Headlines:

1. Federal Court Vacates Delay of International Entrepreneur Rule -On December 1, 2017, a federal court vacated the Trump administration’s delay of an Obama-era rule that would have allowed certain foreign entrepreneurs to obtain immigration parole.

2. USCIS Designates Adopted Decisions Defining Affected Parties, Function Managers -USCIS has designated two Administrative Appeals Office decisions as Adopted Decisions.

3. DHS To Terminate TPS Designation for Haiti in July 2019 -Haitians with TPS must reapply for employment authorization documents to continue working legally in the United States until the end of the extension period.

4. Federal Court Blocks Trump Order To Strip ‘Sanctuary Jurisdictions’ of Federal Funding -A federal court granted two California counties’ motions for summary judgment and permanently enjoined the defunding and enforcement provisions of the Trump administration’s executive order with respect to “sanctuary jurisdictions.”

5. USCIS Announces Caps for Final Three Fiscal Years of CNMI Transitional Worker Program -USCIS encourages employers to file petitions for CW-1 workers as early as possible within six months of the requested employment start date. USCIS will reject a petition if it is filed more than six months in advance.

6. DHS Announces Delayed Termination of TPS for Nicaragua, Six-Month Extension for Honduras -Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke is terminating TPS for Nicaragua with a delayed effective date of 12 months, to January 5, 2019. She also determined that additional information is necessary regarding the TPS designation for Honduras before a determination can be made. As a result, the TPS designation for Honduras will be automatically extended for 6 months, to July 5, 2018.

7. U.S. Resumes Limited Visa Operations in Turkey -The U.S. Mission in Turkey announced that embassies and consulates have resumed “limited visa services” in Turkey.

8. USCIS Warns About Scams Requesting I-9 Forms Via Email -USCIS recently announced that employers have received scam emails requesting Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, information. The emails claim to come from USCIS but do not. Employers are not required to submit Forms I-9 to USCIS but must retain them for a period of time.

9. E-Verify Employers Can Request Authorization to Post Logo -E-Verify employers can now request authorization from USCIS to post the trademarked E-Verify logo on their websites, presentation materials, and brochures “to let everyone know they are committed to maintaining a legal workforce.”

10. ABIL Global: European Court Dismisses Challenge to Mandatory Relocation of Displaced Persons -The European Court of Justice recently dismissed a challenge by Slovakia and Hungary to a mandatory allocation of 120,000 asylum seekers from Greece and Italy to other European Union Member States.

11. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

12. ABIL Member/Firm News -ABIL Member/Firm News

13. Government Agency Links -Government Agency Links

Details:

1. Federal Court Vacates Delay of International Entrepreneur Rule

On December 1, 2017, federal district Judge James E. Boasberg vacated the Trump administration’s delay of an Obama-era rule that would have allowed certain foreign entrepreneurs to obtain immigration parole (to temporarily enter the United States despite lacking a visa or permanent residence). At the outset of the opinion, the court said, “Elections have consequences. But when it comes to federal agencies, the Administrative Procedure Act [APA] shapes the contours of those consequences.”

The “International Entrepreneur Rule” was set to take effect July 17, 2017, but shortly beforehand, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued the “Delay Rule,” delaying the effective date of the original rule until March 14, 2018. The court noted that the agency did so without providing notice or soliciting comment from the public, which is generally required by the APA. The plaintiffs alleged that the agency lacked good cause to dispense with the APA’s strictures and that the Delay Rule was therefore invalid, and the court agreed.

The court noted that the Obama-era DHS promulgated the International Entrepreneur Rule to encourage international entrepreneurs to create and develop start-up entities with high growth potential in the United States. DHS believed that attracting foreign entrepreneurs would “benefit the U.S. economy through increased business activity, innovation, and dynamism.” Before issuance of the regulation, the court observed, foreign entrepreneurs “lacked a clear-cut avenue for entry into this country. …The United States had no dedicated visa category for foreign entrepreneurs, and other visa options were frequently unavailable to that group.” The executive branch, however, cannot unilaterally create a new visa category, the court noted, so it turned to a more temporary solution for these entrepreneurs: parole. This allows a foreign national to be physically present in the United States for a specific, temporary period, ranging from days to years. Parole does not constitute formal “admission” to the United States and gives the recipient no formal immigration status.

To be considered for a discretionary grant of parole for up to 30 months (with reapplication for up to an additional 30 months based on certain conditions) under the International Entrepreneur Rule, an entrepreneur would generally need to demonstrate the following:

1. The applicant must have formed a new start-up entity in the United States within 5 years of the application;
2. The applicant must (a) possess at least a 10% ownership interest in the business; and (b) “have an active and central role” in its operations and future growth; and
3. The applicant must validate the business’s potential “for rapid growth and job creation” by showing (a) it has received at least $250,000 from established U.S. investors; or (b) it has received at least $100,000 in grants from government entities.

The rule also created “alternative criteria” for meeting the final prong: a person partially meeting one of the investment thresholds could provide “additional reliable and compelling evidence” of the company’s potential for rapid growth and job creation. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) would also consider other relevant information in making its discretionary determination, such as any criminal history or other serious adverse factors.

The court noted that the agency “meaningfully” revised the final version in response to 763 comments received on the proposed rule. DHS changed the minimum investment amount, the definition of an entrepreneur, and the definition of a start-up entity.

Six days before the effective date of the rule, USCIS issued the superseding Delay Rule postponing the effective date by eight months, to March 14, 2018, but without offering the public advance notice or an opportunity to comment. Instead, it provided a short window for comments only after the Delay Rule took effect. Further, DHS indicated that it was “highly likely” to rescind the International Entrepreneur Rule. Its Delay Rule, therefore, appeared designed to ensure that the Obama-era rule would never take effect, the court noted.

The plaintiffs included two foreign nationals, two U.S. businesses, and the National Venture Capital Association, an organization of individuals who invest in businesses founded by foreign entrepreneurs. The plaintiffs all claimed that the Delay Rule seriously injured their businesses or investments. The Trump administration argued that the APA’s “good cause” exception applied, which allows an agency to dispense with notice-and-comment when it “for good cause finds…that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” The court noted that because notice-and-comment is “the default,” the onus is on the agency to establish that a notice-and-comment opportunity should not be given, and an agency “faces an uphill battle to meet that burden.”

Among other things, the plaintiffs argued that through its own delay, the agency forfeited any “good cause” defense. Citing related decisions, the court noted that good cause cannot arise as a result of an agency’s own delay; otherwise, an agency unwilling to provide notice or an opportunity to comment could simply wait until the even of a statutory, judicial, or administrative deadline, then raise up the “good cause” banner and promulgate rules without following APA procedures. In this case, the court said, the government’s briefing never explained the time lag and “struggled” to explain what the agency did between learning of the executive order and issuing the Delay Rule. DHS primarily justified the Delay Rule by citing the expense of implementing the new parole system, among other arguments. The court said that the agency’s proffered reasons for bypassing notice-and-comment were unpersuasive and “easily [fell] short of good cause.” The court noted that the agency estimated it would process roughly 2,900 applications this year and receive $1,285 each in filing fees, generating more than $3.5 million, and that the asserted expense to the government without evidence was not sufficient to overcome the notice-and-comment requirement.

The court concluded, ” If Defendants have additional reasons why a stay might be appropriate pending any appeal, they can so move. Until then, the Court believes that vacatur is the appropriate remedy.”

The full text of the opinion, .

Back to Top

2. USCIS Designates Adopted Decisions Defining Affected Parties, Function Managers

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has designated two Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) decisions as Adopted Decisions.

Matter of V-S-G Inc. (AAO Nov. 11, 2017), Adopted Decision 2017-06. This decision clarifies that beneficiaries of valid employment-based immigrant visa petitions who are eligible to change jobs or employers (“port”) and who have properly requested to do so under INA § 204(j) are “affected parties” under Department of Homeland Security regulations for purposes of revocation proceedings of their visa petitions and must be afforded an opportunity to participate in those proceedings.

The USCIS memorandum notes that other kinds of visa petition beneficiaries, and the subsequent employers of beneficiaries who have ported or sought to port, are not affected parties under DHS regulations and may not participate in visa revocation proceedings.

The AAO decision states that it “settles a tension between longstanding agency regulations and subsequent developments in the law regarding who is a cognizable party to a Form I-140, Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker.” The decision notes that traditionally, the applicant or petitioner is the only recognized party to a proceeding; that is, the beneficiary of a petition generally does not have the ability to participate in the immigration proceeding initiated by the petitioner. The decision sets forth a scenario in which an I-140 beneficiary may become a recognized party in certain limited circumstances in light of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-first Century Act of 2000 (AC21) and one of its amendments. In so doing, the decision explains the current USCIS interpretation of applicable regulations to allow such a beneficiary to participate in relevant administrative proceedings.

The decision concludes:

Because we find that beneficiaries who are eligible to port and properly request to port under AC21 are within the statute’s zone of interests, USCIS interprets that statute as requiring a change in the agency’s historical interpretation of the applicable DHS regulations. Our new interpretation is to treat these beneficiaries as affected parties who may participate in revocation proceedings related to their underlying immigrant visa petitions. Because the Beneficiary in this case, who is eligible to port and properly requested to port in compliance with the requirements under AC21, did not have an opportunity to so participate, we will reopen these proceedings and reinstate the Form I-140 immigrant visa petition relating to the Beneficiary and remand these proceedings to the Director, who must afford the Beneficiary an opportunity to respond to any future [Notice of Intent to Revoke] related to this I-140 petition. Should the Director thereafter revoke the immigrant petition’s approval, the Beneficiary may appeal or file a motion to reopen or reconsider from the revocation or he may participate in proceedings arising from an appeal or motion filed by the Petitioner relating to this petition.

Matter of G- Inc. (AAO Nov. 8, 2017), Adopted Decision 2017-05. This decision provides important guidance to U.S. employers who transfer “function managers” (those who primarily manage essential functions rather than people) under the L-1 intracompany visa. A USCIS memorandum explaining the adoption of this decision notes:

Matter of G- Inc. clarifies that, to establish that a beneficiary will be employed in a managerial capacity as a “function manager,” the petitioner must demonstrate that: (1) the function is a clearly defined activity; (2) the function is “essential,” i.e., core to the organization; (3) the beneficiary will primarily manage, as opposed to perform, the function; (4) the beneficiary will act at a senior level within the organizational hierarchy or with respect to the function managed; and (5) the beneficiary will exercise discretion over the function’s day-to-day operations.

MATTER OF V-S-G MEMORANDUM AND DECISION

MATTER OF G- MEMORANDUM AND DECISION

Back to Top

3. DHS To Terminate TPS Designation for Haiti in July 2019

Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke recently announced the termination of the temporary protected status (TPS) designation for Haiti with a delayed effective date of 18 months “to allow for an orderly transition before the designation terminates on July 22, 2019.”

The DHS statement said, “Since the 2010 earthquake, the number of displaced people in Haiti has decreased by 97 percent. Significant steps have been taken to improve the stability and quality of life for Haitian citizens, and Haiti is able to safely receive traditional levels of returned citizens. Haiti has also demonstrated a commitment to adequately prepare for when the country’s TPS designation is terminated.”

In May 2017, then-DHS Secretary John Kelly announced a limited extension for Haiti’s TPS designation, stating that he believed there were indications that Haiti may not warrant further TPS extension past January 2018. At the time, then-Secretary Kelly stated that his six-month extension should give Haitian TPS recipients living in the United States time to attain travel documents and make other necessary arrangements for their ultimate departure from the United States, and should also provide the Haitian government with the time it needed to prepare for the future repatriation of all current TPS recipients.

DHS said the effective date of July 22, 2019, would “provide time for individuals with TPS to arrange for their departure or to seek an alternative lawful immigration status in the United States, if eligible. It will also provide time for Haiti to prepare for the return and reintegration of their citizens. During this timeframe, USCIS will work with the State Department, other DHS components and the Government of Haiti to help educate relevant stakeholders and facilitate an orderly transition.”

Haitians with TPS must reapply for employment authorization documents to continue working legally in the United States until the end of the extension period.

DHS ANNOUNCEMENT

Back to Top

4. Federal Court Blocks Trump Order To Strip ‘Sanctuary Jurisdictions’ of Federal Funding

Following lawsuits by the counties of San Francisco and Santa Clara, California, federal district Judge William H. Orrick ruled against a provision of the Trump administration’s executive order issued in January 2017 to block federal funds from “sanctuary jurisdictions.”

