Today's Immigration Daily issue features no less than eight Letters to the Editor reflecting a wide range of opinions and viewpoints. For the letters, see below.
We welcome readers to share their opinion and ideas with us by writing to email@example.com.
Missed ILW.COM Seminars? Get Tapes! (Listen To Sample Audio Clips)
You can listen to cutting edge issues in immigration at a schedule
convenient to you. Tapes for all our seminars are only $199 per series.
Featured experts include Tammy Fox-Isicoff, Ron Klasko, Cynthia Lange,
Angelo Paparelli, Jan Pederson, Joel Stewart, Bernard Wolfsdorf and many
others. For more info on detailed curricula, speaker bios and sample audio
clips of our seminars, please see here.
The Economics Of Necessity: Economic Report Of The President Underscores The Importance of Immigration
Walter A. Ewing of the Immigration Policy Center writes "Although immigration is crucial to the growth of the U.S. labor force and yields a net fiscal benefit to the U.S. economy, current immigration policies fail
to respond to actual labor demand.
DOL Releases 4th Round PERM FAQS
The Department of Labor released the 4th round of PERM FAQs dated June 1, 2005.
Help Wanted: Immigration Attorney
Jasinsky Immigration Law LLC seeks an experienced business immigration attorney for our Stamford, Connecticut office. Send cover letter and resume to Laura Jasinsky, firstname.lastname@example.org.
Help Wanted: Immigration Paralegal
Jasinsky Immigration Law LLC seeks an experienced business immigration paralegal for our Stamford, Connecticut office. Send cover letter and resume to Laura Jasinsky, email@example.com.
Help Wanted: Immigration Attorney
The Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law is a Los Angeles non-profit focusing its work on the civil and human rights of insular minorities. The Center initiates and conducts major class action litigation. The program also operates community-based and international human rights projects. The Center currently has an opening for a Staff Attorney. The Staff Attorney will assist in development and implementation of a training program on the rights of abused immigrant women and children, as well as provide technical support and assistance to Pro Bono attorneys representing abused immigrant women and children minors. The Staff Attorney will also represent abused women and children in Special Immigrant Juvenile, Asylum, VAWA, U-Visa, and T-Visa proceedings. Qualifications: Applicants must be admitted to CA Bar; must have experience with preparing one of the following: (SIJ petitions, VAWA petitions, or U-Visa applications); must be bilingual in Spanish and English; must have strong research and writing skills; should have demonstrated commitment to social justice issues. Compensation: $40,000 plus benefits. Do not telephone. Send resume, cover letter, 3 references, and writing sample in Word format (no WP docs) to both Angela Perry: firstname.lastname@example.org and Peter Schey: email@example.com.
Help Wanted: Immigration Attorneys
The Law Office of Robert L. Lewis, Immigrant Defense Group is accepting applications for immigration attys (entry and experienced). We excel at deportation defense, including asylum, international human rights defenses, discretionary relief, naturalization and family-based immigration. Successful candidate should expect frequent client contact and court appearances; drafting of client narrative declarations, research news and NGO reports to corroborate claims. Must be admitted to a State Bar, have some training or experience in immigration law, good writing skills, strong computer skills, and be highly organized. Spanish or Portuguese fluency a strong plus. First year salary $65 - $85K, depending on training, language skills and immigration experience. Standard health insurance and vacation benefits, plus fee sharing and bonuses. Sunny, high-tech office in historic landmark building at Oakland City Center, 15 minute BART ride to downtown SF/local immigration courts. Submit resume + cover letter to JobOpenings@ImmigrantDefense.com. All inquiries treated in absolute confidence. State language skills and immigration experience, if any, with specificity in your cover letter. Please, no calls.
Help Wanted: Immigration Attorney
Position available with Pederson Immigration Group, P.C., an established top boutique firm with national and
international client base in Washington, DC. Unique positions for the right
persons who can initiate independent action when necessary, can exercise
sound judgment and assume responsibility. This is an exciting opportunity
to be part of a great team handling sophisticated and challenging
immigration matters. Opportunity to travel to consular posts. Experience
with H-1B petitions, labor certifications, J-1 physician waivers and
consular processing preferred. 3-5 years experience in the immigration
field and computer literacy required. Friendly place to work. Excellent
compensation package. If interested please forward in confidence your
resume, references and compensation history to Jan Pederson at: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Case Management Technology
With Immigration Case Management Tools from INSZoom, you can rest assured that you are working with the most secure, simple and strategic software and support services. This state-of-the art product helps US Immigration Law Firms to build efficiency, accuracy and transparency in their immigration operations through a single comprehensive software. Besides 600+ Forms and Case Management, many advanced functionalities like Online Questionnaires, eFiling, eTracking, Knowledgebase, Group Calendaring, Accounting, Prospect Management, Document Expiration Ticklers & Management Reports, etc. are part of this one all-encompassing tool. Your clients may update their profile information, check case status, manage compliancy, and generate numerous reports..all via a secure online system. INSZoom's superior technology is backed by a friendly, responsive and multi-lingual training & customer support team; which will modulate the training program and handhold your team members to maximize the benefits from INSZoom. We will ensure that our technology works for you…everytime. INSZoom is available in 2 versions: Install in your own office or host on INSZoom secure servers. Contact us for a free guided tour today at 925-244-0600 or email@example.com.
