Revoke GC?

[dynobuoy]

Can USCIS revoke an approved GC? Suppose if the company's financial is screwed up (i.e. they never had the ability to pay etc), could USCIS revoke all the previous GCs issued by that company?

Apart from fraud, under what other circumstances could the GC be revoked?

TIA
dyno

[qwertyisback]

Originally Posted by ****

The recission rules quoted by unitednations deal with CIS mistakes. If CIS makes a mistake by approving a GC that should not have been approved, they can revoke the approval up to 5 years later.
In cases of fraud by the beneficiary, they can revoke it even later. Their position is that if the GC was aquired by fraud, it actually never was acquired. Therefore, there is no statute of limitation on immigration fraud. And they have revoked GCs and citizenship of people who lied on their GC applications, sometimes decades later.

Just a guesswork?? Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256] doesn't say anything like that, it clearly gives amenesty to all GC holders after 5yrs. Support your argument with law or shut up and don't misguide members with your guesswork.

[TheRealCanadian]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

Just a guesswork?? Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256] doesn't say anything like that, it clearly gives amenesty to all GC holders after 5yrs. Support your argument with law or shut up and don't misguide members with your guesswork.

Instead of calling people names, you might explain why all of those old Nazi war criminals get denaturalized and deported after 50 years..... Specifically because they lied and committed fraud when they immigrated back in the 1940s and 1950s.

[harvydonald]

I know of one person who lied when he got his GC, after five years became a naturalized citizen, was arrested on some criminal charges, and it was found that he lied (presented fake documents) to get his green card. He was de-naturalized and deported. It was an immigration judge who made that decision.

[chennai_vaasi]

I had this question when I was reading this thread... I was wondering what happens when a person is "de-naturalized". For example, citizens from certain countries who are naturalized to become US citizens, loose their home country citizenship. If suc people are denaturalized, do they gain their original home country citizenship? If not, where would they (have to) go after deportation?

[TheRealCanadian]

Originally Posted by chennai_vaasi

If suc people are denaturalized, do they gain their original home country citizenship?

That's up to the original home country.

If not, where would they (have to) go after deportation?

To whichever country will take them. If they are a war criminal, then usually the home country is very interested in taking them, citizen or not.

[lohith]

Originally Posted by ****

If CIS makes a mistake by approving a GC that should not have been approved, they can revoke the approval up to 5 years later.

This GC/citizenship recissions are not as trivial as USCIS denials by adjudicators. Regular USCIS adjudicators dont have authority to do these (GC/denatulization)recissions.

It should come from immigration judge(can appeal to Attorney General) after full course of trials/hearings.

[qwertyisback]

Originally Posted by TheRealCanadian

Instead of calling people names, you might explain why all of those old Nazi war criminals get denaturalized and deported after 50 years..... Specifically because they lied and committed fraud when they immigrated back in the 1940s and 1950s.

Where did you see name calling in my previous post??You are just assuming and I am also assuming its just guesswork unless supported by law.

Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256](posted by unitednations) don't say anything like that (or exactly apposite to that). Regarding Nazi cases, right, for such cases ,national security/interest takes precedence, if situation arises, government can put you in G'bay without any reason... But that doesn't mean that its common norm, those are just special cases and treated differently, Thats it.

If such BS doesn't stopped now, very soon, extra wise members on this forum will convert it into something like this " if you did some mistake (e.g wrong travel dates) on GC/citizenship form, you will deported/blah blah ". Better stop this BS at start.

[TheRealCanadian]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

But that doesn't mean that its common norm, those are just special cases and treated differently, Thats it.

For someone who insists on seeing the exact law, you have a remarkably casual way of dismissing the example I mentioned.

The "special case" you refer to was the fact that there is no "amnesty after 5 years" as you claim when it comes to fraud.

[qwertyisback]

Originally Posted by TheRealCanadian

The "special case" you refer to was the fact that there is no "amnesty after 5 years" as you claim when it comes to fraud.