The January executive order stated, “Sanctuary jurisdictions across the United States willfully violate Federal law in an attempt to shield aliens from removal from the United States. These jurisdictions have caused immeasurable harm to the American people and to the very fabric of our Republic.” The executive order said, among other things, that the policy of the executive branch is to “[e]nsure that jurisdictions that fail to comply with applicable Federal law do not receive Federal funds, except as mandated by law.” The order further said that the Secretary of Homeland Security has the authority to designate a jurisdiction as a sanctuary jurisdiction, and that the Attorney General can take “appropriate enforcement action” against any entity that “has in effect a statute, policy, or practice that prevents or hinders the enforcement of Federal law.”

The counties challenging the executive order argued that the relevant provision of the Trump executive order violated the separation of powers doctrine in the Constitution because it improperly sought to wield congressional spending powers. The counties said it was so overbroad and coercive that even if the President had spending powers, the executive order would clearly exceed them and violate the Tenth Amendment’s prohibition against commandeering local jurisdictions. Further, the counties argued that the provision was so vague that it violated the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and was void for vagueness. And because it sought to deprive local jurisdictions of congressionally allocated funds without any notice or opportunity to be heard, it violated the procedural due process requirements of the Fifth Amendment.

The federal government responded that the counties could not demonstrate that the executive order’s sanctuary provision was invalid under all circumstances. It also claimed, among other things, that the provision was consistent with the Constitution’s separation of powers and did not apply to funding in which the county might have a constitutionally protectable interest.

The court noted that the provision in question, by its plain language, attempted to reach all federal grants. The rest of the executive order was broader still, the court noted, addressing all federal funding. And if there was any doubt about the scope of the executive order, the court observed, the President and Attorney General “erased it with their public comments.” The court noted that the President has called the order “a weapon” to use against jurisdictions that disagree with his preferred policies of immigration enforcement, and his press secretary reiterated that the President intends to ensure that “counties and other institutions that remain sanctuary cites don’t get federal government funding in compliance with the executive order.” The Attorney General has warned that jurisdictions that do not comply would suffer “withholding grants, termination of grants, and disbarment or ineligibility for future grants,” and the “claw back” of any funds previously awarded, the court noted.

The court said that the Constitution vests spending powers in Congress, not the President, so the executive order “cannot constitutionally place new conditions on federal funds.” Further, the court noted, the Tenth Amendment “requires that conditions on federal funds be unambiguous and timely made; that they bear some relation to the funds at issue; and that they not be unduly coercive.” Federal funding that bears no meaningful relationship to immigration enforcement “cannot be threatened merely because a jurisdiction chooses an immigration enforcement strategy of which the President disapproves,” the court said. Because the executive order violates the separation of powers doctrine and deprives the counties of their Tenth and Fifth Amendment rights, the court granted the counties’ motions for summary judgment and permanently enjoined the defunding and enforcement provisions of the executive order.

JANUARY EXECUTIVE ORDER

ADDITIONAL DETAILS ON SANCTUARY JURISDICTION CASES, including links to this decision and other related decisions.

Back to Top

5. USCIS Announces Caps for Final Three Fiscal Years of CNMI Transitional Worker Program

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has announced the number of visas the agency will grant for the last three fiscal years of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI)-Only Transitional Worker (CW-1) program. The caps until the end of the program are 9,998 (FY 2018); 4,999 (FY 2019); and 4,999 (FY 2020, until December 31, 2019).

Congress previously mandated that USCIS end the program by reducing the number of workers in the program to zero by December 31, 2019. Under the CW-1 program, employers in the CNMI can apply for permission to employ foreign workers who are ineligible to work in the territory under other nonimmigrant worker categories. The intent of phasing out this foreign worker program is “to encourage the territory’s transition into the U.S. immigration system, as well as to bolster recruitment of U.S. workers in the CNMI,” the USCIS announcement states.

USCIS announced in May 2017 that the agency had received a sufficient number of petitions to reach the maximum possible CW-1 cap for FY 2018. April 11, 2017, was the last day on which USCIS accepted FY 2018 CW-1 petitions requesting an employment start date before October 1, 2018. USCIS “encourages employers to file petitions for CW-1 workers as early as possible within 6 months of the requested employment start date. Please note, however, that USCIS will reject a petition if it is filed more than six months in advance,” the announcement states.

USCIS ANNOUNCEMENT

Back to Top

6. DHS Announces Delayed Termination of TPS for Nicaragua, Six-Month Extension for Honduras

Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Elaine Duke announced on November 6, 2017, her decision to terminate the temporary protected status (TPS) designation for Nicaragua with a delayed effective date of 12 months to allow for an orderly transition before the designation terminates on January 5, 2019. She also determined that additional information is necessary regarding the TPS designation for Honduras before a determination can be made. As a result, the TPS designation for Honduras will be automatically extended for 6 months from the current January 5, 2018, expiration date to July 5, 2018.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said the decision to terminate TPS for Nicaragua was made after a review of the conditions on which the country’s original 1999 designation were based and whether those “substantial but temporary” conditions prevented Nicaragua from adequately handling the return of its nationals. Based on all available information, Acting Secretary Duke determined that those substantial but temporary conditions caused in Nicaragua by Hurricane Mitch no longer exist, and thus the current TPS designation must be terminated.

DHS said that the 12-month delay in the TPS expiration for Nicaragua “will provide time for individuals with TPS to seek an alternative lawful immigration status in the United States, if eligible, or, if necessary, arrange for their departure. It will also provide time for Nicaragua to prepare for the return and reintegration of their citizens.”

Regarding Honduras, Acting Secretary Duke said she concluded that despite receiving input from a broad spectrum of sources, additional time is necessary to obtain and assess supplemental information pertaining to country conditions in Honduras to make an “appropriately deliberative” TPS designation determination. Based on the lack of definitive information regarding conditions on the ground compared to pre-Hurricane Mitch, the Acting Secretary has not made a determination yet, thereby automatically extending the current TPS designation for Honduras for six months.

DHS noted, however, that it is possible that the TPS designation for Honduras will be terminated at the end of the 6-month automatic extension “with an appropriate delay.”

DHS said that it recognizes the difficulty facing citizens of Nicaragua, “and potentially citizens of other countries,” who have received TPS designation for “close to two decades.” Acting Secretary Duke called on Congress “to enact a permanent solution for this inherently temporary program.”

Nicaraguans and Hondurans with TPS will be required to reapply for employment authorization documents to legally work in the United States until the end of their TPS extensions. Further details will appear in a Federal Register notice, DHS said.

ANNOUNCEMENT

Back to Top

7. U.S. Resumes Limited Visa Operations in Turkey

The U.S. Mission in Turkey announced on November 6, 2017, that embassies and consulates resumed “limited visa services” in Turkey.

The U.S. Mission noted that “[w]e continue to have serious concerns about the existing cases against arrested local employees of our Mission in Turkey. We are also concerned about the cases against U.S. citizens who have been arrested under the state of emergency. U.S. officials will continue to engage with their Turkish counterparts to seek a satisfactory resolution of these cases.”

The U.S. Mission also said, however, that it had received “initial high-level assurances” that no additional local employees of the U.S. Mission in Turkey are under investigation. “We have also received initial assurances from the Government of Turkey that our local staff will not be detained or arrested for performing their official duties and that Turkish authorities will inform the U.S. government in advance if the Government of Turkey intends to detain or arrest a member of our local staff in the future.”

The U.S. Mission also said that Turkish citizens with valid visas may continue to travel to the United States. Turkish citizens “are also welcome to apply for a nonimmigrant visa outside of Turkey whether or not they maintain a residence in that country. Please note that an applicant applying outside of Turkey will need to pay the application fee for services in that country, even if a fee has previously been paid for services in Turkey.”

As background, on October 8, 2017, the U.S. Department of State announced that it was suspending nonimmigrant visa services at its diplomatic facilities in Turkey. Nonimmigrant visas included business, tourist, student, and temporary work authorization visas. The suspension also applied to diplomatic and official visas.

The U.S. Mission said that those with questions regarding canceled appointments or other issues resulting from these issues should see HERE.

Latest statements are HERE and HERE.

Back to Top

8. USCIS Warns About Scams Requesting I-9 Forms Via Email

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently announced that employers have received scam emails requesting Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, information. The emails claim to come from USCIS but do not. Employers are not required to submit Forms I-9 to USCIS but must retain them for a period of time.

USCIS said that the scam emails have been coming from a fraudulent email address: [email protected]. This is not a USCIS email address. The body of the email may contain USCIS and Office of the Inspector General labels, your address, and a fraudulent download link to a non-government web address (uscis-online.org). “Do not respond to these emails or click the links in them,” USCIS warned.

Those who believe they received a scam email requesting I-9 information from USCIS may report it to the Federal Trade Commission HERE. Those who are uncertain may forward the suspicious email to the USCIS webmaster, [email protected]. USCIS “will review the emails received and share with law enforcement agencies as appropriate.”

USCIS SCAM ALERTS AND RELATED RESOURCES

Back to Top

9. E-Verify Employers Can Request Authorization to Post Logo

E-Verify employers can now request authorization from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to post the trademarked E-Verify logo on their websites, presentation materials, and brochures “to let everyone know they are committed to maintaining a legal workforce.”

For more information or to apply, see the Trademark and Logo Usage Guidelines website.

GUIDELINES AND LICENSING AGREEMENT

Back to Top

10. ABIL Global: European Court Dismisses Challenge to Mandatory Relocation of Displaced Persons

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) recently dismissed a challenge by Slovakia and Hungary to a mandatory allocation of 120,000 asylum seekers from Greece and Italy to other European Union (EU) Member States.

ECJ judges said the European Council had acted lawfully. The court said that EU institutions were on firm legal ground when they adopted measures to respond to “an emergency situation characterized by a sudden inflow of displaced persons.” The ECJ also concluded that the legality of the decision was not affected by retrospective conclusions about the policy’s effectiveness.

Budapest condemned the court ruling as “appalling and irresponsible.” The foreign minister, Péter Szijjártó, said, “This decision jeopardizes the security and future of all of Europe. Politics has raped European law and values.” Hungary and Poland have not relocated anyone yet, and the Czech Republic has not made any such offers for more than a year. All three countries risk being taken to court by the commission.

Karl Waheed offered the following answers in response to questions about the ECJ’s decision, in his capacity as Vice Chair of the International Bar Association’s (IBA) Immigration and Nationality Law Committee:

1. What is the view of the Immigration and Nationality Law Committee on the ECJ decision?

The IBA promotes the rule of law, and this decision upholds the rule of law and backs the European Council’s authority to apply it uniformly, despite resistance from some Member States. This is good news for the governance of the EU.

2. Why did Slovakia and Hungary object in the first place?

Slovakia considers itself to be ethnically homogeneous. It has presently taken in 16 refugees out of the 902 it has pledged to take. However, Slovakia has avoided provoking any “infringement procedures,” which is the financial penalty imposed by the ECJ for refusing to follow their ruling, and it has avoided this by promising to take in more refugees.

Hungary sees itself as defending European and Christian civilization. Prime Minister Orban has pledged to fight the quota. Orban is facing a re-election this fall, which may be encouraging him to double down on his refusal. To date, Hungary has not taken a single person, and in June the ECJ initiated Infringement procedures against it, Poland, and the Czech Republic.

3. Will this ruling make any difference? Will these two countries now accept refugees?

Yes, this ruling makes the European Council stronger. It reinforces their decision-making authority, even in the face of a lack of unanimity. It shows that the Council can enforce solidarity upon the reluctant EU members to provide relief for the more exposed countries like Italy and Greece.

If the rule of law still has any currency in Europe at all, then Slovakia and Hungary are bound to follow the ruling of the ECJ. If they do not follow the ruling, we have a deeper political crisis of the EU on our hands.

If Slovakia and Hungary refuse to follow the ruling, the ECJ can implement infringement procedures that financially penalize the countries for not abiding with their ruling, which the ECJ already started initiating in June 2017.

4. Why was there so much refugee migration in 2015 in particular? Are there still refugees trying to get into Greece/Italy?

Numerous factors contributed. An escalation of the civil war in Syria made it such that more than one out of every two Syrians became a displaced person, either internally within Syria or outside it. Furthermore, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s offer in September 2015 to accept 1 million refugees had the inverse effect of encouraging more people to emigrate. Concerning the Mediterranean crossings, the civil war in Libya destabilized that country such that there was no authority to prevent the traffickers from shipping out of Libya.

At present, there are still tens of thousands of people on boats arriving monthly in Italy and Greece. According to the International Organization for Migration, in the first five months of 2017, there were 60,000 arrivals in Italy compared to 47,000 in the first five months of 2016. So, the problem is far from being episodic, or from having resolved itself.