Readers can share their professional announcements (100-words or fewer at no charge), email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Alexis Kirk and Associates is pleased to announce that the New York City Chamber of Commerce has cited our firm as Best Bet in New York, we are so proud of this honor. Tel: 212-572-9997. Fax: 212-619-0006.
Readers are welcome to share their comments, email: email@example.com (300-words or fewer preferred).
I am a greencard applicant myself. Allowing this massive number of illegals to become US permanent residents is simply damaging to the US (see 6/03/05 ID comment). Here are the reasons why: (1) Rewarding illegals and people with questionable backgrounds will always bring negative consequences. Many crossing the borders are from questionable backgrounds. In my community here I see faces from people coming from known neighborhoods in South America (not from Mexico) and I hear stories of robbery and late night drinking increasing more and more in my community in Seattle, WA. The majority of people coming are not robbers or bad elements, but the problem is that the bad ones will not raise the hands and volunteer to leave during your proposed legalization. Moreover, once you grant amnesty or legalization for those who brake the law of a sovereign country, people will be rewarded and encouraged to continue to cross the borders illegally. That's obvious. (2) Divisive culture and language, a disruption to any nation: How many of the 12 million illegals you think are here because they have respect, long-term (LT) relationship and bounds to the America culture and language like me or you? Most people don't go to Japan, Australia or the US because they love the place. They immigrate due to short term opportunities, money - and that's alright. Please do not reward temporary workers that have no serious LT interest and merits with a valuable US permanent residency or legalization. You are setting a divided culture and nation, with a group that is out of touch with the rest of the country. Making the host country speak Spanish to accommodate the newcomers never worked. This will erode the American culture very soon, as it is already happening now.
Justin D. Randolph, Esq.'s letter (6/03/05 ID) says that according to his dictionary an
immigrant is "one who leaves a country to settle permanently in another", but I think the person who leaves a country to settle
permanently in another, is called "emigrant", and not immigrant. Furthermore, I agree to what Mr. Murray's letter (6/02/05 ID) says that " illegals aren't immigrants ", because illegals are those who violated the US law by overstaying their visa. How could they be immigrants when they violate the US law?
ID's Comment of June 3, 2005 claims that "Enforcement Is Not Solution" and advocates instead large scale legalization as the solution to the problem of undocumented workers in the U.S.. However, you neglect to
mention that we tried this already in 1986. Then we were told that this
amnesty would resolve the illegal immigrant anomaly by legalizing farm
workers and those firmly settled in the U.S., while deterring further
unlawful immigration by the sanctioning of employers who continued to employ workers illegally.
What happened instead was an utter failure by the government to meaningful enforce employer sanctions. Clearly one should not be advocating a second amnesty without at least explaining why the same situation will not repeat itself. Without a
genuine commitment to employer sanctions, a second amnesty will simply pull more undocumented workers into the U.S., as the expectation that if one remains in the U.S. long enough, one will never have to go back,
But is there anything then that can be done to make employer sanctions
effective? Not increased spending on enforcement. It's naive to believe that Congress will provide the necessary funds for an enforcement campaign aimed at the largest donators to its election campaigns. Rather, I submit that
the best solution is to harness the genius of the American market to the
task, at minimal expense to the federal purse.
Privatize the enforcement of employer sanctions. Empower any person with
probable cause to suspect that an employer is illegally employing foreign
workers to bring an action in court to fine the employer, and let the
plaintiff receive the fines as his judgment. Only once we have a truly effective employer sanction system in place can
we hope to make any real progress toward solving the problem of illegal
immigration in the United States.
Michael E. Piston. Esq.