I am not claiming anything, Its in the LAW, Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256]. And the example what you have given is a "special case"(if you care to read it, those deported person actually worked in nazi camp.... thats why its special case), not common norm. Period.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

I am not claiming anything, Its in the LAW, Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256]. And the example what you have given is a "special case"(if you care to read it, those deported person actually worked in nazi camp.... thats why its special case), not common norm. Period.

What makes it special? Even the "harvydonald's example is special too?

[TheRealCanadian]

Originally Posted by pralay

What makes it special? Even the "harvydonald's example is special too?

It's special because qwerty says so. There's a section of the INA allowing him to make this claim.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by lohith

This GC/citizenship recissions are not as trivial as USCIS denials by adjudicators. Regular USCIS adjudicators dont have authority to do these (GC/denatulization)recissions.

It should come from immigration judge(can appeal to Attorney General) after full course of trials/hearings.

GC is issued by USCIS (not judge). So USCIS does have authority for recissions.

The thing is that, eventually this kind of USCIS decision end up being going to immigration court thru appeal, where judge either upholds USCIS decision or reject it. If the person does not appeal, USCIS's decision for recissions remains.

[Participant]

Originally Posted by pralay

GC is issued by USCIS (not judge). So USCIS does have authority for recissions.

The thing is that, eventually this kind of USCIS decision end up being going to immigration court thru appeal, where judge either upholds USCIS decision or reject it. If the person does not appeal, USCIS's decision for recissions remains.

I remeber read some where,Specifically the Denaturalization aspect doesn't rest with CIS but with a judge(revoking naturalization).Also,seems there was a move/plea to shift it to CIS but
it was opposed.(Do not rember the link).Not sure with GC and judge axis.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by Participant

I remeber read some where,Specifically the Denaturalization aspect doesn't rest with CIS but with a judge(revoking naturalization).Also,seems there was a move/plea to shift it to CIS but
it was opposed.(Do not rember the link).Not sure with GC and judge axis.

After getting citizenship, person is not in USCIS jurisdiction anymore. Hence, USCIS cannot revoke citizenship. Instead USCIS itself can go to court and appeal for revoking citizenship. Howver, GC is still in USCIS jurisdiction and can be revoked without going to court.

[PremChopra]

For qwertyisback:

When you say RC has given an example of "special case". Just keep in mind that the cases will be rescinded/deported or de-naturalized will always be special cases.

If it starts happening casually then anyone is rescinded for anything.

[Participant]

See the link:
http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031352.P.pdf
Anoter one detailed on five year limit admissability;
http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Nov1996/96a1453p.txt

[usnycus]

See Inline ...

Originally Posted by dynobuoy

Can USCIS revoke an approved GC? Suppose if the company's financial is screwed up (i.e. they never had the ability to pay etc), could USCIS revoke all the previous GCs issued by that company?
... I have never heard of such case.

I rememeber back in 1998, USCIS (then INS) black-listed couple of companies for fraud and barred them from doing any H1-B cases. But nothing they did to the employees who were then holding H1 visas from the black-listed employer(s).

Apart from fraud, under what other circumstances could the GC be revoked?
... Beside fruad, one can get deported for
a) criminal convictions; either committed felonies or "crimes of moral turpitude"



TIA
dyno

[usnycus]

Q: What are the grounds for Removal?

A: Noncitizens can be expelled for a number of reasons:
-- A person who entered the country on a temporary visa, that has since expired.
-- A person who has entered the country illegally.
-- A person who has violated immigration laws.
-- A long-time immigrant who has a green card can be expelled if they commit a crime, or have committed a crime in the past.
-- There are many grounds for removal, which arise out of economic, moral, political, security, health, criminal, or other concerns.

There are additional grounds for removal added by the new immigration law enacted in 1996. They include:
-- Making a false claim of U.S. citizenship in order to receive a benefit under the immigration laws (even for employment purposes).
-- Conviction for a crime that was the result of domestic violence, stalking, or child abuse.