Italy and EU are seemingly doing whatever they can, both legally and illegally, to keep boats from arriving in Italy. Take, for example, the EU-Turkey agreement from 2015. The EU is “refouling,” or relocating, thousands of asylum-seekers to Turkey, and yet Turkey is not considered a safe country because it has signed the outdated 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees but not the modern 1968 Protocol.

5. Where does this ruling leave the relocation “policy” of the EU?

This ruling reinforces the legitimacy of relocating within the EU. The ECJ described the relocation as fair and proportionate, so as to be in solidarity with Greece and Italy receiving so many arrivals. It reinforces the Dublin regulation, which took a hit to its legitimacy during 2015 when both Greece and Germany decided not to abide by it.

6. Is this problem unique to the EU or are there other places where relocation is used?

It is not unique to the EU. Australia, for example, has similar agreements with Christmas Island and Papua New Guinea, where the latter two countries are paid to “warehouse” the asylum seekers. The problem with this is that these are not humane conditions. The asylum seekers are stuck on tiny islands for years while they wait for Australia to refuse them asylum. And what happens to them when they are refused asylum? Thus, relocation exists in other places, but it is not a model solution. At least within the EU, it can be done ethically among advanced countries, providing humane conditions during the asylum application process.

7. Do we have any facts relating to the number of refugees affected? How many are there in Greece/Italy waiting relocation or who have been relocated?

According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in 2015 approximately 1 million refugees arrived by sea in Europe. For 2016, it was 362,000 sea arrivals. In 2017, as of September, there have been 132,000 sea arrivals. Of those 132,000, Italy has received 103,000 and Greece 18,000.

Regarding relocation, 8,500 of the 39,600 targeted relocations from Italy have occurred, which is just 22 percent for Italian relocations. For Greece, 20,000 out of the 63,000 have been relocated, which is 31 percent.

Back to Top

11. New Publications and Items of Interest

E-Verify free webinar listings are HERE.

The Immigrant and Employee Rights (IER) Section of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division has published a , which features articles on noteworthy recent cases, initiatives and partnerships, IER investigations and enforcement activities, and reflections from a former intern.

IER also released a video on recent changes to the IER’s regulations and what these changes mean for the public. The video also discusses resources on IER’s work and the law it enforces. The video is available in English and in Spanish.

Advisories and tips:

• Community Advisory: Social Media, Criminalization, and Immigration has been published by the National Lawyers Guild’s National Immigration Project. This advisory summarizes ways in which immigration agents may use social media against those in removal proceedings or involved in criminal cases.
• How to safeguard your data from searches at the border is the topic of several recent articles and blogs. See, for example, NYTimes and ACLU.
• Listings and links to cases challenging executive orders, and related available pleadings, are available HERE.
• DACA Revocation Advisor, to help people determine how their Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) eligibility is affected by the recent Trump administration action to terminate the program in 6 months.

The latest edition of the Global Business Immigration Practice Guide has been released by LexisNexis. Dozens of members of the Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL) co-authored and edited the guide, which is a one-stop resource for dealing with questions related to business immigration issues in 30 immigration hotspots around the world.

The latest edition adds chapters on Malta and Romania. Other chapters cover Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, the European Union, France, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Latchi Delchev, a global mobility and immigration specialist for Boeing, called the guide “first-rate” and said the key strong point of the book is its “outstanding usability.” She said she highly recommends the book and notes that it “is helpful even to seasoned professionals, as it provides a level of detail which is not easily gained from daily case management.”

Mireya Serra-Janer, head of European immigration for a multinational IT company, says she particularly likes “the fact that the [guide] focuses not just on each country’s immigration law itself but also addresses related matters such as tax and social security issues.” She noted that the India chapter “is particularly good. The immigration regulations in India have always been hard to understand. Having a clear explanation of the rules there helps us sort out many mobility challenges.”

Charles Gould, Director-General of the International Co-operative Alliance, said the guide is “an invaluable resource for both legal practitioners and business professionals. The country-specific chapters are comprehensive and answer the vast majority of questions that arise in immigration practice. Its clear and easy-to-follow structure and format make it the one volume to keep close at hand.”

This comprehensive guide is for:

• Human resources professionals and in-house attorneys who need to instruct, understand, and liaise with immigration lawyers licensed in other countries;
• Business immigration attorneys who regularly work with multinational corporations and their employees and HR professionals; and
• Attorneys interested in expanding their practice to include global business immigration services.

This publication provides:

• An overview of the immigration law requirements and procedures for over 20 countries;
• Practical information and tips for obtaining visas, work permits, resident status, naturalization, and other nonimmigrant and immigrant pathways to conducting business, investing, and working in those countries;
• A general overview of the appropriate options for a particular employee; and
• Information on how an employee can obtain and maintain authorization to work in a target country.

Each chapter follows a similar format, making it easy to compare practices and procedures from country to country. Useful links to additional resources and forms are included. Collected in this Practice Guide, the expertise of ABIL’s attorney members across the globe will serve as an ideal starting point in your research into global business immigration issues.

An excerpt of the book is on the ABIL website.

Contact your Lexis/Nexis sales representative; call 1-800-833-9844 (United States), 1-518-487-3385 (international); fax 1-518-487-3584.

ABIL on Twitter. The Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers is on Twitter: @ABILImmigration. Recent ABIL member blogs are HERE.

Back to Top

12. ABIL Member/Firm News

Aaron Hall, of the Joseph Law Firm, has authored a new blog entry. “Happy Thanksgiving.”

Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP, has published a client alert, “What’s Old Is New Again,” about the October 23, 2017, USCIS policy memorandum rescinding guidance on deference to prior determinations in adjudication of petitions for extension of nonimmigrant status.

Robert Loughran presented at the Global Citizenship Seminar in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on the current U.S. administration’s impact on immigration strategies available to Middle Eastern investors interested in relocating to the United States.

Mr. Loughran was recently interviewed by Super Lawyers Magazine, “Lost in Translation,” on the abuse of “notaries” in submitting U.S. immigration applications and petitions and how notaries take advantage of immigrant communities.

Cyrus Mehta has authored a new blog entry. “.”

Mr. Mehta and Sophia Genovese co-authored a new blog entry. “.”

Mr. Mehta was interviewed by FirstPost on November 12, 2017, in “For H-1B Workers, The Uncertainty Has Never Been Worse.”

Mr. Mehta has authored “The NY Constitutional Convention Immigrants Need,” published in the New York Daily News on November 1, 2017.

Cora-Ann V. Pestaina, of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, has authored a new blog entry. “The Government’s ‘Nasty’ Treatment of Expert Opinions in Support of H-1B Visa Petitions.”

Angelo Paparelli (bio: https://www.abil.com/lawyers/lawyers-paparelli.cfm) has published a new blog entry. “AB 450: California’s Law of Unintended Immigration Consequences.”

Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP has published a new blog entry. “.” “.” “.” “.”

Stephen Yale-Loehr was quoted in the following publications:

• La Opinion (Spanish), about the Trump administration’s efforts to accelerate deportations. Mr. Yale-Loehr said, “Desde que este tipo de deportación se creó por ley en 1996, nunca se ha implementado totalmente” (“Although this type of deportation [expedited removal] was created in 1996, it never was implemented totally”).
• Univision (Spanish), about the Trump administration’s plan to eliminate work permits for spouses of H-1B temporary workers.

On the diversity visa lottery program:

• New York Times (“A lottery is a crazy way to run an immigration system. No other country selects immigrants based on a lottery.”)
• U.S. News and World Report
• NBC News
• NPR

On other news:

• The Independent (UK), on President Trump’s immigration enforcement one year after his election
• Time, on TPS termination for Nicaragua

Back to Top

13. Government Agency Links

Follow these links to access current processing times of the USCIS Service Centers and the Department of Labor, or the Department of State’s latest Visa Bulletin with the most recent cut-off dates for visa numbers:

USCIS Service Center processing times online

Department of Labor processing times and information on backlogs

Department of State Visa Bulletin

Visa application wait times for any post

Back to Top

Headlines:

1. Kirstjen Nielsen Nominated as Secretary of Homeland Security -On October 12, 2017, President Donald Trump announced the nomination of Kirstjen Nielsen for the position of Secretary of Homeland Security.

2. Lee Cissna Confirmed as Director of USCIS -The U.S. Senate confirmed Lee Francis Cissna as director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on October 5, 2017.

3. Revised Form Allows Work Authorization and SSN Application Simultaneously -Foreign nationals in certain categories can now apply for work authorization and a social security number using a single form, the updated Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization.

4. Premium Processing Now Available for All Petitioners Seeking H-1B Visas -USCIS resumed premium processing on October 3, 2017, for all H-1B visa extension-of-stay petitions. Premium processing is now available for all types of H-1B petitions.

5. USCIS Reminds About Immigration Services Available To Those Affected by Disasters -USCIS released a reminder about immigration services that may help people affected by unforeseen circumstances, including disasters such as hurricanes. USCIS said the measures may be available on a case-by-case basis upon request.

6. DOL Changes iCERT System for H-2A and H-2B Programs -OFLC said new easy-to-understand steps and instructions “will serve to clarify regulatory filing requirements and improve the quality and consistency of H-2A and H-2B applications received for processing.”

7. State Dept. Releases Cable on Revised Guidance re 90-Day Rule -The cable advises posts on revised guidance regarding the 90-day rule, formerly known as the “30/60 day rule.”

8. U.S. Suspends Certain Visa Services in Turkey -The United States has suspended certain visa services in Turkey.

9. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

10. ABIL Member/Firm News -ABIL Member/Firm News

11. Government Agency Links –Government Agency Links

Details:

1. Kirstjen Nielsen Nominated as Secretary of Homeland Security

On October 12, 2017, President Donald Trump announced the nomination of Kirstjen Nielsen for the position of Secretary of Homeland Security. Ms. Nielsen is currently the White House principal deputy chief of staff. She was John Kelly’s deputy when he served as President Trump’s first Secretary of Homeland Security, and came with Mr. Kelly to the White House when he became President Trump’s chief of staff.

According to a White House statement, Ms. Nielsen has experience in the areas of homeland security policy and strategy, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure, and emergency management. She is the first nominee for this position to have previously worked within the Department of Homeland Security, having served there in two administrations, first as senior legislative policy director for Transportation and Security Administration under President George W. Bush and then as Department of Homeland Security Chief of Staff under President Trump. Before joining the Trump administration, Ms. Nielsen founded a risk and security management consulting firm. She previously served as Special Assistant to the President and senior director for prevention, preparedness, and response on the White House Homeland Security Council under President George W. Bush, in addition to serving as a corporate attorney and as a congressional staff member.

Elaine Duke has been serving as acting Secretary of Homeland Security since April 2017.

WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT

RELATED REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT

Back to Top

2. Lee Cissna Confirmed as Director of USCIS

The U.S. Senate confirmed Lee Francis Cissna as director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services on October 5, 2017. The vote was 55-43 in favor of Mr. Cissna’s confirmation.

Mr. Cissna most recently helped write the H-1B and L-1 Visa Reform Act of 2015, a bill that would have dramatically enlarged the enforcement authority of the U.S. Department of Labor and restricted H-1B and L-1 visa requirements and benefits. He also helped draft the American Job Creation and Investment Promotion Reform Act of 2015, which included an array of what have come to be known as EB-5 “integrity” measures.

Most recently, Mr. Cissna was Director of Immigration Policy in the Office of Policy of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Before serving in that position, Mr. Cissna served in USCIS’ Office of the Chief Counsel. Before that, he was an attorney in private practice in the immigration group of the law firm of Kaufman & Canoles in Richmond, Virginia. Mr. Cissna also served in the U.S. Department of State as a U.S. Foreign Service Officer stationed in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, and Stockholm, Sweden. Before that, he was an attorney in the international trade practice group at the law firms of Steptoe & Johnson LLP and Kirkpatrick & Lockhart LLP. Mr. Cissna graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a BS in physics and political science; Columbia University with an MA in international affairs; and Georgetown University Law Center with a JD.

Due to USCIS’s crucial role in granting many immigration benefits, the Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL) issued a press release urging Mr. Cissna to:

• Encourage adjudicators to apply the statutes and regulations as written
• Refrain from altering regulations through the promulgation of policy memoranda
• Solicit stakeholder input before and not after changing existing or implementing new policy
• As a benefits granting agency, return to an alien-based reading of the immigration statute and its implementing regulations

ABIL’S PRESS RELEASE

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S STATEMENT announcing his intent to nominate Mr. Cissna

Back to Top

3. Revised Form Allows Work Authorization and SSN Application Simultaneously

Based on a new information-sharing partnership between U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and the Social Security Administration (SSA), foreign nationals in certain categories or classifications can now apply for work authorization and a social security number using a single form, the updated Form I-765, Application for Employment Authorization.

