ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Home Page

Advanced search

Immigration Daily


Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board



Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation


CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage


Immigration Daily

The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily November 10, 2003
Previous Issues
The unmatched news resource for legal professionals. Free! Join 9000+ readers

Editor's Comments

Education-Based Marketing For Immigration Lawyers

Trey Ryder will speak on Education-Based Marketing For Immigration Lawyers at ILW.COM's Telephonic Workshop on Friday, November 14th. This 45 minute telephonic workshop (from 1.15pm ET to 2pm ET) is free for members in good standing of ILW.COM's directory of immigration lawyers.

Agenda for the workshop: How to attract new clients, increase referrals, strengthen client loyalty and build your image as an authority -- without selling! During this eye-opening program, you will discover:

++ 13 marketing misconceptions that cost lawyers a fortune
++ How to attract calls from the prospects you want to reach
++ How to create a powerful marketing message
++ How to begin your program of education-based marketing
++ Why selling-based marketing no longer works
++ Why most p.r. programs do not work
++ 6 essential elements for marketing success
++ How to build your image as an authority
++ How to appeal to skeptical prospects
++ How to overcome phone-call fear
++ How to make your marketing accountable
++ Why marketing programs fail
++ Why you should never compete on low price
++ How to get prospects to eagerly pay you higher fees than other lawyers charge
++ How to get prospects to call you before they call other lawyers
++ The toughest marketing challenge you face (it is not what you might think)
++ Why you should never rely exclusively on referrals
++ How to establish the highest possible level of trust
++ The most effective time to deliver your marketing message (no, it is not when your prospect is in your office)
++ Why you should never promote your services -- and what you should promote instead!

The deadline to register is Wednesday, November 12th. Requests for registration should be sent to


Curriculum For "All In The Family" - Current Issues In Family-Based Immigration

The curriculum for "All In The Family" - Current Issues In Family-Based Immigration is as follows:

FIRST Phone Session on November 20: Marriage ("Married - With Children")

  • Lists of documents for bona fide marriages
  • Fraud and Stokes interviews
  • Removal of conditional status
  • Separation, divorce, annulment issues
  • Fiance(e)s
  • K and V visas
  • Unmarried Partners

SECOND Phone Session on December 11: Inadmissibility, Visa and Financial Issues ("One Day at a Time")

  • Entry issues-245(i)
  • Arrests, inadmissibility-waivers
  • 3 and 10 year bar waivers
  • Removal Defense
  • New procedures for NTAs
  • Recent changes in enforcement practices
  • Affidavits of support

THIRD Phone Session on January 8: Children's Issues and Legislative Changes ("Eight is Enough")

  • Child Status Protection Act - Age out protection for children of Permanent residents, refugees and asylees, and DV lottery winners
  • Step children
  • Children born out of wedlock
  • Adoption
  • DREAM Act and other Pending legislation
For more info, see: (Fax version:

Featured Article

Presidential Paper Historical Series: 65 - Special Message to the Congress on Aid for Refugees and Displaced Persons March 24, 1952 [ title corrected - Ed. 11/12/03 ]
President Truman sent this message to Congress on March 24, 1952.

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:

Immigration Law News

USCIS Training Materials On The Family Sponsor Immigration Act of 2002
This document is the USCIS training material for its employees on the Family Sponsor Immigration Act of 2002 (courtesy of David H. Nachman of Grotta, Glassman & Hoffman, P.A.).

Ambiguity About Employer's Business Dooms Business Necessity Argument
In the Matter of Lucky Star Industries, Inc., No. 2002-INA-278 (BALCA, Oct. 6, 2003), the Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals said that given the ambiguity concerning the nature of Employer's business and products, Employer did not establish that the two year experience requirement bore a reasonable relationship to the occupation in the context of the Employer's business.

DOS Says Deportation Was Law Enforcement Decision
The Department of State commented on a Canadian-Syrian national who was deported from the US and said that the decision to detain and deport him was a law enforcement decision.

Texas Conviction For Theft From Person Is Not Crime Of Violence
In US v. Luna-Montoya, No. 02-41444 (5th Cir. Nov. 5, 2003), the court said that the district court committed plain error in classifying Defendant's prior Texas conviction for theft from a person as a crime of violence. The court also said that nothing in the Texas statutory definition of theft from a person indicated that "the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another" was an element of the crime.

Pat Buchanan Speaks His Mind
An American Conservative op-ed writes "As California is fast becoming a Third World state, America is becoming a Third World country.Why is President Bush welcoming this radical transformation of America into a giant replica of the UN General Assembly?"

Special Juvenile Immigrant Visa Awarded To Polish Student
The Florida Keys reports "Ms. Trawinska, the Polish girl threatened with deportation following the death of her mother and disappearance of her father, has cleared her most difficult immigration hurdle and will be classified as a special juvenile immigrant."