Although a person may be able to seek a waiver of removal in certain circumstances, there are some grounds for removal that can not be waived.

[usnycus]

Also:

Once you gain a U.S. citizenship, you cannot be deported or lose your citizenship even if you commit a crime or choose to live elsewhere in the world, unless you misrepresented yourself to get citizenship or were ineligible at the time.

But, just be careful with past:

http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/06/top11.htm

[lohith]

Originally Posted by usnycus

Q: What are the grounds for Removal?

A: Noncitizens can be expelled for a number of reasons:

There are additional grounds for removal added by the new immigration law enacted in 1996. They include:


Although a person may be able to seek a waiver of removal in certain circumstances, there are some grounds for removal that can not be waived.

So, GC can be recisended If there was a some sort of involuntary false-represenation (no criminal/moral tupitude charges) to obtain Adjustment, even after 5 yr time limit ?

[Layperson]

Some quick questions for experts..

If they want to revoke your GC, what will they do ?

(1)Will they issue a NOIR ?
(2)Will you receive an updated email message on-line ?
(3)Will you receive an notice by mail (sent to your home address)?

Just being curious about the procedure of NOIR, thanks.

Originally Posted by ****

The recission rules quoted by unitednations deal with CIS mistakes. If CIS makes a mistake by approving a GC that should not have been approved, they can revoke the approval up to 5 years later.
In cases of fraud by the beneficiary, they can revoke it even later. Their position is that if the GC was aquired by fraud, it actually never was acquired. Therefore, there is no statute of limitation on immigration fraud. And they have revoked GCs and citizenship of people who lied on their GC applications, sometimes decades later.

[qwertyisback]

Originally Posted by pralay

What makes it special? Even the "harvydonald's example is special too?

I already answered q/s in quotes below.

Originally Posted by pralay

I am not claiming anything, Its in the LAW, Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256]. And the example what you have given is a "special case"(if you care to read it, those deported person actually worked in nazi camp.... thats why its special case), not common norm. Period.

you,TRC and others, if you are suggesting that some Nazi case will be used to deport/denaturalise innocent immigrants... I think nobody can help you people. I think you should right away start worring bout loosing your GC on plane riding/donkey ridings etc. May god help suffering souls to get your GC(or atleast some basic senses, to start with) back

[dynobuoy]

Thanks for everyone that replied.

The reason I asked about this is that one of the company got about 5-6 denials on their 140 citing the reason that the company doesn't have the ability to pay. The company's financials had been similar for the past 5 year. But they had about 30 GCs approved over the past 5 years. So the the ones who had their GCs approved were worried that their GCs might be revoked.

Today morning my paralegal replied to my message I left yesterday. She said that revoking a GC due to ability of pay is 'far-fetched'. She hasn't heard about any such thing in her service (she has been in her field for abt 20 yrs) nor she thinks it would be possible as it would open a whole can of worms. She assured that with the current backlog USCIS would not open the approved cases. I mentioned (to her) that USCIS might revoke an approved case, if the find out they approved a petition by an error (based on UNs post). She said that with pending lawsuits against USCIS, they wouldn't come out and say they committed an error as the national security will be questioned and the issue will become major concern.

Again thanks for everyone who responded.

Cheers

-dyno

[qwertyisback]

Originally Posted by dynobuoy

Today morning my paralegal replied to my message I left yesterday. She said that revoking a GC due to ability of pay is 'far-fetched'. She hasn't heard about any such thing in her service (she has been in her field for abt 20 yrs) nor she thinks it would be possible.
-dyno

Exactly thats what its all about. You and others should not be worry bout some Nazi case("special case") for your scenerio. All that matter in such situation is LAW, Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256].

Originally Posted by dynobuoy

say they committed an error as the national security will be questioned and the issue will become major concern.

Thats what I am saying all the time. Don't apply such extreme cases for common man immigration issues. For general immigrant, whats in the law is important (for this scenerio Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256]. ) and for extreme cases, there are G'bay and other avenues.