USCIS explained that to lawfully work in the United States, foreign workers in some categories and classifications need both an employment authorization document (EAD) from USCIS and a Social Security number (SSN) from the SSA. Previously, applicants needed to submit a Form I-765 to USCIS for an EAD and then submit additional paperwork in person at their local Social Security office to obtain an SSN.

The revised USCIS form includes additional questions that allow applicants to apply for an SSN or replacement card without visiting a Social Security office. As of October 2, 2017, USCIS began transmitting the additional data collected on the form to the SSA for processing. Applicants who receive their approved EADs from USCIS should receive their Social Security card from SSA within the following two weeks.

USCIS NOTICE

Back to Top

4. Premium Processing Now Available for All Petitioners Seeking H-1B Visas

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) resumed premium processing on October 3, 2017, for all H-1B visa extension-of-stay petitions. Premium processing is now available for all types of H-1B petitions.

USCIS explained that when a petitioner requests the agency’s premium processing service, USCIS guarantees a 15-calendar day processing time. If that time is not met, the agency will refund the petitioner’s premium processing service fee and continue with expedited processing of the application.

In addition to the October 3 resumption of premium processing for H-1B visa extension of stay petitions, USCIS had previously resumed premium processing for H-1B petitions subject to the annual cap, petitions filed on behalf of physicians under the Conrad 30 waiver program, and interested government agency waivers and certain H-1B petitions that are not subject to the cap.

USCIS ANNOUNCEMENT

Back to Top

5. USCIS Reminds About Immigration Services Available To Those Affected by Disasters

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released a reminder about immigration services that may help people affected by unforeseen circumstances, including disasters such as hurricanes. USCIS said the following measures may be available on a case-by-case basis upon request:

• Changing nonimmigrant status or extending a nonimmigrant stay for an individual currently in the United States. Failure to apply for the extension or change before expiration of the authorized period of admission may be excused if the delay was due to extraordinary circumstances beyond the person’s control;
• Re-parole of individuals previously granted parole by USCIS;
• Expedited processing of advance parole requests;
• Expedited adjudication of requests for off-campus employment authorization for F-1 students experiencing severe economic hardship;
• Expedited adjudication of employment authorization applications, where appropriate;
• Consideration of fee waivers due to an inability to pay;
• Assistance for those who received a Request for Evidence or a Notice of Intent to Deny but were unable to submit evidence or otherwise respond in a timely manner;
• Assistance if a person was unable to appear for a scheduled interview with USCIS;
• Expedited replacement of lost or damaged immigration or travel documents issued by USCIS, such as a Permanent Resident Card (green card); and
• Rescheduling a biometrics appointment.

USCIS said that those making such requests should explain how the impact of a hurricane (or other disaster) created a need for the requested relief.

THE REMINDER, which includes information on how to make such a request

Back to Top

6. DOL Changes iCERT System for H-2A and H-2B Programs

In an effort to provide better service and ensure that more complete H-2A and H-2B applications are submitted for review, the Department of Labor’s Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC) is releasing new enhancements to the iCERT System’s application filing module that will help employers or, if applicable, their authorized attorneys or agents identify and upload required documentation supporting their applications. OFLC said new easy-to-understand steps and instructions “will serve to clarify regulatory filing requirements and improve the quality and consistency of H-2A and H-2B applications received for processing.”

An employer seeking temporary labor certification under the H-2A or H-2B visa programs must submit an application and all required supporting documentation to the Department’s Office of Foreign Labor Certification (OFLC) either electronically using the iCERT System or by U.S. mail.

Since 2013, the iCERT System has permitted employers or, if applicable, their authorized attorneys or agents to submit H-2A and H-2B applications online, electronically upload supporting documentation, and receive all communications during the processing of their applications via email. For fiscal year 2017, more than 83% of H-2A applications and approximately 94% of H-2B applications were submitted electronically through the iCERT System. OFLC said that electronic submission of all required documentation at the time of filing “facilitates a more efficient and consistent review of the employer’s application, and reduces the incidence of the OFLC Certifying Officer returning the incomplete application without further review or issuing a Notice of Deficiency to request missing documentation.”

OFLC strongly encourages employers or, if applicable, their authorized attorneys or agents to download and read the Quick Start Guides associated with these new system enhancements, available in Adobe PDF format: H-2A program or H-2B program.

Back to Top

7. State Dept. Releases Cable on Revised Guidance re 90-Day Rule

The Department of State recently released the following cable to the field:

UNCLASSIFIED 17 STATE 95090

Sep 16, 2017

Subject: Change to INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i) and Introduction of 90 Day Rule

1. SUMMARY: This cable advises posts on the application of INA section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) as it pertains to revised guidance at 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(g-h) regarding the 90 day rule, formerly known as the “30/60 day rule.” Interagency working groups agreed to a change in policy and expanded the 30/60 day timeframe to 90 days for aliens who enter the United States and engage in activity inconsistent with their nonimmigrant status before procuring a change or adjustment of status. END SUMMARY.

The 90 day rule

2. The following revised guidance replaces the 30/60 day rule and applies to all adjudications that occur after September 1. The guidance should not be applied retroactively. As detailed in the revisions to 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(g-h), aliens who violate or engage in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status within 90 days of entry into the United States by: 1) engaging in unauthorized employment; 2) enrolling in a course of unauthorized academic study; 3) marrying a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident and taking up residence in the United States while in a nonimmigrant visa classification that prohibits immigrant intent; or 4) undertaking any other activity for which a change of status or adjustment of status would be required prior to obtaining such change or adjustment, may be presumed to have made a material misrepresentation. You must give the alien the opportunity to present evidence to rebut the presumption that he or she made a willful misrepresentation on prior visa applications or in their applications for admission to the United States before you can find the applicant ineligible under 212(a)(6)(C)(i). If the applicant is unable to overcome the presumption that he or she engaged in a willful misrepresentation, post must request an Advisory Opinion (AO) from the Visa Office of Advisory Opinions (CA/VO/L/A) per 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(h)(2)(b).
3. If an alien violates or engages in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status after 90 days of entry into the United States, there generally is no presumption of willful misrepresentation. However, if facts in the case give you a reason to believe that the alien misrepresented his or her purpose of travel at the time of the visa application or application for admission, you must request an AO from CA/VO/L/A.

Back to Top

8. U.S. Suspends Certain Visa Services in Turkey

The United States has suspended certain visa services in Turkey. On October 8, 2017, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) announced that it was suspending nonimmigrant visa services at its diplomatic facilities in Turkey. Nonimmigrant visas include business, tourist, student, and temporary work authorization visas. The suspension applies to diplomatic and official visas. Ambassador John Bass said, “[T]his suspension of services is not a visa ban on Turkish citizens. It’s a suspension of our consideration of new visa applications. If you have a valid visa, you can still travel to the United States. If you want to apply for a visa at another U.S. embassy or consulate outside of Turkey, you are free to do so.”

Ambassador Bass said the suspension was due to the arrest of a Turkish staff member of the U.S. diplomatic mission in Turkey. That staff member was allegedly linked to the U.S.-based cleric Muhammed Fethullah Gülen Hocaefendi. Turkey has blamed Mr. Gülen for a failed coup, according to reports. Turkey has similarly suspended nonimmigrant visa services at its diplomatic facilities in the United States.

A statement posted by the U.S. Embassy & Consulates in Turkey said, “Turkish citizens with valid visas may continue to travel to the United States. Turkish citizens are also welcome to apply for a nonimmigrant visa outside of Turkey whether or not they maintain a residence in that country. Please note that an applicant applying outside of Turkey will need to pay the application fee for services in that country, even if a fee has previously been paid for services in Turkey.”

Immigrant visas have not been suspended.

AMBASSADOR BASS’S STATEMENT

STATEMENT FROM THE U.S. EMBASSY & CONSULATES IN TURKEY

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Download: Click here
Back to Top

9. New Publications and Items of Interest

Policy briefs on the value of STEM OPT. The National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) has just released two policy briefs on the value of STEM OPT (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math Optional Practical Training). Today, 81 percent of the full-time graduate students at U.S. universities in electrical engineering and 79 percent in computer science are international students, but the Trump administration may soon eliminate the primary way such students work in the United States after graduation. NFAP concludes that eliminating STEM OPT via regulation would encourage U.S. companies to hire and place many more international student graduates of U.S. universities outside the United States, which would threaten America’s role as a center of innovation, harm U.S. universities, and limit available jobs for U.S. workers by pushing more investment abroad.

The NFAP report noted that an analysis by Glassdoor shows that 9 of the 10 highest paying majors 5 years out of college are in STEM. Moreover, there is no correlation between an inability to find work in a STEM field and the presence of foreign nationals in that field in the United States. Nearly three times as many individuals with degrees in the social sciences, a field in which relatively few H-1B visa holders receive a degree, report working involuntarily outside of their field as those with degrees in computer and mathematical sciences and engineering, according to the National Science Foundation. The Conference Board reported in August 2017 almost 5 times as many online ads for positions in computer and mathematical science occupations as individuals listed as unemployed in those occupations.

Below are links to the policy briefs and related materials:

• Policy Brief on international students and STEM OPT
• Policy Brief on the importance of international students to U.S. science and engineering
• Press release

Webcast of press call

USCIS teleconference on revised Form I-765. USCIS invites stakeholders to a 10/18/17 teleconference to discuss the revised Form I-765 that provides applicants with the option to apply for a SSN at the same time as they apply for an EAD. SSA estimates this will reduce visits to their offices by almost 400,000 annually. To register, follow these steps:

• Go to the USCIS registration page.
• Enter your email address and select “Submit.”
• Select “Subscriber Preferences.”
• Select the “Event Registration” tab.
• Provide your full name and organization, if any.

Complete the questions and select “Submit.”

The Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers has published a press release on Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The release notes, among other things, that “[w]hatever concerns or complaints Americans may have about immigration in general, we shouldn’t threaten the future of this group of young people who are here through no fault of their own, who pose no threat, who are not taking away anything from the rest of us… Kicking them out won’t lower the unemployment rate, or lighten anyone’s taxes, or raise anybody’s wages.”

Advisories and tips:

• Community Advisory: Social Media, Criminalization, and Immigration has been published by the National Lawyers Guild’s National Immigration Project. This advisory summarizes ways in which immigration agents may use social media against those in removal proceedings or involved in criminal cases.
• How to safeguard your data from searches at the border is the topic of several recent articles and blogs. See, for example, NYTimes and ACLU.
• Listings and links to cases challenging executive orders, and related available pleadings, are available HERE.
• DACA Revocation Advisor, to help people determine how their Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) eligibility is affected by the recent Trump administration action to terminate the program in 6 months.

The latest E-Verify webinar schedule from USCIS is available HERE.

The latest edition of the Global Business Immigration Practice Guide has been released by LexisNexis. Dozens of members of the Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL) co-authored and edited the guide, which is a one-stop resource for dealing with questions related to business immigration issues in 30 immigration hotspots around the world.

The latest edition adds chapters on Malta and Romania. Other chapters cover Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, the European Union, France, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Latchi Delchev, a global mobility and immigration specialist for Boeing, called the guide “first-rate” and said the key strong point of the book is its “outstanding usability.” She said she highly recommends the book and notes that it “is helpful even to seasoned professionals, as it provides a level of detail which is not easily gained from daily case management.”

Mireya Serra-Janer, head of European immigration for a multinational IT company, says she particularly likes “the fact that the [guide] focuses not just on each country’s immigration law itself but also addresses related matters such as tax and social security issues.” She noted that the India chapter “is particularly good. The immigration regulations in India have always been hard to understand. Having a clear explanation of the rules there helps us sort out many mobility challenges.”

Charles Gould, Director-General of the International Co-operative Alliance, said the guide is “an invaluable resource for both legal practitioners and business professionals. The country-specific chapters are comprehensive and answer the vast majority of questions that arise in immigration practice. Its clear and easy-to-follow structure and format make it the one volume to keep close at hand.”

This comprehensive guide is for:

• Human resources professionals and in-house attorneys who need to instruct, understand, and liaise with immigration lawyers licensed in other countries;
• Business immigration attorneys who regularly work with multinational corporations and their employees and HR professionals; and
• Attorneys interested in expanding their practice to include global business immigration services.

This publication provides:

• An overview of the immigration law requirements and procedures for over 20 countries;
• Practical information and tips for obtaining visas, work permits, resident status, naturalization, and other nonimmigrant and immigrant pathways to conducting business, investing, and working in those countries;
• A general overview of the appropriate options for a particular employee; and
• Information on how an employee can obtain and maintain authorization to work in a target country.

Each chapter follows a similar format, making it easy to compare practices and procedures from country to country. Useful links to additional resources and forms are included. Collected in this Practice Guide, the expertise of ABIL’s attorney members across the globe will serve as an ideal starting point in your research into global business immigration issues.