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:


Help Wanted: Experienced Immigration Attorney
Youngok S. Kim & Associates, PLC, an immigration law firm based in the Los Angeles area, seeks an experienced immigration attorney. Experience in removal hearings and immigration-related litigation required. Korean/Chinese/Spanish speaking skills are desired - not mandatory. Please send resume + salary requirements by email: or fax: (213) 381-5790.

Help Wanted: Experienced Immigration Attorney
Are you looking to join a fast-paced and friendly team that provides first-rate immigration legal services to global businesses and individuals? Paparelli & Partners LLP, a leading immigration law firm with an established national practice, has immediate openings for a moderately experienced Immigration Lawyer to work at its office in Irvine, California. If you have what it takes, you will work with multinational companies and high-achiever individuals to perform the full range of immigration legal services for employment-based and family-based immigration clients. You will use computer software extensively (research databases, Internet, MS Word, MS Outlook, Excel, ProLaw, Power Point, etc.), and become immersed in cutting-edge immigration law issues. This job is for you if you are a multi-talented multi-tasker, detail oriented, express yourself well in person and on paper, work well as part of a team, love challenges, are willing to work hard, have a spotless ethical record, are admitted to practice law in California or another state and have up to three years of U.S. immigration law experience. If you'd like to pursue this exciting opportunity, fax your resume + cover letter to Chris McCoy at 949-955-5599 or e-mail her at For background, see our web site: No phone calls please.

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

Dear Editor:
I am heartened by the plethora of recent commentary regarding the questionable lawfulness and/or constitutionality of the summary affirmance or so called "streamlining" opinions of the BIA entered without any analysis or rationale. I am presently struggling with multiple briefs due in the 2nd Circuit on the issues of asserted substantive, procedural, facial and as applied deprivations of substantive and procedural due process and additionally attempting to argue patterns of abuse associated with such process- as alluded to by the 1st Circuit as a plausible legal justification for finding due process violations as systemic and/or inherent in the summary affirmance process. In such endeavors I am now encountering a new and regrettably re-occurring problem. As substituted appellate counsel before the circuit court and not the attorney of record in proceedings before the EOIR and BIA, I am required to brief the issues on appeal to the circuit, some due this forthcoming week, and the related certified records of proceedings requested months ago are not yet ready and cannot be filed in the circuit court as ordered due to the increasing backlogs of similar requests being made to the BIA/EOIR for such records. In essence, I am required to brief the circuit on the issues without the benefit of first reviewing the requested certified record of proceedings, which arguably the single BIA panel member could not possibly have read, let alone review, in the time frame mandated by the AG for rendering such summary affirmance opinion which is the basis for such appeal to the circuit. Can anyone say "catch-22"? If anyone out there is aware of any specific circuit court opinions, particularly in the 2d Circuit, finding facial, as applied and/or inherent or indigenous due process violations in the summary affirmance procedures and process, I would appreciate if other attorneys would share their experience on similiar matters, particularly as I am required to evidence such deprivations by 11/12/03.

James G Mc Keon

Dear Editor:
I just wanted to thank Erick Seven Hawks for sharing his thoughts. He has given backing to a belief that I have held since the discussion of illegal immigration came to the forefront in recent years. I look at my own European ancestry and ask what right do I really have to be living here? And when I hear of an assault on our Judeo-Christian foundation, I wonder about the Native American religious foundation that preceded it. Thank you for giving an audience to a voice that should be heard.

Dan Walker
Denver, CO

Dear Editor:
Pardon my perception of the Erick Seven Hawks letters as being contrived, but they still seem to me as if a determined, open borders advocate with that agenda has carefully constructed a series of questionable, simplistic, positions and statements (possibly including the name) for the sole purpose of attempting to justify excessive foreign intrusion upon US. If this feeling is erroneous, my apology, as I have a great respect for the Indian people. Mr. Hawks amazingly assumes the right to speak for all Indians and refers to America as "my land", ignoring the various early claims of not only competing, rival tribes but also valid claims by England, Spain, France and Mexico. Where are the "papers" of ownership by the Indians? Unless they paid for the lands they claim, can they be considered the owners thereof or merely squatters? If this is absurd, then so is Mr. Hawks reference. The US paid for most of the claims to the above mentioned parties which in times past, was seldom, if ever, done. Instead of falling for his carefully constructed liberal guilt trip in not opposing the present Mexican and foreign invasion, perhaps we should benefit from the obvious lesson the early Indians and Mexicans failed to learn, when they did not limit settlers which is that your own culture suffers. Today, in our own national interest (which includes many ethnicities including European), many are suggesting that we need to place orderly limits and controls upon entry as numerous polls and David Murray conclude which does not include anyone coming here who decides on their own to do so or millions of border violators, regardless of intent or hardship. One very real Comanche Indian supports this view at his website at Mr. Hawks advocacy of open borders and/or amnesty and/or invitations to all foreigners to come to US is poor policy. The very real importance of borders and the need to enforce them can be read at: We must vigorously defend and enforce the validity of our borders and sovereignty as well as entry and demand that others respect these also. Amnesties disguised as guest worker programs are an insult to US and to legal migrants and show no respect to anyone, nor does sneaking over our borders. An honest guest worker program would be limited and would apply to those already illegally here and provide for their eventual return, not citizenship. Illegal entry hardly qualifies one for that. An uninvited guest who never leaves is not a guest and never was and any program so labelled is a fraud which legitimizes millions of border violaters and does nothing to deter millions more, but rather encourages it. There is no "hate" in these comments, which liberals love to label differing views, only true, objective facts and considered opinion. There does seem to be much hate directed at today's traditional America, openly and disguised, using various stratagems including an adopted concern for foreigners, at our expense and against our best interests. To attempt to establish immigration policy with today's evolved and complex society based upon ancient historical fact or fiction when conditions were very different is misleading at best and with possible ulterior motives at worst.

