
Mandatory NIV Interviews In London
Richard S. Goldstein writes about significant upcoming changes in the processing of Non-immigrant Visa applications at the US Embassy in London.
Keep on top of the latest in immigration law! Attend ILW.COM seminars! You can attend ILW.COM phone seminars from the convenience of your office! For more info on the seminars currently available, please click here: http://www.ilw.com/seminars/
Immigration Law News
White House Position On 245(i)
White House Press Secretary Fleischer referring to President Bush's stance on 245(i) said, ... "[President Bush] thinks that's an important immigration
initiative to help give people opportunities to come to the US where willing employers want and have positions for immigrants... The President would like to see action taken on that this year."
INS Issues Guidance On Adjudication of H-1B Petitions Filed on Behalf of Nurses
INS issued a memo to provide field offices with guidance on adjudication of H-1B petitions when the beneficiary is a registered nurse (RN) and clarifies that while typical RNs generally do not meet the requirements for H-1B classification, aliens in certain specialized RN occupations are more likely than typical RNs to be eligible for H-1B status.
DOS Issues Interim Rule On Uncertified Foreign Health-Care Workers Visas
The Department of State issued an interim rule with request for comments on uncertified foreign health-care workers visas. This rule changes the requirements and provides that an
alien who seeks to enter the US to perform health-care
services (other than a physician) is excludable unless the alien
presents an approved certificate.
DOS Issues Final Rule On Immigrant Visa Registration
The Department of State issued a final rule amending the Department's regulation that defines
"registration" in connection with an application for an immigrant
DOS Issues Final Corrected Rule On The Exchange Visitor Program
The Department of State released a final correction rule stating that the regulation at 22 CFR 41.63(c)(4)(iii) contains a statement to be signed and dated by foreign medical graduate exchange visitors. The
statement indicates that the medical graduate will incur penalties, as
provided for under the provisions of ``18 USC 1101,'' for making
false or misleading statements. The USC cite was incorrect, and
should have been ``18 USC 1001''.
EOIR Seeks Comments
The Executive Office for Immigration Review issued notice allowing an additional 30 days for
public comments until January 16, 2003 and sought comments on applications for suspension of deportation.
8th Circuit Orders Inquiry Into Sequence Of Events Where Government Represented That Witness Would Be Deported And Later Supported Witness's Asylum Claim
In US v. Rushing, Nos. 01-3077EA, 01-3082EA, 01-3266EA, 01-3428EA, and 01-3526EA (8th Cir. Dec. 17, 2002), the court found that Defendants' harbored an illegal alien when they, knowing that an alien had entered the country illegally, gave her a job and a place to live, and helped her receive medical care and banking privileges. The court also found that serious questions of Due Process were raised by the sequence of events where the government's witness testified against the Defendants and where the counsel for the US represented to the jury that that the government would seek prison time and deportation against that witness and where the government later stated an intention to aid that witness in her application for asylum. The Court ordered an inquiry into the sequence of events on remand.
No Consular Immunity Where A-3 Visa Used Instead Of A-2
In Park v. Shin, No. 01-16805 (9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2002), the court said that Defendent is not entitled to consular immunity since, inter alia, Petitioner was employed primarily as a personal domestic servant for his family, evidenced, again inter alia, by the obtaining of an A-3 Visa, instead of an A-2 Visa.
Rep. Tancredo To Help Undocumented Sick Child
The Rocky Mountain News reports "Rep. Tom Tancredo, who has attacked
illegal immigration, plans to help raise money for a 5-year-old Mexican boy
with leukemia whose parents brought him to the U.S. unlawfully."
LCA Hearing On Alleged Violations At Sun
The New York Times reports "The Department of Labor began an administrative
law hearing Monday into whether Sun Microsystems violated regulations
concerning the employment of foreign workers in the United States on
temporary H-1B work visas."
Punishing Children For Sins Of Parents Is Un-American
Writing in the Arizona Republic, a columnist says "let me suggest to
Virginia's governor that he doesn't really need a task force to tell him
that punishing children for the sins of the parents is un-American. It's
probably even un-Virginian."
Attorney listings on ILW.COM are searched 200,000 times/year! Each attorney listed is searched an average of once each day! Just one new client will pay for the entire year's fee! Click here for more info: http://www.ilw.com/membership/
Labor Certification Advertising
Are you satisfied with how you currently handle your labor certification advertising? Do you want to save time and reduce expenses and also eliminate the headaches of dealing with media ad reps, collection issues, tearsheets and other related documentation? Let ADNET handle the complete labor certification advertising process for you. You will receive the same unparalleled customer service whether you place one ad a year or thousands - leading immigration law firms and attorneys have solved their advertising problems by letting ADNET handle their labor certification advertising needs from beginning to end. Our dedicated staff consists of experienced professionals who are intimately familiar with the Department of Labors' requirements and restrictions with regard to: media selection, text abbreviations, deadlines, three-day consecutive runs, ad responses, tear-sheet urgency and matters arising from placement, follow-up, and documentation of labor certification ads. Based in New York City, ADNET is equipped to handle ad placement for any print media throughout the United States. For more information, please email us at: firstname.lastname@example.org or call us at: 212-587-3164.