An excerpt of the book is on the ABIL website.

Contact your Lexis/Nexis sales representative; call 1-800-833-9844 (United States), 1-518-487-3385 (international); fax 1-518-487-3584.

ABIL on Twitter. The Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers is on Twitter: @ABILImmigration. Recent ABIL member blogs are HERE.

Back to Top

10. ABIL Member/Firm News

Robert Loughran was interviewed on September 25, 2017, by National Public Radio affiliate KUT on the impact of the latest travel ban on Austin’s sizeable Iranian community.

Mr. Loughran was interviewed on ABC affiliate KVUE regarding the potential for immigration relief for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) beneficiaries now that the program has been ended.

David Isaacson, of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, has authored a new blog entry. “”

Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP has published a new blog entry. “”

Stephen Yale-Loehr will speak on “Global Entrepreneurs in Residence: Helping Immigrant Founders Create American Jobs” on October 24, 2017, at the Welcoming Economies (WE) Global Convening 2017. The Trump Administration’s pause of the proposed International Entrepreneurs Rule to allow an alternative to the startup visa has given new emphasis to the Global Entrepreneurs in Residence (GEIR) program to pair international entrepreneurs with universities to create local businesses and entrepreneurship opportunities. This session will include national experts, as well as the experience of one WE Global member, on how these programs operate, what they bring to a local entrepreneurial ecosystem, and what local communities should consider when contemplating such an endeavor. For more information or to register.

Mr. Yale-Loehr co-authored an article, “Ten Key Immigration Concepts for College & University Counsel,” published on September 28, 2017, in the National Association of College and University Attorneys’ NACUA Notes (Vol. 16, No. 1).

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in an article on fivethirtyeight.com about two important immigration cases being argued this fall at the Supreme Court.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in “Will Work Program for Foreign Tech Students End?“, published by the Bureau of National Affairs. “I’m sure there would be a court battle” if the administration rescinded the regulation, he said, adding that any argument that the 2016 regulation was somehow illegal “would be very dubious.”

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in “US: STEM OPT Restrictions Would Be ‘Harmful’ to Economy,” published by PIE (Professionals in International Education) News. He said the legal case for maintaining STEM OPT is strong. “A federal court has already held that the Department of Homeland Security had the statutory authority to publish a rule extending OPT to students in STEM fields. The court noted that since at least 1947, the immigration agency has interpreted the immigration laws to allow foreign students to engage in employment for practical training purposes. During all that time, Congress acquiesced to that interpretation,” he said.

Back to Top

11. Government Agency Links

Follow these links to access current processing times of the USCIS Service Centers and the Department of Labor, or the Department of State’s latest Visa Bulletin with the most recent cut-off dates for visa numbers:

USCIS Service Center processing times online

Department of Labor processing times and information on backlogs

Department of State Visa Bulletin

Visa application wait times for any post

Back to Top

Headlines:

1. President Orders End of DACA in Six Months, With Mixed Signals About Future for ‘Dreamers’; Two Lawsuits Challenge Program’s Termination -President Trump has ordered the end of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, an Obama administration program that allowed certain people who came to the United States as children to continue to live, go to school, and work in the country, known as “Dreamers.” The order takes effect in six months and affects nearly 800,000 people. At least two lawsuits challenge the legality of ending the program.

2. President Signs Legislation Extending Several Programs Under Disaster Relief Act -Among other things, the legislation extends the Religious Worker, Conrad State 30, EB-5, and E-Verify programs until December 8, 2017.

3. ICE Temporarily Suspends Unspecified Enforcement Actions in Wake of Hurricanes; DHS States That Immigration Status Will Not Be a Factor During Rescues -The Department of Homeland Security said that “DHS will not conduct non-criminal immigration enforcement operations in the affected area.”

4. Ninth Circuit Rules Grandparents, Cousins, Others Exempted From Travel Ban; Supreme Court Intervenes -A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled on September 7, 2017, that certain relatives from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen banned by the Trump administration from entering the United States should be admitted while the ban is under legal review, contrary to the administration’s interpretation of a June Supreme Court ruling. The Ninth Circuit panel also rejected the Trump administration’s ban on refugees formally accepted by resettlement agencies. The Supreme Court blocked the refugee part of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling.

5. EB-1, EB-3 Categories Show Progress in Visa Bulletin for October -Several developments in employment-based categories were announced in the Department of State’s Visa Bulletin for the month of October 2017.

6. Registration for Diversity Visa Program for FY 2019 Begins in October -Registration for the Diversity Visa Program for fiscal year 2019 (DV-2019) will begin at noon ET on October 3, 2017, and end at noon ET on November 7, 2017. For FY 2019, 50,000 diversity visas will be available.

7. State Dept. Changes Standard for Assessing ‘Residence Abroad’ for F-1 Nonimmigrant Students -The Department of State recently changed language regarding the way in which F-1 student visas are adjudicated with respect to “residence abroad.”

8. State Dept. Issues New 90-Day Rule for Misrepresentation -The Department of State recently updated the Foreign Affairs Manual with a new 90-day rule on misrepresentation.

9. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

10. ABIL Member/Firm News -ABIL Member/Firm News

11. Government Agency Links –Government Agency Links

Details:

1. President Orders End of DACA in Six Months, With Mixed Signals About Future for ‘Dreamers’; Two Lawsuits Challenge Program’s Termination

On September 5, 2017, President Donald Trump ordered the end of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), an Obama administration program that allowed certain people who came to the United States as children to continue to live, go to school, and work in the country, known as “Dreamers.” He said that his administration’s position is that DACA was not statutorily authorized and therefore was an unconstitutional exercise of discretion by the executive branch. The order takes effect in six months. The rescission affects nearly 800,000 DACA recipients.

Based on “guidance from Attorney General Sessions and the likely result of potentially imminent litigation,” the Department of Homeland Security’s Acting Secretary Elaine Duke issued a memorandum on September 5 formally rescinding the Obama administration’s June 15, 2012, memorandum that created DACA. Ms. Duke explained, “As a result of recent litigation, we were faced with two options: wind the program down in an orderly fashion that protects beneficiaries in the near-term while working with Congress to pass legislation, or allow the judiciary to potentially shut the program down completely and immediately. We chose the least disruptive option.” Ms. Duke said that “no current beneficiaries will be impacted before March 5, 2018, nearly six months from now, so Congress can have time to deliver on appropriate legislative solutions. However, I want to be clear that no new initial requests or associated applications filed after [September 5, 2017] will be acted on.”

President Trump’s statement about current beneficiaries not being affected for 6 months was slightly less absolute; he said that current DACA recipients “generally” will not be affected: “DHS’s enforcement priorities remain in place. However, absent a law enforcement interest—which is largely the standard that has been in place since the inception of the program—the Department will generally not take actions to remove active DACA recipients.” He said that renewal applications for DACA employment authorization documents (EADs) properly filed and accepted by October 5, 2017, for people whose current EADs expire between September 5, 2017, and March 5, 2018, will be processed. He also said that all pending applications for advance parole by DACA recipients “will be closed and associated fees will be refunded.” In a related tweet on September 7, 2017, President Trump said, “For all of those (DACA) that are concerned about your status during the 6 month period, you have nothing to worry about – No action!”

Hinting that the end of the DACA program might not necessarily be the end of the line for the Dreamers, President Trump also tweeted on September 5, “Congress now has 6 months to legalize DACA (something the Obama Administration was unable to do). If they can’t, I will revisit this issue!”

On September 6, 2017, the attorneys general of more than a dozen states and the District of Columbia sued the government to stop the DACA program’s rescission. The lawsuit argues that the repeal of President Obama’s DACA order violates the Administrative Procedure Act, is motivated by discrimination against Mexicans, and violates due process. The University of California filed a similar suit on September 8, 2017, against the Trump administration for violating the rights of the university and its students by rescinding DACA on “nothing more than unreasoned executive whim.”

WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT

RELATED USCIS STATEMENT

ATTORNEY GENERAL SESSIONS’ LETTER TO ACTING SECRETARY DUKE

ACTING SECRETARY DUKE’S MEMORANDUM

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

COMPLAINT BY VARIOUS STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA’S COMPLAINT

Back to Top

2. President Signs Legislation Extending Several Programs Under Disaster Relief Act

The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives recently passed the “Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2017” as part of an appropriations bill to increase the debt limit, fund the government through a continuing resolution, and provide emergency funding for hurricane relief. Among other things, the legislation extends the Religious Worker, Conrad State 30, EB-5, and E-Verify programs until December 8, 2017. President Trump signed the legislation on September 8, 2017.

WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT

TEXT OF THE BILL

Back to Top

3. ICE Temporarily Suspends Unspecified Enforcement Actions in Wake of Hurricanes; DHS States That Immigration Status Will Not Be a Factor During Rescues

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) released a statement on September 7, 2017, that appears to temporarily suspend unspecified enforcement actions in areas affected by recent hurricanes:

While we generally do not comment on future potential law enforcement actions, operational plans are subject to change based on a variety of factors. Due to the current weather situation in Florida and other potentially impacted areas, along with the ongoing recovery in Texas, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) had already reviewed all upcoming operations and has adjusted accordingly. There is currently no coordinated nationwide operation planned at this time. The priority in the affected areas should remain focused on life-saving and life-sustaining activities.

For the safety and security of our communities, ICE fugitive operations teams will continue to target and arrest criminal aliens and other individuals who are in violation of our nation’s immigration laws, in non-affected areas of the country, as part of routine operations.

A separate statement issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on September 6, 2017, states, among other things, that “DHS will not conduct non-criminal immigration enforcement operations in the affected area.” The statement also notes, “When it comes to rescuing people in the wake of Hurricane Irma, immigration status is not and will not be a factor. However, the laws will not be suspended, and we will be vigilant against any effort by criminals to exploit disruptions caused by the storm.” DHS also stated that ICE detainees from the Krome Detention Center, Monroe County Jail, Broward Transitional Center, and Glades Detention Center “are being temporarily transferred to various other detention facilities outside the projected path of the hurricane. In the event of transfers, the detainee’s attorney of record is notified, the Online Detainer Locator is updated, and the transfer is temporary in nature.”

ICE STATEMENT

DHS STATEMENT

Back to Top

4. Ninth Circuit Rules Grandparents, Cousins, Others Exempted From Travel Ban; Supreme Court Intervenes

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled on September 7, 2017, that certain relatives from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen banned by the Trump administration from entering the United States should be admitted while the ban is under legal review, contrary to the administration’s interpretation of a June Supreme Court ruling. However, on September 12, the Supreme Court blocked the Ninth Circuit’s ruling indefinitely.

The administration had interpreted the Supreme Court’s June reference to close or bona fide family relationships as including immediate family members and in-laws but excluding grandparents, grandchildren, brothers- and sisters-in-law, aunts and uncles, nieces and nephews, and cousins. The Ninth Circuit panel observed, “Stated simply, the Government does not offer a persuasive explanation for why a mother-in-law is clearly a bona fide relationship, in the Supreme Court’s prior reasoning, but a grandparent, grandchild, aunt, uncle, niece, nephew, or cousin is not.” Noting that the administration had relied on specified provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the court noted, “The Government’s ‘cherry-picked’ INA provisions recognize immediate family relationships as those between parents, spouses, children, and siblings, yet other provisions of the INA and other immigration laws offer broader definitions for close family.” The court also said that the INA was implemented with the underlying intention of preservation of the family unit, and noted that the administration’s “artificially narrow interpretation of close familial relationships directly contradicts this intention.”

The Ninth Circuit panel also rejected the Trump administration’s ban on refugees formally accepted by resettlement agencies. The court noted that it typically takes a refugee applicant 18 to 24 months to successfully complete the complex, lengthy application and screening process before he or she can be resettled in the United States. The court cited various hardships that would be faced by resettlement agencies, local affiliates, church congregations, volunteers, and landlords if formally assured refugees were barred. The court also noted that refugees’ lives “remain in vulnerable limbo during the pendency of the Supreme Court’s stay. Refugees have only a narrow window of time to complete their travel, as certain security and medical checks expire and must then be re-initiated. Even short delays may prolong a refugee’s admittance.”

The Ninth Circuit’s order was set to take effect on September 12. However, on that date the Supreme Court indefinitely blocked part of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling. For now, the Trump administration’s travel ban remains in effect with respect to refugees who have formal assurances from resettlement agencies. The Supreme Court will hear arguments on October 10, 2017, in a consolidated case challenging the travel ban.

