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

VIP Network


Chinese Immig. Daily


Connect to us

Make us Homepage



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free

Immigration LLC.

< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Dear Editor:

It is obvious that this issue of 245(i) has two sides, those that are pro and those that are against.

The fact of the matter is, regardless of where you stand on the issue, there are millions of "illegal" or undocumented aliens living on US soil. The pre 9/11/01 benefit of 245(i) was, up until April 2001, that many of these undocumented aliens who are honest, hard-working, tax paying, of good moral character, individuals that flocked to immigration consultants, employers, etc., i.e., CAME FORWARD, EXPOSED THEMSELVES, were willing to undergo fingerprinting, background checks, file applications with the INS, DOL, etc., in order to take advantage of this Section of the law with the hope of some day becoming citizens of these United States of America.


Today there are still untold thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of undocumented aliens still living, working, paying taxes, raising families, etc., in the US. However, these did not, could not, didn't understand enough, or didn't believe what they were told about Section 245(i). Yet, they are here and since Congress chose NOT TO EXTEND this law, not only did these individuals lose a shot at the American dream, but as a result the US government has NO WAY OF KNOWING WHERE they live, what they're doing here, who they associate with.....

Does it drain the resources of our law enforcement agencies? Maybe yes, and probably more so since 9/11/01! But, these people were already here before that horrific tragedy took place on September 11, 2001. Many who missed their chance would have been willing to COME FORWARD, let the US government and all its agencies KNOW WHERE THEY WERE, what they're doing here, where they lived, where they work, etc., etc., etc. That fact of and in itself would've drastically REDUCED THE burden now placed upon the various law enforcement agencies. Suffice it to say 245(i), therefore, does not and would not create a hinderance, but a helpful tool to enforcement. The choice made by Congress not to extend 245(i) is what created the now enormous burden on the back(s) of these various law enforcement agencies.

Remember, too, that those 19 terrorists who perpertrated the atrocities on September 11, 2001, were not here in the US seeking adjustment under 245(i), they were here under EXPIRED student and visitor visas.