[TheRealCanadian]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

you,TRC and others, if you are suggesting that some Nazi case will be used to deport/denaturalise innocent immigrants...

My 3 year old has better reading comprehension than you do.

You suggested that after 5 years a permanent resident is free and clear from fraud and misrepresentation. I merely provided the Nazi war criminals as an example to show that no such safe harbor exists.

Fortunately, illiteracy is not grounds for removal.

[qwertyisback]

Originally Posted by TheRealCanadian

My 3 year old has better reading comprehension

Ask your 3 year old to post here and you stay busy yourself bout worring some paranormal situation. . Nazi war criminals case is not applicable to general immigrant cases. Period. And that what is confirmed by OP's highly experienced lawyer.


FYI, Resident bully from this forum was threatening one member (on citizenship forum) that her citizenship will be revoked as her parents were traveling every 6 months to protect their GC. She was accused with all obnoxious allegation, compared with criminal gangsters etc by him. In the end , she stopped posting on forums and we lost one more good hearted member and left with bullying guesswork

My whole intention was not to attack you or other but stop this BS at start. Peace.

Originally Posted by TheRealCanadian

You suggested that after 5 years a permanent resident is free and clear from fraud and misrepresentation. I merely provided the Nazi war criminals as an example to show that no such safe harbor exists.

I am not suggesting, its in the law Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256].

[TheRealCanadian]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

Nazi war criminals case is not applicable to general immigrant cases. Period.

You miss the point I am making, qwerty.

No matter what section of the law you suggest, there is NO forgiveness period for making a material misrepresentation when you immigrate. None. I mention the Nazis as an example, but Nazi attrocities are not the only case.

Remember the 16 questions on the I-485 form? One of them asked if we had participating in war crimes or Nazi genocide before May 8th, 1945. My wife and I rolled our eyes, but there are other questions, like if I had ever been a member of the Communist Party. I, of course, answered no.

Now let's say that when I was 15, I had as a lark joined the Trotskyite Socialist Revolutionary Worker's Party in Canada so I could get a Che Guevara T-Shrt, nothing more. If 10 years from now USCIS finds out, they could conceivably revoke my GC and/or denaturalize me.

I'm not saying this to sound extreme or alarmist. However, if you make a false statement as part of your immigration process and USCIS proves it, there is no grace period. They can go after you 30 years from now. It's that simple. It's the same principle that if CBP catches you as a non-immigrant making a false statement at a POE, they can bar you for life. 99.9999% of us will never encouter that (thank goodness!) but they can still do it.

Same thing here. If you lied about a material fact and USCIS found out, you lose. The 5 years you talk about refers to situations where information was not known.

What I am talking about are situations where you as an alien actively conceal information by deliberately lying. Two different sitautions.

[pralay]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

I already answered q/s in quotes below.


you,TRC and others, if you are suggesting that some Nazi case will be used to deport/denaturalise innocent immigrants... I think nobody can help you people. I think you should right away start worring bout loosing your GC on plane riding/donkey ridings etc. May god help suffering souls to get your GC(or atleast some basic senses, to start with) back

No. Working in nazi camp is not special case. I guess you followed 2001 nazi guard case. The ground for removal was not because he worked in nazi camp, but he did not mention it while obtaining LPR status. If he admitted, INS would not grant his GC in first place. So INS's argument was his LPR status was not valid in first place. As his citizenship is based on his LPR status, so citizenship should be revoked (as par INS's argument).

[pralay]

Originally Posted by qwertyisback

Thats what I am saying all the time. Don't apply such extreme cases for common man immigration issues. For general immigrant, whats in the law is important (for this scenerio Sec. 246. [8 U.S.C. 1256]. ) and for extreme cases, there are G'bay and other avenues.

"Extreme" is a relative word and it totally depends on US immigration policy on certain circumstance. If you remember infamous Texas raid case where H1 visa holders were detained from their workplace because they did not have I-94 with them. In special registration, people detained and got deported for not filing AR-11. Sound silly? Probably not.