NINTH CIRCUIT’S OPINION

SUPREME COURT’S ORDER blocking part of the Ninth Circuit’s ruling

Back to Top

5. EB-1, EB-3 Categories Show Progress in Visa Bulletin for October

Several developments in employment-based categories were announced in the Department of State’s Visa Bulletin for the month of October 2017.

For the past several months, there has been a backlog for Chinese-mainland and Indian nationals for EB-1. With the new fiscal year, the EB-1 category is now current for all nationalities, and visa applications may be filed regardless of the applicant’s priority date. It is unknown how long this category will remain current.

Also, the September 2017 Visa Bulletin included a cutoff date of January 1, 2012, for China-mainland born EB-3 applicants. It has advanced two years to January 1, 2014. The Department estimates that this cutoff date will move up approximately four months in the coming months.

OCTOBER 2017 VISA BULLETIN

Back to Top

6. Registration for Diversity Visa Program for FY 2019 Begins in October

Registration for the Diversity Visa Program for fiscal year 2019 (DV-2019) will begin at noon ET on October 3, 2017, and end at noon ET on November 7, 2017. For FY 2019, 50,000 diversity visas will be available. There is no cost to register for the DV program.

For DV-2019, natives of the following countries are not eligible to apply, because more than 50,000 natives of these countries immigrated to the United States in the previous five years: Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China (mainland-bo

Headlines:

1. Labor Dept. Announces Revisions to H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Forms, Comment Period -Pursuant to a June news release calling for proposed form changes “to better protect American workers, confront fraud, and increase transparency,” the Department of Labor published a notice announcing its intent to revise its information collection for the H-1B, H-1B1 and E-3 programs.

2. State Dept. Announces Oversubscription of EB-2 Category, Annual Numerical Limits for Immigration, Change-of-Address NVC Reporting Requirements -The Department of State’s Visa Bulletins for August and September 2017 include news on several topics.

3. Ninth Circuit Rules Against Good Faith Exception for Unauthorized Worker Employment and I-9 Violations -In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found, among other things, that an employer could not make a good faith defense to a charge of continuing to employ unauthorized workers or failing to properly complete, retain, or produce I-9 employment verification forms.

4. CBP Says Attorneys Not Allowed in Secondary Inspection Areas of Ports of Entry -Attorneys report that CBP says that as of August 21, 2017, they will not be able to accompany clients in the secondary inspection area of any ports of entry, and that this is a national policy.

5. Former Airline Staffing Executive Pleads Guilty in Unlawful Fees Case -The executive admitted he falsely certified that he had received no payments, when in fact he had demanded and collected hundreds of thousands of dollars of unlawful fees from approximately 85 mechanics.

6. CBP Deploys Facial Recognition Biometric Exit Technology at More Airports -CBP has announced the deployment of facial recognition biometric exit technology to several more airports, including McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, Nevada, for one daily flight from the United States to Guadalajara, Mexico; and to William P. Hobby International Airport in Houston, Texas, for select flights.

7. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

8. ABIL Member/Firm News -ABIL Member/Firm News

9. Government Agency Links -Government Agency Links

Details:

1. Labor Dept. Announces Revisions to H-1B, H-1B1, and E-3 Forms, Comment Period

Pursuant to the Secretary of Labor’s June 6, 2017, news release calling for proposed form changes “to better protect American workers, confront fraud, and increase transparency,” the Department of Labor has published a 60-day notice in the Federal Register announcing its intent to revise its information collection for the H-1B, H-1B1 and E-3 programs.

The revisions include the Labor Condition Application for Nonimmigrant Workers (LCA) Form ETA 9035/9035E (electronic), Form ETA 9035CP accompanying instructions, a new Appendix for the Form ETA 9035/9035E, and the Wage and Hour Division’s WH-4 Nonimmigrant Worker Information Form collection.

The Department says it seeks revisions to the Form 9035/9035E and Form 9035CP Instructions to “streamline parts of the current information collection to assist the regulated community with form completion; provide greater clarity of existing employer obligations under the programs; and promote greater program transparency by collecting additional information on the employment of temporary nonimmigrant workers by U.S. employers.” The Department also seeks revisions to the WH-4 “to provide the form in a LIVECYCLE document to improve accessibility and compliance” with the Rehabilitation Act and the Workforce Investment Act; to “assist the regulated community with form completion”; and to “collect additional information to facilitate complainant communication for the enforcement of Forms 9035 and 9035E.”

Written comments must be submitted in accordance with the 60-day notice’s instructions.

The August 3, 2017, announcement of the 60-day notice.

The related June 6, 2017, news release.

Back to Top

2. State Dept. Announces Oversubscription of EB-2 Category, Annual Numerical Limits for Immigration, Change-of-Address NVC Reporting Requirements

The Department of State’s Visa Bulletins for August and September 2017 include news on several topics.

The August bulletin notes the oversubscription of the employment-based second preference (EB-2) category. High demand for numbers for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjustment-of-status applicants has required the establishment of cut-off dates for August for Worldwide, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, and Philippines EB-2 visa numbers. The bulletin says this action will allow number use to be held within the Worldwide annual limit. The Department expects the date for these countries to once again become Current for October, the first month of fiscal year (FY) 2018.

The September bulletin notes that any changes of address for applicants processing their cases overseas should always be reported to the National Visa Center (NVC). The bulletin provides details about what to include in communications with NVC and contact information.

The September bulletin also notes the annual determination of the numerical limits on immigrants for FY 2017. The worldwide employment-based preference limit is 140,000. For FY 2017, the per-country limit is 25,620 and the dependent area annual limit is 7,320.

AUGUST BULLETIN

SEPTEMBER BULLETIN

Back to Top

3. Ninth Circuit Rules Against Good Faith Exception for Unauthorized Worker Employment and I-9 Violations

In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit found, among other things, that an employer could not make a good faith defense to a charge of continuing to employ unauthorized workers or failing to properly complete, retain, or produce I-9 employment verification forms.

DLS Precision Fab LLC, a Phoenix, Arizona-based custom sheet metal fabrication company doing business as Di-Matrix Precision Manufacturing, had dealt with the sudden growth of its workforce due to an expansion of a Department of Defense program by hiring a well-credentialed human resources director to ensure compliance with applicable state and federal employment laws. Instead of doing so, however, the HR director shirked his responsibilities to the point of “literally stuffing the government’s correspondence in a drawer and never responding,” according to DLS. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement subsequently inspected DLS’s I-9 forms and other relevant business information and served DLS with notices of suspect documents and intent to fine.

The court noted that the good faith defense, as argued by DLS, did not apply here. DLS conceded that its violations were substantive but contended that the “peculiar facts of this case” justified extending the good faith defense to the substantive violations because DLS had made a good faith effort to comply with the law’s employment requirements by hiring an HR director, but the HR director exhibited bad faith by neglecting his duty to keep DLS compliant. The court was not persuaded. Among other things, the court pointed out that under the law, such a defense might apply to technical or procedural, but not substantive, violations. Also, the court said, “DLS is not the first employer to hire an employee with the expectation that he or she will comply with the law only to be disappointed, nor is it likely to be the last. More broadly, DLS asks us to disregard the company’s responsibility for hiring and supervising its own employees. The HR director was acting as DLS’s agent, and his failure to perform his responsibility may properly be imputed to DLS.”

The full text of the opinion, DLS Precision Fab LLC v. U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement, 2017 S.O.S. 14-71980 (Aug. 7, 2017).

Back to Top

4. CBP Says Attorneys Not Allowed in Secondary Inspection Areas of Ports of Entry

According to reports from attorneys serving clients in New York, the Buffalo office of U.S. Customs and Border Protection is advising that effective August 21, 2017, attorneys cannot accompany clients in the secondary inspection area of any ports of entry, and that this is a national policy.
Back to Top

5. Former Airline Staffing Executive Pleads Guilty in Unlawful Fees Case

Following a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) investigation, Eleno Quinteros, Jr., former vice president of operations for two airline mechanic staffing companies, pled guilty on August 10, 2017, to charges of making false statements in support of lawful permanent resident petitions for dozens of the companies’ mechanics.

Mr. Quinteros admitted he falsely certified that he had received no payments, when in fact he had demanded and collected hundreds of thousands of dollars of unlawful fees from approximately 85 mechanics. According to the plea agreement, Quinteros collected as much as $567,480 from employees, even though employers are prohibited by law from demanding payment for their fees. Mr. Quinteros used some of the money to pay attorneys assisting with the applications and pocketed the rest.

The employees performed heavy maintenance on aircraft at a variety of locations nationwide. Mr. Quinteros was responsible for recruiting Mexican airline mechanics to work in the United States, and for helping recruits to obtain work visas such as TN or H-2B visas. According to the indictment, Mr. Quinteros first assisted recruits in obtaining work visas to come to the United States. He then agreed to help at least 85 of them pursue lawful permanent residence in exchange for substantial, unlawful fees. He instructed many employees to deposit money in his wife’s bank account or provide him with blank money orders to conceal the source of the unlawful funds.

Mr. Quinteros pleaded guilty to a single count of making a false claim in support of an immigration application. He admitted in his plea, however, that the underlying scheme involved more than 25 immigration documents. His sentencing is set for November 6, 2017.

USCIS ANNOUNCEMENT

Back to Top

6. CBP Deploys Facial Recognition Biometric Exit Technology at More Airports

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has announced the deployment of facial recognition biometric exit technology to several more airports, including McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas, Nevada, for one daily flight from the United States to Guadalajara, Mexico; and William P. Hobby International Airport in Houston, Texas, for select flights. This follows recent deployments of the technology to Washington Dulles International Airport; George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston, Texas; and O’Hare International Airport in Chicago, Illinois. An initial pilot was also conducted at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. Additional deployments are planned in the near future.

John Wagner, CBP’s Deputy Executive Assistant Commissioner for Field Operations, said, “With the expansion of this technology we will be looking at different flights, airports, lighting conditions, and internal IT configurations to demonstrate to our stakeholders that this solution is flexible, reliable and easy for travelers to use.” Using the flight manifest, CBP builds a flight-specific photo gallery using photographs from the travel document the traveler provided to the airline. CBP then compares the live photo against the document photo in the gallery to ensure that the traveler is the true bearer of the document. If the photo captured at boarding is matched to a U.S. passport, the traveler—having been confirmed as a U.S. citizen—is automatically determined to be out of scope for biometric exit purposes and the photo is “discarded after a short period of time,” CBP said, adding that it “remains committed to protecting the privacy of all travelers.”

ANNOUNCEMENT

Back to Top

7. New Publications and Items of Interest

A national database of occupational licensing, launched by the Center for the Study of Occupational Regulation, St. Francis University, documents and tracks the occupational licensing regulations for many professions. The database, which is free and open to the public, includes regulatory information affecting physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, registered nurses, massage therapists, and physical therapists, among others. From the Find Occupations page, users can select their State, Industry, and Occupation.

Advisories and tips:

• Immigration Court Practitioner’s Guide to Responding to Inappropriate Immigration Judge Conduct, by Catholic Legal Immigration Network, provides practitioners with information about the range of options available when inappropriate immigration judge conduct occurs, including how to file an administrative complaint with the Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review.
• Travel ban FAQ, by David Isaacson of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, updated July 19, 2017.
• Community Advisory: Social Media, Criminalization, and Immigration has been published by the National Lawyers Guild’s National Immigration Project. This advisory summarizes ways in which immigration agents may use social media against those in removal proceedings or involved in criminal cases.
• How to safeguard your data from searches at the border is the topic of several recent articles and blogs. See, for example, NYTimes and ACLU.
• Airport Lawyer is a free Web app that is intended to help ensure that immigrants are treated fairly at airports. Arrivals information can be securely passed along to large groups of volunteer attorneys who have been organized to monitor arrivals. See HERE.
• Listings and links to cases challenging executive orders, and related available pleadings, are available HERE.

The latest E-Verify webinar schedule from USCIS is available HERE.

The latest edition of the Global Business Immigration Practice Guide has been released by LexisNexis. Dozens of members of the Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL) co-authored and edited the guide, which is a one-stop resource for dealing with questions related to business immigration issues in 30 immigration hotspots around the world.

The latest edition adds chapters on Malta and Romania. Other chapters cover Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, the European Union, France, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Latchi Delchev, a global mobility and immigration specialist for Boeing, called the guide “first-rate” and said the key strong point of the book is its “outstanding usability.” She said she highly recommends the book and notes that it “is helpful even to seasoned professionals, as it provides a level of detail which is not easily gained from daily case management.”

Mireya Serra-Janer, head of European immigration for a multinational IT company, says she particularly likes “the fact that the [guide] focuses not just on each country’s immigration law itself but also addresses related matters such as tax and social security issues.” She noted that the India chapter “is particularly good. The immigration regulations in India have always been hard to understand. Having a clear explanation of the rules there helps us sort out many mobility challenges.”

