The White House Blog.

Immigration Update: Maximizing Public Safety and Better Focusing Resources.

Posted by Cecilia Muñoz on August 18, 2011 at 02:00 PM EDT.

President Obama is deeply committed to fixing our immigration laws and has been aggressively searching for partners in Congress who are willing to work with him to pass a new law. As he focuses on building a new 21st century immigration system that meets our nation’s economic and security needs, the President has a responsibility to enforce the existing laws in a smart and effective manner. This means making decisions that best focus the resources that Congress gives the Executive Branch to do this work. There are more than 10 million people who are in the U.S. illegally; it’s clear that we can’t deport such a large number. So the Administration has developed a strategy to make sure we use those resources in a way that puts public safety and national security first. If you were running a law enforcement agency anywhere in the world, you would target those who pose the greatest harm before those who do not. Our immigration enforcement work is focused the same way.

Under the President’s direction, for the first time ever the Department of Homeland Security has prioritized the removal of people who have been convicted of crimes in the United States. And they have succeeded; in 2010 DHS removed 79,000 more people who had been convicted of a crime compared to 2008. Today, they announced that they are strengthening their ability to target criminals even further by making sure they are not focusing our resources on deporting people who are low priorities for deportation. This includes individuals such as young people who were brought to this country as small children, and who know no other home. It also includes individuals such as military veterans and the spouses of active-duty military personnel. It makes no sense to spend our enforcement resources on these low-priority cases when they could be used with more impact on others, including individuals who have been convicted of serious crimes.

So DHS, along with the Department of Justice, will be reviewing the current deportation caseload to clear out low-priority cases on a case-by-case basis and make more room to deport people who have been convicted of crimes or pose a security risk. And they will take steps to keep low-priority cases out of the deportation pipeline in the first place. They will be applying common sense guidelines to make these decisions, like a person’s ties and contributions to the community, their family relationships and military service record. In the end, this means more immigration enforcement pressure where it counts the most, and less where it doesn’t – that’s the smartest way to follow the law while we stay focused on working with the Congress to fix it.

Cecilia Muñoz is White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs

December 22, 2010

Op-Ed Article

The “Right” DREAM

For years, many well-meaning people from widely diverse backgrounds and organizations have encouraged Congress to pass the Dream Act, branding it a “Pathway to Citizenship”.

As an Immigration attorney, my personal opinion is that the repeated failure of the Dream Act to pass Congress lies in that de facto and demanding phrase. This “Pathway to Citizenship” may be seen by many as a way to pave a future for minors who had no control over their fate in being brought to the United States. Alternatively, this may be perceived by others as simply asking for too much from our Federal Government at a time when it has so many crises to resolve.

I have heard and seen thousands of stories of how brutal life is for undocumented minors and young adults. Doors for military service and higher education remain closed. The opportunity to gain even meager employment remains tenuous or impossible. Doors have never slammed shut on these young people, because the doors were never open. More often than not, these people are borderline illiterate in the language of their birth country, and often they do not even have any memories from their country of birth. The stories of these boys and girls are simply heart wrenching. They are preoccupied about arrest, detention and potential removal to a land they don’t even remember. Depression and anxiety grow annually as tens of thousands of people come to understand they cannot realize their dreams in the United States. I have heard from a few undocumented adolescents that have said they would kill themselves rather than live outside of the United States, the only country they know.

What is preventing the DREAM act from passing? The most progressive lobbyists and politicians, with the best of intentions, have altogether missed the beat of many American people who are against this pathway to citizenship. I have heard both sides of the story for many years as conservatives often tell me their perspective. Are conservatives being heartless or impractical on this topic? I think not. Most conservatives want these productive young people to be able to serve in our military, to pay their way in higher education, to help maintain their stable families and communities, to be employed legally in our workforce and to contribute billions to our tax base. But not at the cost of being placed on the pathway to citizenship. This usually seems to be one of the strongest points of debate.

The “Pathway to Citizenship” has become a point of hostile national gridlock instead of productive national debate and compromise. The following is a proposed solution to this vexing problem that has stymied our Congress for so long. Let’s drop the demand for a “Pathway to Citizenship”. Instead, let’s call it a “Pathway to Compliance” and give undocumented youth the ability to stay in the United States, to work in the United States and to travel in and out of our country, forever being barred from acquiring Permanent Residency, save for an exception for those who earn honorable military discharges.