I realize that lawyers are wont to argue over the angelic population on a pinhead, but on reading Mr. Randolph's response (6/03/05 ID) to Mr. Murray's letter (6/2/05 ID), I wonder if his letter intentionally chose to dabble in trivia in order to avoid addressing the point of Murray's letter. Perhaps Randolph should trade his "old and tattered American Heritage Dictionary" for whatever passes for immigration law these days. "Immigrant" is customarily used for aliens lawfully admitted for permanent residence. The others are precisely "illegal aliens," a term based on legal definition and not meant to be disrespectful. As for your editorial (6/03/05 ID comment), there is no doubt that illegal aliens provide "enormous economic benefit" that "allows for the lowered cost of goods and services" in much the same way that slavery once provided those same benefits to the nation. What kind of legalization did you have in mind that would keep those people trapped in the lowest paid of the working class? Only their illegal status keeps them there now. Once they are freed from those bonds, they will climb out of the basement to be replaced by a new wave of illegals just as in the years following the last amnesty. If enforcement is not a solution, I fear you will never be able to craft any legislation that can operate without it. I join you in looking forward to substantial immigration reform legislation. Perhaps this time they could put some real teeth into employer sanctions and enforce it across the board so it would level the field for all employers. The resulting living wage at the bottom rung might cause a temporary inconvenience to the pampered among us, but we can adjust.
Although a general dictionary cannot be relied upon to define legal terms (that's why Mr. Black published Black's Law Dictionary), Justin G. Randolph, Esq. is right (06/03/05 ID), laymen would generally define "immigrants" as "people who leave a country to settle permanently in another". To an immigration lawyer, however, the words "settle permanently" are words of legal art, not a layman's misunderstanding of an unfamiliar term. Black's does not define "immigrant", but defines "immigration" as, "The coming into a country of foreigners for purposes of permanent residence.". Applying lawyer's logic, illegal aliens are not "coming" the US "for purposes of permanent residence", and they are not "leaving" their country for that purpose either. In actual fact, their purpose of coming is to find work, notwithstanding the law, or the consequences of the bar to admissibility in INA Section 212(a)(9)(B). A subjective wishful intent of permanent residence to possibly, maybe, someday become a permanent resident does not rise to the level of an objective intent to "settle permanently", any more than my entry into a bank evidences my intention of becoming a millionaire by somehow getting into the vault, illegal as it may be. The bottom line is, an uninspected alien, or an overstay, simply cannot, as a matter of law, be "coming" to the US "for purposes of permanent residence", since in order to have that intent, the alien must possess a permanent residence visa. Until then, the entering alien is either an uninspected illegal, or a nonimmigrant, as the case may be. Therefore, applying legal logic, and immigration law, along with a realistic construction of the definition of Mr. Randolph's "old and tattered American Heritage Dictionary", as well as Blacks, we can only conclude that illegals are not immigrants, any more than are nonimmigrants.
David D. Murray, Esq.
Newport Beach, CA
Immigration Daily believes that the undocumented should be given a path to legalization because the undocumented provide enormous economic benefit to the nation (6/03/05 ID comment). This may be the case, but to those who are going through the legal channels and patiently waiting for up to 6-8 years, it feels like a slap in the face. Maybe they should also grant de-facto approvals or green cards to those those who have waiting upwards of 5 years. This would (1) reduce backlogs so that immigration could then get a decent approval process in place that they can deal with in a timely manner (2) reduce costs in opening up additional centers to reduce backlogs.
How can we justify ourselves to enjoy prosperity, freedom and better opportunity while we unfairly deny others to do the same and call them illegals, just because our ancestors came here much earlier when free movement to seek survival, better life and opportunity wasn't considered as a sin and crime? Free market, trade and movement for everybody and businesses to offer best deals anywhere in this planet is the only fair answer to end this never ending debate about immigration. We hate immigration and job outsourcing simply because we hate competition. Lou Dobbs of CNN, should tell his fans, that life is competitive and Americans must face this tough reality and try to find positive solutions. CNN doesn't need H1B foreign worker to replace Lou Dobbs just to do his easy job, many Americans can do for much less. We need solutions to face globalized world, its challenges and opportunities not just endless criticism.
I noticed a grammatical mistake in your immigration daily comingsngoings section 6 this morning. The correct grammar should be "100 words or fewer". Not "100 words or less".
Editor's Note: Thanks for alerting us to our error. The error has been corrected.
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. Copyright 1999-2005 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM. Send correspondence and articles to firstname.lastname@example.org. Letters and articles may be edited and may be published and otherwise used in any medium. The views expressed in letters and articles do not necessarily represent the views of ILW.COM or members of the Immigration Daily Advisory Board. The opinions expressed in the Comment section are those of ILW.COM and Immigration Daily and do not necessarily represent the views of the members of the Immigration Daily Advisory Board.