We carry advertisements for Help Wanted: Attorney, Help Wanted: Paralegal, Help Wanted: Other, Positions Sought, Products & Services Offered, etc.
For information on advertising in the classifieds please click here
For a listing of current immigration events please click here
For services/products of use in your law practice please click here
Letters to the Editor
I want to set the record straight after being misquoted by Brian E. Grutman in his responsive letter to mine of 12/12/02, Mr. Grutman credits me with stating taking the position that I "claim(s) that it is the law that is killing all of these American citizens, not policy. I claimed no such thing. In fact, my position is that all degreed nurses should be H-1B's, but as anyone who can read my letter can see, I am silent on the issue of who is, or is not, responsible for "killing all of these American citizens". It is Mr. Grutman, not I, who takes the position that immigration law or immigration policy is the culprit for causing deaths in America. In my opinion it is the profession itself, the licensing process and the entire health care system in the US that is responsible for the nursing shortage, not INS policy against importing foreign nurses so people like Mr. Grutman can make big money recruiting them.
Mr. Grutman misses the point because he does not understand H-1B visa law and he obviously did not understand my letter, which made it perfectly clear why most nurses, including critical care nurses, do not qualify for H-1B visas. Obviously, the INS disagrees that a critical care nurse rises to a "specialty occupation", notwithstanding Mr. Grutman's assertion that, "the expertise, education, training and experience necessary to fill a critical care position far exceed the minimum education needed to qualify a registered nurse for an RN license."
If Mr. Grutman continues to disagree with the INS position, and stands on his statement, he can always put his money where his mouth is and hire competent legal counsel to appeal an INS denial of an H-1B critical care nurse, and if unsuccessful on appeal to the BIA (which is almost a certainty), and if, as he alludes in his impassioned letters, the size of his heart is larger than the sum of money his company will make by importing H-1B nurses to the USA, he can exercise his legal rights by taking the critical care nurse denial all the way to the Federal District Court for their interpretation as to whether or not the law is being properly applied by the INS. That's the American way.
David D. Murray, Esq.
Newport Beach, CA
In his letter on 12/16/02, while extolling illegal aliens from Mexico, Dr. Richard Baer cited a study from UCLA, dated 9/10/01. He quotes the study as saying that illegal aliens contribute $300 billion to the US economy yearly. I couldn't find the study on the "web", but I'd be interested to see what they counted to come up with the $300 billion figure. I suspect they ignored the costs of illegal aliens on welfare, medical services, subsidized housing, jail costs, etc.
A few things I've found on the "web" are: (1) a study released by the NAS (Nat'l. Academy of Sciences) in 1997 which says that immigration (legal and illegal) costs to each native US household are a net loss of between $166 and $226 per year. This translates to a net drain of between $11 and $22 billion per year nationally; (2) an article in the San Diego Union on 8/20/01 which said that, based on figures by the NAS, the net fiscal drain for an average adult male Mexican, over his lifetime, is a total of $55,200; (3) a study by Dr. George Borjas of Harvard University which said that immigration costs US workers $133 billion in "wage depression" and "job displacement"; (4) an article (source unknown) which said that, in 1999, the states asked the US government for $1.484 billion in reimbursement for the costs of incarcerating illegal aliens. They were given $573 million to split up from a program at the Dep't. of Justice - SCAPP - and were had to fund the rest themselves; (5) a 1994 Urban Institute study showing that immigration created a surplus of $29 billion annually, but only after it excluded from its calculations all immigrants from Mexico, Poland, Cambodia, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Viet Nam, and the former USSR; (6) a 1997 study by professor Donald Huddle of Rice University which says that the estimated net cost this year of immigration - both legal and illegal - will be about $66 billion; (7) a 1995 study from the National Bureau of Economic Research which estimated that immigrants would receive total benefits - direct and indirect - of about $180 billion in 1996.
I apologize for the poor format of the foregoing, but I wanted to try to show that not everyone thinks that immigrants are a net benefit. Those who profit most are the business owners, often at the cost of loss of jobs and depressed wages for native workers.
John H. Frecker
An Important disclaimer! The information provided on this page is not legal advice.
Transmission of this information is not intended to create, and receipt by you does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Readers must not act upon any information without first seeking advice from a
qualified attorney. Send Correspondence and articles to email@example.com. Letters and articles may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium. Opinions expressed in letters and articles do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ILW.COM.