Once and for all, we could put to rest the angst of conservatives regarding perceived “amnesty” for those who entered the United States without authorization. Would this prohibition against permanent residency, and therefore, ultimately, a prohibition against Citizenship be fair? Probably not. But life is not entirely fair and this compromise could satisfy perspectives from both the left and from the right. Most immigrants who entered the United States as minors, through no choice of their own, and who do not yet have legal status, would be able to live productive lives and come out of the shadows. Certainly, everyone would be subject to criminal background checks and other tests of attributes of good moral character, such as compliance with annual tax filings. The very nature of being in this new temporary and indefinite visa status would give the Federal Government the tools to deal pragmatically with so many young people who are not yet in status, and to monitor more closely many of those people who are here.

The real benefits to the United States, to many frustrated military recruiters, to our reeling national tax base, to our educational institutions, and to the emotional and legal stability of hundreds of thousands of families are within reach. This debate should be re-kindled. Lobbyists and Congressmen should compromise on DREAM in order to realize benefits for all and to avoid a future national nightmare.

Daniel L. Weiss, Esq.
Freehold, New Jersey

*** The contents of the above OP ED are not necessarily the opinions of the Visaserve Team but they are the opinions of Daniel Weiss, Esq., an Immigration Lawyer and a friend of our Law Office.

Why We Need The DREAM Act Now
by Victoria Donoghue

Why We Need The DREAM Act Now For some time now, lawmakers have insisted that immigration reform, if it is to happen, must be comprehensive, dealing with all of the problems with our broken system at once. A piecemeal approach, they say, is not acceptable. Suggestions that certain pressing issues be dealt with separately have been flatly rejected.

However, efforts at so-called Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) have gone nowhere for years. Lobbying efforts in March 2010 by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) made it clear that CIR is not going to pass anytime soon.

Given this state of affairs, perhaps now is the time to address separately our most pressing immigration issues. And nothing could be more pressing than the one facing many talented young people in our country. In his July 1, 2010 remarks on CIR, President Obama pointed out that many of the 11 million illegal immigrants amongst us came to the US with young children in tow. These children grew up as Americans; they were educated in our schools, speak English fluently, and have embraced American culture as their own. As President Obama stated, many “only discover their illegal status when they apply for college or a job.”

College applications require a social security number, and illegal immigrants do not have one. While a few academic institutions have a policy of accepting illegal immigrants (on the theory that they are not in the business of enforcing U.S. immigration law), most do not. Even if a young illegal alien is lucky enough to obtain a college degree, he or she will face an even more serious problem upon getting an offer of employment. Accepting a job offer leads to the need to complete an I-9 form for the employer, a form that requires an employee to produce documents evidencing authorization to work in the U.S.

In 2009 the DREAM Act (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act) was introduced as a way to address this problem. If passed, the DREAM Act would make it possible for 1 million young undocumented immigrants to become lawful permanent residents. The bill would permit immigrant students who graduate from US high schools, are of good moral character, arrived in the US as children, and have been in the country continuously for at least five years prior to the bill’s enactment, the opportunity to earn conditional permanent residence. The students would obtain permanent residence for a six year period. Within the six year period, a qualified student must have acquired a degree from an institution of higher education in the US or have completed at least 2 years, in good standing, in a program for a bachelor’s degree or higher degree in the U.S., or have “served in the uniformed services for at least 2 years and, if discharged, have received an honorable discharge.” Members of Congress have introduced several forms of this bill in both the House and Senate over the years, but it has yet to pass.

But the DREAM Act could be considered by the Senate again next week. In a blog entry on September 14, 2010, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced his intention to include the DREAM Act in the major defense bill scheduled for floor action next week.

A real-life story of a young illegal alien that would benefit from the passage of the DREAM Act is the best way to illustrate the realities of what these young people face. What follows is such a story (the name is fictitious):

Maria San Gabriel

Maria San Gabriel was born in Columbia, the daughter of a doctor and flight attendant. Their lives in Columbia were comfortable, but changes in the health care system in that country were making it increasingly difficult for Maria’s father to make a living. Seeing their way of life threatened, Maria’s parents set their sights on the U.S.

When Maria was 7 years old, she and her parents entered the U.S. in tourist status. They moved in with relatives and searched for work. Maria’s father found work as a parking attendant in a garage in New York City, where he still works to this day. Her mother went to work in a factory that manufactures cosmetics. Maria started school in the second grade, struggling to learn English.

As the years passed the family of three settled into their new life. Eventually, Maria’s parents were able purchase a small apartment. Maria not only learned English, she became a star student graduating from high school with straight A’s. Despite this progress, the family was never able to adjust their status; they remained undocumented. Maria’s parents put a great emphasis on education and were determined to see their only daughter go to college. Maria felt this pressure. But without lawful immigration status, it seemed like every avenue was closed. Many colleges were interested in her, but she was undocumented.

While working on her computer one day early in her senior year of high school, Maria typed “undocumented” and “college student” into a google search. The search results included an article by a conservative commentator, critical of colleges and universities that had made a policy decision to accept undocumented students if they were academically qualified. The article identified a school in the Northeast that Maria knew was an outstanding institution. Maria and her parents went to visit the college on a rainy overcast day. Notwithstanding the weather, they fell in love with the school. Maria applied to the college and waited anxiously, checking the mailbox daily. When the thick acceptance letter arrived, she cried tears of joy. When she phoned her parents at work to share the news, their reaction was the same.

Maria is about to start her sophomore year. During her freshman year, she earned top grades. She is studying Education and DREAMs of being a teacher. But her future is not bright. As an undocumented alien she is not work authorized. With a change in the law, she will never be able to work legally in the U.S.

There are countless more stories like Maria’s all across the U.S. Regardless of one’s personal feelings about illegal immigration, there can be no doubt that young people caught in Maria’s circumstances are valuable members of our society who, given the opportunity, will make their own unique contributions. It’s time for Congress to overcome political inertia and provide the children of illegal immigrants who have grown up in America with the opportunity to fully participate in the life of this country. We will all be better off for it.

About The Author

Victoria Donoghue received her J.D. from St. John’s University School of Law in 1992, after having received a Masters of Science in Industrial and Labor Relations from Cornell University in 1989. From 2003-2007 Ms. Donoghue was the Assistant Director of Human Resources at the Research Foundation of the City University of New York, a 5000 employee nonprofit corporation that administers the $360 million in research grants that flow through the City University system each year. In that capacity, she oversaw the Foundation’s immigration program, supervising the processing of nonimmigrant visas and serving as a resource both to the Foundation’s foreign national employees and to outside counsel in petitions for permanent residence. In addition, she regularly delivered presentations to colleges throughout the CUNY system about immigration matters and is a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. In 2007 Ms. Donoghue entered private practice as an immigration attorney, becoming Of Counsel to the law firm of Nachman & Associates. Since then she has taught and published widely on a variety of immigration related issues. She is currently an Adjunct Professor in the Immigration Law Program in CUNY’s School of Professional Studies. She has given presentations at the 2008 NAFSA Annual Conference, Fairleigh Dickenson University, Vassar College, Hunter College, City College, New Jersey Institute of Technology, the National Business Institute, and the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, among others. Her publications include a chapter in The PERM Book, 2008-2009 Edition and a chapter article entitled “A Program to Promote Scientific Research at the City University of New York” to be published in NAFSA’s International Students: Strengthening a Critical Resource, due out in 2009.

DOL SECRETARY SOLIS ANNOUNCES THE DEPARTMENT TO EXERCISE ITS AUTHORITY TO CERTIFY U VISAS.

“On March 15, 2010 Secretary Solis announced that the Department of Labor (“DOL”) will begin exercising its authority to certify applications for U Nonimmigrant Status Visas (”U Visas”).”

So, what is the big fuss, you may ask? Well, if U.S. employers take a close look at the rules and regulations . . . it means that the U.S. Department of Labor has another enforcement tool in its “bag of tricks.”

The DOL can afford U Visa status to any foreign nationals that help the DOL investigate employers who are involved in Wage and Hour Violations and other Workplace Violations.

Employers need to be mindful (more then ever before) that they should carefully follow all of the DOL’s rules and regulations.

CLICK on the link below to read the U Visa Certification Announcement from the DOL:

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/opa/opa20100312-fs.htm

As our economy continues in its downward spiral, company mergers, acquisitions and restructurings (“transactions”) are likely to continue. In general, since a merger, acquisition or restructuring is a “corporate transaction”, the immigration issues often get left in the dust. For this reason, it is important that immigration repercussions that arise from a merger, acquisition or restructuring are considered and that Business Immigration Counsel is brought into the “deal” or arrangement at the appropriate time – earlier rather then later. This is especially the case since Business Immigration Counsel may be able to save money for the parties to the transaction.

Immigration regulations closely tie the employer’s identity, location and ownership structure; any change from the merger/acquisition may immediately invalidate an alien employee’s non-immigrant visa. The loss of non-immigrant visa validity could immediately affect an employee’s work status in the U.S. For example, if a transaction is undertaken and the successor party fails to amend the H-1B petition and/or the underlying Labor Condition Application (the “LCA”) then the H-1B nonimmigrant may be out of status. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Citizenship and Immigration Service (“CIS”) has made it clear that there is no “grace period” and that once an H-1B non-immigrant is no longer employed with the H-1B sponsor then the individual is deemed to be out-of-status.

It is for this very reason that Business Immigration Counsel advise employers who are involved in a transaction to be sure to annotate the Public Access File (“PAF”) prior to the transaction so that the successor organization clearly assumes the liabilities of the H-1B nonimmigrants. This “assumption” can be added to the PAF prior to the closing of the transaction and this way there is no requirement that there be amendments to the H-1B be submitted. However, amendments to H-1Bs may be desired by H-1B employees if they will be traveling outside the U.S.

Depending upon an individual’s progress in the green card process, Immigrant Visa Petitions may also be affected. A determination will need to be made as to whether or not the new company owner would be considered to be a “successor-in-interest”. If the organization’s new owner has assumed all of the past owner’s liabilities, then the new owner may qualify as a “successor-in-interest”. If the new company is a “successor-in-interest” then the green card process can be continued by the successor organization. Hence, the new employer would continue with the green card process on behalf of the foreign national employee without having to start the green card process/labor certification/PERM from the beginning.

The third and one of the most important issues with which a business owner or transferor should be concerned is the Form I-9. A “successor-in-interest” can assume the I-9 liabilities of the organization. Failure to comply with I-9 requirements may result in serious sanctions. Therefore, before a transaction is undertaken, an examination of the Forms I-9 of the organization should be conducted through either an audit or a review. If the successor organization does not assume the Forms I-9 of the prior organization then new I-9s can be done for each of the organization’s employees. Such Forms I-9 should be prepared for all employees to avoid any allegation of an unfair immigration-related employment practice such as document abuse or discrimination on the basis of citizenship or nationality.

Immigration repercussions should be considered early on in any transaction. Initially, an analysis of the immigration status of all of the organization’s alien employees and a determination of the form of the corporate change on their status should be considered. Following this analysis, filings of any applications necessary to maintain the employees’ status can be appropriately considered.

In an ongoing attempt to keep HR professionals up-to-date with business immigration law rules and regulations, our office continues to forge strategic alliances with various professional organizations that are able to obtain and provide important information to their members.

When traditional immigration approaches do not work, our knowledgeable and skilled legal team offers many visa options to meet immigration goals. Please feel free to contact us at any of our several office locations, and speak to a member of our staff in one of the 15 languages spoken, English, Spanish, French, Japanese, Korean, Slovak, Czech, Polish, Tagalog, Hindi, Tamil, Italian, Russian, Chinese, and German.

To meet a growing demand for Canadian Immigration Law Services, Nachman & Associates formed a Canadian Division in 2005. Managed by licensed Canadian legal staff and with offices in Montreal and Toronto, as well as New York and New Jersey, our Canadian Division attorneys are in the unique position to assist with cross-border issues.

Nachman & Associates, P.C. is also proud to announce the 2007 formation of a Global Immigration Division to assist clients with immigration services to countries such as the UK, China, New Zealand, Australia, and more. Our Global Division staff is fully equipped to assist with international transfers to and from the United States. If you, or any member of your staff, are interested in receiving more information about with regard to changes in the corporate structure or in connection with a merger or acquisition or layoff or termination. please contact us at 201-670-0006 (x100) or at info@visaserve.com. Feel free to visit us on the web at www.visaserve.com.