Charles Gould, Director-General of the International Co-operative Alliance, said the guide is “an invaluable resource for both legal practitioners and business professionals. The country-specific chapters are comprehensive and answer the vast majority of questions that arise in immigration practice. Its clear and easy-to-follow structure and format make it the one volume to keep close at hand.”

This comprehensive guide is for:

• Human resources professionals and in-house attorneys who need to instruct, understand, and liaise with immigration lawyers licensed in other countries;
• Business immigration attorneys who regularly work with multinational corporations and their employees and HR professionals; and
• Attorneys interested in expanding their practice to include global business immigration services.

This publication provides:

• An overview of the immigration law requirements and procedures for over 20 countries;
• Practical information and tips for obtaining visas, work permits, resident status, naturalization, and other nonimmigrant and immigrant pathways to conducting business, investing, and working in those countries;
• A general overview of the appropriate options for a particular employee; and
• Information on how an employee can obtain and maintain authorization to work in a target country.

Each chapter follows a similar format, making it easy to compare practices and procedures from country to country. Useful links to additional resources and forms are included. Collected in this Practice Guide, the expertise of ABIL’s attorney members across the globe will serve as an ideal starting point in your research into global business immigration issues.

An excerpt of the book is on the ABIL website.

Contact your Lexis/Nexis sales representative; call 1-800-833-9844 (United States), 1-518-487-3385 (international); fax 1-518-487-3584.

ABIL on Twitter. The Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers is on Twitter: @ABILImmigration. Recent ABIL member blogs are HERE.

Back to Top

8. ABIL Member/Firm News

The following ABIL members are included in Who’s Who Legal: Corporate Immigration:

Bernard Caris

Maria Celebi

Eugene Chow

Steven Clark, of Clark Lau, LLC

Laura Danielson

Laura Devine

Rami Fakhoury

Charles Foster, of Foster LLP

Avi Friedman, of Wolfsdorf Rosenthal

Vic Goel

Avi Gomberg

Kehrela Hodkinson

Mark Ivener

H. Ronald Klasko

Jelle Kroes

Charles Kuck

Kirby Joseph

Jeff Joseph, of Joseph Law Firm

Vincent Lau

Robert Loughran

Dawn Lurie, of Seyfarth Shaw

Gabriele Mastmann, of Offer & Mastmann

Gunther Mävers

Marco Mazzeschi

Cyrus Mehta

Bettina Offer

Angelo Paparelli

Julie Pearl

Sharon Cook Poorak, of Seyfarth Shaw

William Reich

Ari Sauer, of Siskind Susser

Nicolas Rollason

Gregory Siskind, of Siskind Susser

William Stock, of Klasko Immigration Law Partners

Lynn Susser

Elissa Taub, of Siskind Susser

Anastasia Tonello, of Laura Devine Attorneys

Karl Waheed

Andrew Wilson, of Serotte Reich Wilson, LLP

Bernard Wolfsdorf

Stephen Yale-Loehr

Brian Zuccaro, of Serotte Reich Wilson, LLP

Mr. Goel and Mr. Siskind were mentioned/quoted in an op-ed on the RAISE Act in Forbes.com, “Cotton and Trump Team Hand America a Bad Bill.”

Mr. Klasko has published a new blog entry. “It’s All About Numbers” (re EB-5)

Mr. Kuck was quoted in an interview with National Public Radio on WABE 90.1, in “Georgia Immigrant, Refugee Advocates Blast Immigration Reduction Bill.” He noted, “People are going to immigrate. People are always going to go to places where there are more opportunities and options. And if America isn’t that place, someplace else will be.”

Mr. Loughran presented and was the discussion leader for “How to Prepare Your Clients for Potential Raids,” a live webinar on worksite enforcement hosted by the American Immigration Lawyers Association on July 18, 2017. As a panelist, Mr. Loughran provided a broad overview of recent enforcement trends and also co-authored a practice advisory on developing proactive immigration action plans for employers.

Mr. Loughran presented “Using EB-5 Capital for Project Development” to the State Bar of Texas Advanced Real Estate Law Seminar in San Antonio, Texas, on July 13, 2017. Mr. Loughran’s presentation focused on the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program, the potential for use of foreign investment in real estate project development, and alternative U.S. visa options for foreign investors.

Mr. Loughran presented at the Geneva Group International’s Latin America Conference in Santiago, Chile, on “Desarollos en la Ley de Inmigracion de los Estados Unidos,” focused on changes in immigration enforcement by the Trump administration and the U.S. immigration options that continue to remain in place for Chilean and Latin American nationals despite these developments.

Mr. Mehta has published a new blog entry. “RAISE Act Will Hurt Immigrants, Americans and America”

Mr. Paparelli has published a new blog entry. “”

Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP has published several new blog entries. “” “5 Reasons Why Tom Cotton’s Bill That President Trump Supports Is Bad Policy” “5 Reasons Indian Citizens Should Consider EB-5” “The RAISE Act: A Big Lie?” “”

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in an article in the Financial Times about a new bill to slash immigration in half. “It’s going to be very hard to get through Congress. Immigration is just as complicated as healthcare and tax reform,” he said.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in an article on NBC News about how President Trump’s travel ban may fare in the Supreme Court. “Immigration touches on national sovereignty and the [Supreme] Court has been largely loath to second guess the president,” he said.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted by the Bureau of National Affairs in an article in Bloomberg Law Daily Labor Report about a bill that would boost Northern Mariana Islands foreign worker permits. The legislation is likely a “one-off” because of the small number of permits added and their temporary nature, he noted. It’s also “noteworthy” that an earlier version of the bill called for 2,000 additional permits but that that number was pared down considerably, he said.

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in various international publications regarding President Trump’s support for the RAISE Act, a bill to limit legal immigration, including:

• Los Tiempos
• Financial Times Daily Briefing
• Deutsche Welle
• Financiero
• United Daily News (Taiwan)
• El Cronista
• Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten
• Entorno Inteligente

Back to Top

9. Government Agency Links

Follow these links to access current processing times of the USCIS Service Centers and the Department of Labor, or the Department of State’s latest Visa Bulletin with the most recent cut-off dates for visa numbers:

USCIS Service Center processing times online

Department of Labor processing times and information on backlogs

Department of State Visa Bulletin

Visa application wait times for any post

Back to Top

Headlines:

1. State Dept. Issues Guidance on Trump ‘Travel Ban’; Hawaii Motion Denied; More Court Action -The Department of State recently released guidance on President Trump’s “travel ban.” The Department’s guidance was issued following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling partially granting the government’s request to stay lower court injunctions against the travel ban. A federal judge in Hawaii has challenged aspects of the travel ban, and the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court for clarification and an emergency stay.
2. DHS Delays, Plans To Propose Rescinding International Entrepreneur Rule -As expected, DHS has delayed the effective date of the International Entrepreneur Rule to provide the agency with an opportunity to obtain comments from the public regarding a proposal to rescind the rule.
3. I-94 Arrival/Departure Info Now Available Online for Air and Sea Travelers -Foreign visitors arriving to the United States via air or sea no longer must complete the paper Arrival/Departure Record.

4. USCIS Issues Policy Guidance on H-1B Master’s Degree Cap Exemption Case -A recent decision clarifies that to qualify for an H-1B numerical cap exemption based on a master’s or higher degree, the conferring institution must have qualified as a “United States institution of higher education” at the time the beneficiary’s degree was earned.

5. Ten States Demand End of DACA -Signers included officials from Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.

6. New Publications and Items of Interest -New Publications and Items of Interest

7. ABIL Member/Firm News -ABIL Member/Firm News

8. Government Agency Links –Government Agency Links

Details:

1. State Dept. Issues Guidance on Trump ‘Travel Ban’; Hawaii Motion Denied; More Court Action

The Department of State recently released guidance on President Trump’s executive order 13780, “Protecting the Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into the United States,” frequently referred to as the “travel ban.” The Department’s guidance was issued following the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 26, 2017, ruling partially granting the government’s request to stay lower court injunctions against the travel ban.

The guidance states that implementation of the executive order, in compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision, began June 29, 2017. The Department said it does not plan to cancel previously scheduled visa application appointments. For nationals of the six designated countries—Libya, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen—a consular officer will make a determination in the course of the interview whether an applicant otherwise eligible for a visa is exempt from the executive order or, if not, is eligible for a waiver and may be issued a visa. Consular officers may issue visas to nationals of the six designated countries on a case-by-case basis, the guidance states, if they determine that issuance is in the national interest, the applicant poses no national security threat to the United States, and denial of the visa would cause undue hardship.

The guidance reiterates that the executive order provides specifically that no visas issued before its effective date will be revoked pursuant to the order, and that the order does not apply to nationals of affected countries who had valid visas on June 29, 2017. The guidance also notes:

The E.O. further instructs that any individual whose visa was marked revoked or cancelled solely as a result of the original E.O. issued on January 27, 2017 (E.O. 13769) will be entitled to a travel document permitting travel to the United States, so that the individual may seek entry. Any individual in this situation who seeks to travel to the United States should contact the closest U.S. embassy or consulate to request a travel document.

The guidance notes that the Supreme Court’s order specified that the travel ban may not be enforced against foreign nationals who have a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States. The guidance states that applicants seeking B, C-1, C-3, D, or I visas “will need to make a credible claim to a consular officer at their visa interview that they have a bona fide close familial relationship with a person in the United States or of a bona fide, formal, documented relationship with an entity in the United States that was formed in the ordinary course, rather than for the purpose of evading the E.O., for the visa applicant to be exempt from the E.O. based on the Supreme Court order.” Alternatively, the Department noted, some applicants may qualify for an exemption, and others may qualify for a waiver. Qualified applicants in nonimmigrant visa categories not listed above “are considered exempt from the E.O., because a credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the United States is inherent in the requirements for the visa classification,” the guidance states.

Qualified applicants in the immediate-relative and family-based immigrant visa categories are also exempt from the executive order’s travel ban under the Supreme Court’s order, the guidance states, because having a credible claim of a bona fide close familial relationship is inherent in the requirements for the visa. Likewise, qualified employment-based immigrant visa applicants generally are exempt “because they have a credible claim of a bona fide, formal, documented relationship with an entity in the United States formed in the ordinary course.” Unlike other employment-based immigrant visa applicants, certain self-petitioning employment-based first preference applicants with no job offer in the United States and special immigrant visas under INA section 101(a)(27) may be subject to the travel ban unless they have a credible claim of a bona fide close familial relationship with a person in the United States or of a bona fide, formal, documented relationship with an entity in the United States that was formed in the ordinary course, rather than for the purpose of evading the executive order, the guidance states. Applicants not exempted based on the Supreme Court’s order still may qualify for an exemption or a waiver, the guidance says. Likewise, diversity visa applicants from the affected countries “will need a credible claim of a bona fide close familial relationship with a person in the United States or of a bona fide, formal, documented relationship with an entity in the United States that was formed in the ordinary course, to be exempted under the provisions of the E.O., or qualify for a waiver, before they can be issued a visa during the suspension,” because a relationship with a person or entity in the United States is not required for such visas.

The guidance notes that if a principal visa applicant qualifies for an exemption or a waiver under the executive order, a qualified derivative is also exempt. The order does not restrict the travel of dual nationals if they are traveling on the passport of an unrestricted country and, if needed, hold a valid U.S. visa, the notice states. This applies even if they hold dual nationality from one of the six restricted countries. Also, U.S. lawful permanent residents are not affected by the executive order.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied Hawaii’s appeal of a U.S. District Court decision denying an emergency motion filed by Hawaii’s Attorney General Douglas Chin asking the court to block portions of the travel ban and for clarification of “bona fide relationship” with respect to qualifying relationships under the travel ban.

However, on July 13, 2017, a federal judge in Hawaii ruled that the travel ban cannot apply to grandparents, grandchildren, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and cousins of persons in the United States. The Trump administration filed a motion with the Supreme Court on July 14, 2017, asking for clarification and a stay of the Hawaii order. “The Supreme Court has had to correct this lower court once, and we will now reluctantly return directly to the Supreme Court to again vindicate the rule of law and the Executive Branch’s duty to protect the nation,” Attorney General Jeff Sessions said.

THE DEPARTMENT’S GUIDANCE, which includes frequently asked questions

EXECUTIVE ORDER 13780

HAWAII’S EMERGENCY MOTION

Back to Top

2. DHS Delays, Plans To Propose Rescinding International Entrepreneur Rule

As expected, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has delayed the effective date of the International Entrepreneur Rule that was scheduled to take effect July 17, 2017. The Federal Register notice, published on July 11, 2017, states that this delay ” will provide DHS with an opportunity to obtain comments from the public regarding a proposal to rescind the rule pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13767, ‘Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements.’ ” DHS said it will issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking soliciting public comments on the proposal to rescind the IE Final Rule.

The new effective date for the final rule, with one exception, is March 14, 2018. In the final rule, DHS added the Department of State Consular Report of Birth Abroad (Form FS-240) to the regulatory text and to the “List C” listing of acceptable documents for Form I-9 verification purposes. As part of the final rule, DHS also revised the accompanying form instructions to reflect this change. As this provision is unrelated to entrepreneur parole under the final rule, this one provision will go into effect on July 17, 2017, as originally provided, the notice states.

The final rule amended DHS regulations to include criteria that would guide the implementation of the Secretary of Homeland Security’s discretionary case-by-case parole authority as applied to international entrepreneurs. Specifically, the notice states, it applied to international entrepreneurs who can demonstrate that their parole into the United States under § 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) would provide a significant public benefit to the United States. In accordance with the final rule’s criteria, such potential would be indicated by, among other things, the receipt of significant capital investment from U.S. investors with established records of successful investments, or obtaining significant awards or grants from certain federal, state, or local government entities. In addition to defining criteria for the favorable exercise of the Secretary’s discretionary parole authority, the final rule established a period of initial parole stay of up to 30 months (which may be extended by up to an additional 30 months) to facilitate the applicant’s ability to oversee and grow his or her start-up entity in the United States.

Comments may be submitted by August 10, 2017, by following the instructions in the NOTICE.

LETTER from a group of investors and startup founders in support of the International Entrepreneur Rule

ORIGINAL FINAL RULE

Back to Top

3. I-94 Arrival/Departure Info Now Available Online for Air and Sea Travelers

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) recently announced that foreign visitors arriving to the United States via air or sea no longer must complete the paper Form I-94 Arrival/Departure Record or Form I-94W Nonimmigrant Visa Waiver Arrival/Departure Record. Such travelers who need to prove their legal-visitor status to employers, schools and universities, or government agencies, can now access their CBP arrival/departure record information online. CBP said it is gathering travelers’ arrival/departure information automatically from their electronic travel records. Because advance information is transmitted only for air and sea travelers, CBP will still issue a paper I-94 at land border ports of entry.

If travelers need the information from their I-94 admission record to verify immigration status or employment authorization, the record number, and other admission information, CBP encourages them to obtain the I-94 number HERE.

Upon arrival, a CBP officer stamps the travel document of each arriving nonimmigrant traveler with the admission date, the class of admission, and the date until which the traveler is admitted. If a traveler would like a paper I-94, one can be requested during the inspection process. All requests will be accommodated in a secondary setting, CBP said.

Upon leaving the U.S., a traveler previously issued a paper I-94 should surrender it to the commercial carrier or to CBP upon departure. Otherwise, CBP will record the departure electronically via manifest information provided by the carrier or by CBP.

NOTICE

RELATED FACT SHEET

Back to Top

4. USCIS Issues Policy Guidance on H-1B Master’s Degree Cap Exemption Case

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently published a policy memorandum designating Matter of A-T- as an “Adopted Decision,” which establishes policy that applies to and binds all USCIS employees. “USCIS personnel are directed to follow the reasoning in this decision in similar cases,” the memo states. The decision clarifies that to qualify for an H-1B numerical cap exemption based on a master’s or higher degree, the conferring institution must have qualified as a “United States institution of higher education” at the time the beneficiary’s degree was earned.

In Matter of A-T- Inc., Adopted Decision 2017-04 (AAO May 23, 2017), the California Service Center director denied the H-1B petition, concluding that the beneficiary did not qualify for the claimed master’s cap exemption because the degree-conferring institution was not accredited when it awarded the beneficiary’s master’s degree. The petitioner asserted that a master’s degree does not need to be from a U.S. institution of higher education when the degree is awarded to qualify for the master’s cap exemption, but rather that a beneficiary may qualify for the exemption if he or she earned a degree from an entity that qualified as a U.S. institution of higher education at the time of adjudication. The Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) disagreed, noting that the degree must have been earned from an institution that has either been accredited or granted preaccreditation status. Among other things, the AAO noted that if a beneficiary could qualify for the master’s cap exemption based on accreditation or preaccreditation that happens long after the degree was earned, this would not necessarily reflect the quality of the beneficiary’s education. Conversely, the beneficiary subsequently could become ineligible for the exemption if the institution ended up not being accredited. Thus, the AAO noted, the petitioner’s proffered interpretation introduces uncertainty for graduates seeking immigration benefits over time. In contrast, the AAO said, under its interpretation, an individual who earns a degree from an accredited or preaccredited institution may continue to qualify for the master’s cap exemption even if the institution later closes or loses its accreditation status. Therefore, the AAO said it interprets the statute as requiring that the institution’s qualifications be established at the time the degree is earned, and the date the beneficiary earned his master’s degree is critical.

USCIS POLICY MEMORANDUM

Back to Top

5. Ten States Demand End of DACA

Republican officials from 10 states, led by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, sent a letter to the Department of Justice threatening further legal action if the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program is not ended. That program, instituted by President Obama in 2012, allows undocumented immigrants, called “DREAMers,” who grew up in the United States to stay in the country and obtain work authorization. Signers included officials from Alabama, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia.

The letter states that the original 2012 DACA memorandum is “unlawful” because DACA “unilaterally confers eligibility for work authorization…and lawful presence without any statutory authorization from Congress.” The letter, sent to Jeff Sessions, U.S. Attorney General, asks that DACA be phased out, that the 2012 memorandum be rescinded, and that DACA or Expanded DACA permits not be renewed or issued in the future. The letter asks the Trump administration to agree by September 5, 2017, to rescind the 2012 DACA memorandum and not to renew or issue any new such permits in the future, to avoid further legal action.

The states with the most DACA applicants are California, which reportedly has received an estimated 387,000 DACA applications or renewals and approved 359,000 as of August 2016, and Texas, which has received more than 220,000 such applications and approved nearly 200,000 in the same time frame.

Reaction from DACA advocates was swift and intense. Thomas A. Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF), said his organization “condemns in the strongest terms each of the state officials who joined in threatening the federal administration to repeal DACA.” Accusing the state signatories of “xenophobia” and “mean-spirited stupidity,” he said MALDEF “urges the president not to cave in to the toothless threat in [the] Texas letter. Presidential authority does constitutionally extend to protecting DACA recipients, whom the president has repeatedly declared worthy of protection. We urge the president to fight to vindicate that authority.” He said MALDEF “takes encouragement from the fact that less than half of the plaintiff states in Texas v. United States joined today’s craven letter. For its part, MALDEF, on behalf of the Jane Doe intervenors whom we represent, will be moving to dismiss the case as moot and not appropriate for the threatened expansion.”

LETTER

MALDEF’s STATEMENT

Back to Top

6. New Publications and Items of Interest

Travel ban FAQ, by David Isaacson of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, updated June 27, 2017.

How to safeguard your data from searches at the border is the topic of several recent articles and blogs. See, for example, NYTimes and ACLU.

Airport Lawyer is a free Web app that is intended to help ensure that immigrants are treated fairly at airports. Arrivals information can be securely passed along to large groups of volunteer attorneys who have been organized to monitor arrivals. See HERE.

Listings and links to cases challenging executive orders, and related available pleadings, are available HERE.

The latest E-Verify webinar schedule from USCIS is available HERE.

The latest edition of the Global Business Immigration Practice Guide has been released by LexisNexis. Dozens of members of the Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers (ABIL) co-authored and edited the guide, which is a one-stop resource for dealing with questions related to business immigration issues in 30 immigration hotspots around the world.

The latest edition adds chapters on Malta and Romania. Other chapters cover Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Costa Rica, the European Union, France, Germany, Ghana, Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

Latchi Delchev, a global mobility and immigration specialist for Boeing, called the guide “first-rate” and said the key strong point of the book is its “outstanding usability.” She said she highly recommends the book and notes that it “is helpful even to seasoned professionals, as it provides a level of detail which is not easily gained from daily case management.”

Mireya Serra-Janer, head of European immigration for a multinational IT company, says she particularly likes “the fact that the [guide] focuses not just on each country’s immigration law itself but also addresses related matters such as tax and social security issues.” She noted that the India chapter “is particularly good. The immigration regulations in India have always been hard to understand. Having a clear explanation of the rules there helps us sort out many mobility challenges.”

Charles Gould, Director-General of the International Co-operative Alliance, said the guide is “an invaluable resource for both legal practitioners and business professionals. The country-specific chapters are comprehensive and answer the vast majority of questions that arise in immigration practice. Its clear and easy-to-follow structure and format make it the one volume to keep close at hand.”

This comprehensive guide is for:

• Human resources professionals and in-house attorneys who need to instruct, understand, and liaise with immigration lawyers licensed in other countries;
• Business immigration attorneys who regularly work with multinational corporations and their employees and HR professionals; and
• Attorneys interested in expanding their practice to include global business immigration services.

This publication provides:

• An overview of the immigration law requirements and procedures for over 20 countries;
• Practical information and tips for obtaining visas, work permits, resident status, naturalization, and other nonimmigrant and immigrant pathways to conducting business, investing, and working in those countries;
• A general overview of the appropriate options for a particular employee; and
• Information on how an employee can obtain and maintain authorization to work in a target country.

Each chapter follows a similar format, making it easy to compare practices and procedures from country to country. Useful links to additional resources and forms are included. Collected in this Practice Guide, the expertise of ABIL’s attorney members across the globe will serve as an ideal starting point in your research into global business immigration issues.

An excerpt of the book is on the ABIL website.

Contact your Lexis/Nexis sales representative; call 1-800-833-9844 (United States), 1-518-487-3385 (international); fax 1-518-487-3584.

ABIL on Twitter. The Alliance of Business Immigration Lawyers is on Twitter: @ABILImmigration. Recent ABIL member blogs are HERE.

Back to Top

7. ABIL Member/Firm News

The following ABIL members are included in Who’s Who Legal: Corporate Immigration:

Bernard Caris

Maria Celebi

Steven Clark, of Clark Lau, LLC

Laura Danielson

Laura Devine

Rami Fakhoury

Charles Foster, of Foster LLP

Avi Friedman, of Wolfsdorf Rosenthal

Vic Goel

Avi Gomberg

Kehrela Hodkinson

Mark Ivener

H. Ronald Klasko

Jelle Kroes

Charles Kuck

Kirby Joseph

Jeff Joseph, of Joseph Law Firm

Vincent Lau

Robert Loughran

Dawn Lurie, of Seyfarth Shaw

Gabriele Mastmann, of Offer & Mastmann

Gunther Mävers

Marco Mazzeschi

Cyrus Mehta

Bettina Offer

Angelo Paparelli

Julie Pearl

Sharon Cook Poorak, of Seyfarth Shaw

William Reich

Nicolas Rollason

Gregory Siskind, of Siskind Susser

William Stock, of Klasko Immigration Law Partners

Anastasia Tonello, of Laura Devine Attorneys

Karl Waheed

Andrew Wilson, of Serotte Reich Wilson, LLP

Bernard Wolfsdorf

Stephen Yale-Loehr

Brian Zuccaro, of Serotte Reich Wilson, LLP

Julianne Opet of Klasko Immigration Law Partners, LLP, recently published a new blog entry. “U.S. Travel Ban Implementation and Guidance”

Mr. Klasko has published a new blog entry. “Trump Administration Delays and May Eliminate the ‘Startup Visa’ ”

Michelle Velasco, of Cyrus D. Mehta & Partners PLLC, recently published a new blog entry. “With Adopted Decision Matter of O-A-, USCIS Accepts Provisional Certificates as Evidence of Degree Completion”

Mr. Mehta has published a new blog entry. “Analysis of the 60-Day Grace Period for Nonimmigrant Workers”

Mr. Yale-Loehr was quoted in an article on Time.com about an ACLU lawsuit challenging detention of a US citizen family at the border for more than 10 hours because the father was on a terrorist watch list. Mr. Yale-Loehr said, “It is very difficult to win a case challenging searches at the border. Border Patrol officials have broad authority at ports of entry,” says Cornell University law professor Stephen Yale-Loehr. “Courts have often ruled against citizens alleging that their constitutional rights have been violated at the border. Only the most egregious cases are likely to win.”

Back to Top

8. Government Agency Links

Follow these links to access current processing times of the USCIS Service Centers and the Department of Labor, or the Department of State’s latest Visa Bulletin with the most recent cut-off dates for visa numbers:

USCIS Service Center processing times online

Department of Labor processing times and information on backlogs

Department of State Visa Bulletin

Visa application wait times for any post

Back to Top