R. L. Ranger

Dear Editor:
Erick Seven Hawks appears to be suffering from an ethnic superiority complex when he chastises RL Ranger's opinions and accuses Mr. Ranger of "justify(ing) his presence in my land and the land of my ancestors Native Americans." Then, with unbridled arrogance, Mr. Seven Hawks throws down the gauntlet by saying, "You will get the same respect if you find the papers from my ancestors inviting your ancestors to come here." Well, excuse me, Mr. Seven Hawks, but you'll have to show me title to the land that your ancestors possessed saying the land belonged to them. In fact, you will have to show me that in the 1600's, when the Europeans began immigrating to the New World, that the Native American culture was advance to the point where they could have written a letter, or drafted the Constitutition, the Bill of Rights and formed a nation. The land belongs to no one. We who live on it are only custodians of the land for the time we occupy it, and despite the irresponsible treatment by many, it is the duty of mankind to tend it well. For all we know, ten centuries from now, it may "belong" to invaders from the planet Neptune. Under modern law, unknown to Native Americans, we now title land to show who has the legal right to occupy it, and so arguments that the land rightfully belongs to anyone else takes the position that the law has no validity, and that, dear sir, is anarchy. While giving deference to the rich culture and sensitivity to nature, understand that Native Americans do not own the country we call the US. And Native Americans did not build this nation we now call the US - European and Asian settlers, along with some African slaves, built this nation that now provides us all with the freedoms we enjoy under the Constitution and laws of the US. Just because they first occupied the land, Native Americans have no more right to be in the US than anyone else who has a legal right to be here. And the people who "deserve" to be here are the people who have been given the right to be here under the laws of the US. What the settlers did to Native Americans was abhorrible, but that's history. We live in the 21st Century, complete with corporate greed, political scandal and moral decay, and ugly as it may be, it is as it is. The USA is not utopia, but it's a darned good country to live in. That's why so many foreigners want to live here, but remember, it belongs to those who have a legal right to be here, and those are the people who have the right to say who will, and who will not be allowed to remain here, using law as edict. If the law is wrong, then change it, but while the law is the law, respect it. That's the democratic way. We are a system of laws, not men, and it's a darned good thing. Illegal immigration is just one way of others telling the people of the US to shove it. And that's not a good thing.

David D. Murray, Esq.
Newport Beach, CA

Dear Editor:
Mr. Murray makes a rhetorical "tongue-in-cheek" remark asking "if one, why not them all?" Rhetorical or not I have to reply. If a person qualifies for asylum then, by law, he or she is supposed to get it. It appears that Mr. Murray misunderstands asylum law or maybe he was just kidding. Either way, not every "malcontent" or "mistreated" person is eligible for asylum. Only people who have been persecuted, for specific grounds, who cannot, for some reason, avail themselves of the protection of their government, are entitled to claim asylum. Providing asylum is a legal obligation of our country by virtue of international treaties and the constitution. I agree with Mr. Murray that the immigration laws need to be reworked. But as it is our legal obligation to provide asylum seekers who qualify safe haven in the US we cant start there. Perhaps less H visas would be a start as we have no legal obligation to have an H visa program. Then the overworked people in the service centers could work on the backlogs in other areas.

Justin G. Randolph
Carpenter & Capt, Chtd., Chicago, IL

Dear Editor:
Regarding your news item about Threat To Kill President Bush Lands Lawful Permanent Resident In Deportation Proceedings, the Miami Herald ( reports that he had tried to impersonate his boss in an email sent to the FBI with "[I] will kill the president by 5/30/03; catch me if you can; long live saddam".

Name Not Provided

Dear Editor:
The BALCA decision for today is not accessible, can you provide a new link?

Stacy Cozart LPA
Margaret Wong & Assoc., Co., Cleveland, Ohio

Editor's Note: We tried the BALCA link and it works fine. If you get faced with a similiar situation in the future, it may help to close all the web browsers open on your computer and retry. Failing that, re-booting your computer may also help.

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 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.

Editorial Advisory Board
Marc Ellis, Gary Endelman

© Copyright 1999-2003 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM