Isn't it unfair that this waiting time doesn't count in 5 yrs needed for Citizenship

P

pleasehelp1

Registered Users (C)
Isn't it unfair that this waiting time doesn't count in 5 yrs needed for Citizenship ?

I am sick of watching people that come here, get married for the green card, asylees, or even lottery people that can use this waiting time to apply for a citizenship.

I think in case of employment based I-485 adjustment of status, it would be fair that they start counting time as soon as we switch from H1B to EAD or begin adjustment. If the adjustment is not granted, we don't get the citizenship. It's not fair that sopmebody waits 5 years for the green card and then 5 years for the citizenship whereas some people get married and get it in 5. It looks like the people who have the hich-tech jobs, help corporations make a lot of money with foreign degrees this country has not paid for, and who pay the most taxes at the end, are the lowest priority.

Does anybody share my view ?

Maybe there should be another petition just for that...
 
This is one of our request in the petition to Congress and the Petition to COngress and BCIS through Media.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cent percent ina grement

i think they should count and reduce the lead time atleast some way it would eventually equal out
but then that is a long way off and i for one am hoping gc to be done passport can citizenship can wait who wants to do jury duty anywy
 
Definitely, INA should be amended.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=580153#post580153

To apply Naturalization, we have to wait another five years from the date of I-485 approval.
However, we have been already waiting for a long time for I-485.
For most of us, it will take two or three years just to get I-485 approvals.
The current processing delay of EB I-485 is significantly UNFAIR to us.
Originally posted by Edison
This is one of our request in the petition to COmgress and the Petition to COngress and BCIS through Media.
Click to expand...
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=574645#post574645

6. Amend Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) :
INA Sec. 316. [8 U.S.C. 1427] states that " No person, except as otherwise provided in this title, shall be naturalized, unless such applicant, (1) immediately preceding the date of filing his application for naturalization has resided continuously, after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence, within the United States for at least five years".
The INA should be amended so that , for people who had obtained the Permanent Residency through Employment based adjustment of status, the five year lawful residency requirement should start from the day adjustment of status application (I485) is filed with BCIS. Alternatively, we suggest that the eligibility for citizenship application should be changed so that it requires the applicant to be a permanent resident and should have resided continuosly for 8 years with valid legal status to work
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Project "Ocean" : Become a U.S. Citizen by 2008 Election !!
The target of this project is included in the petition that Edison is currently leading.
Please forward our BACKLOG PETITION to your local Senators & House of Representative.
I encourage to send the petition by FAX or (USPS) MAIL with your signature and your residential address.
-kashmir

Originally posted by kashmir
Definitely, INA should be amended.

http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=580153#post580153

To apply Naturalization, we have to wait another five years from the date of I-485 approval.
However, we have been already waiting for a long time for I-485.
For most of us, it will take two or three years just to get I-485 approvals.
The current processing delay of EB I-485 is significantly UNFAIR to us.
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=574645#post574645

6. Amend Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) :
INA Sec. 316. [8 U.S.C. 1427] states that " No person, except as otherwise provided in this title, shall be naturalized, unless such applicant, (1) immediately preceding the date of filing his application for naturalization has resided continuously, after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence, within the United States for at least five years".
The INA should be amended so that , for people who had obtained the Permanent Residency through Employment based adjustment of status, the five year lawful residency requirement should start from the day adjustment of status application (I485) is filed with BCIS. Alternatively, we suggest that the eligibility for citizenship application should be changed so that it requires the applicant to be a permanent resident and should have resided continuosly for 8 years with valid legal status to work
Click to expand...
 
Ask your local Congressperson to support Congresswomen Anna Eshoo and Zoe Lofgren

I have an important request about our petition to Congressional members about Naturalization requirements.

I live in California 14th District, and for a couple of months, I have been working with my representative Anna Eshoo for our petition, especially for sixth request of our petition to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) for Naturalization requirements.
I'd like you to contact you local Congressperson to ask to support amendment of INA that Congresswoman Anna Eshoo is trying to introduce.

Could you please send our petition and your cover letter with your signature and residential address to your local Congressional office ?
A sample is following.

The lastest status at the CSC forum is here.
Best regards,
-kashmir


ImmigrationPortal.Com
5225 N. Wilson Blvd. Arlington VA 22205
Phone: (703) 908-4800
United for Dignity, Equality and Acceptance

November 6, 2003

Congressman XXXXX XXXXX
XXX Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Phone: (202) 225-XXXX
Fax: (202) 225-XXXX

RE: Amendment of INA - Congresswoman Anna Eshoo and Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren

Dear Congressman XXXXX XXXXX;

I am one of Employment based I-485 applicants suffering from the current huge backlog at the USCIS, and also a member of one of the largest online immigrant community of legal workers -- ImmigrationPortal.Com. Attached is our petition consisting of six requests.

Now, our community members in California are working with Anna Eshoo and Zoe Lofgren to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) especially for sixth request of our petition.

Could you please support Anna Eshoo and Zoe Lofgren to implement one of our requests in the petition ?

Best regards,
(your signature)
(your name)
(your address)

Attachment:
1) ImmigrationPortal.Com petition (8 pages)
 
First Things first

Let us worry about getting the damn GC first before we can worry about becoming citizens. If we dont get the GC then there is no point in worrying about the Citizenship.
 
There is one thing wrong with the petition circulated by kashmir. It discriminates against other non employment based I-485 applicants. It would be better if it included all 485 applicants. The alternative of 8 years residency also should not discriminate those who did not work (students for example).
But for these issues I wholeheartedly support it.
 
Originally posted by nkm-oct23
There is one thing wrong with the petition circulated by kashmir. It discriminates against other non employment based I-485 applicants. It would be better if it included all 485 applicants. The alternative of 8 years residency also should not discriminate those who did not work (students for example).
But for these issues I wholeheartedly support it.
Click to expand...

I think too late to change the petition. Probably you should have participated in our discussion earlier.

It is just a proposal from us to Congress, it's up to the congress to frame the law in their own words.

You can't expect this to become law(atleast Bill.....) if we don't contact our Congressperson ASAP.
 
Originally posted by Edison
I think too late to change the petition. Probably you should have participated in our discussion earlier.

It is just a proposal from us to Congress, it's up to the congress to frame the law in their own words.

You can't expect this to become law(atleast Bill.....) if we don't contact our Congressperson ASAP.
Click to expand...


Congress will not touch this if it appears discriminatory.
I should have followed this sooner, I was already on the "other" side!
 
EXPECTING

people who are desperate to worry about citizenship is a far stretch. but who knows what stone might hit the mark?:(
 
Originally posted by nkm-oct23
Congress will not touch this if it appears discriminatory.
I should have followed this sooner, I was already on the "other" side!
Click to expand...
Hi, nkm-oct23,
I recieved the similar comment at the CSC forum.
http://www.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=610080#post610080

And, here is my reply.

(originally posted at the CSC forum)

Re: Disagreement

Hi, Huracan,
Thanks for your suggestive comment,
especially I agree on your proposal of third paragraph.

> it seems that the petition is written to fit Mr. Kashmir personal situation

The petition was originally written by several core members at the VSC forum.
Actually, I suggested not to emphasize "Employment Based" too much,
but other members wanted to appeal the right of legal workers.

> Why the need to put the 8 years requirement?

This is not requirement.
It is an alternative proposal in case the first proposal "5 years from AOS filing" is not accepted.
Although this alternative item was added by the VSC forum,
I want to remove it.

> What about people who got green card through consular processing from outside the country?

It is a good question.
The proposal must be updated condering CP cases.

> Are you going to make them wait another three years more, just because you got stuck on your adjustment of status.

I think you mean the above "8 years requirement", but it is not a case.

> If my interpretation of your petition is correct, it seems selfish to me.

I am not a volunteer for this forum nor Immigrants.
I am working on Immigration issues for myself at first,
so somebody may think I am selfish although I don't care.
However, I believe that some works such as Project Kashmir and this project would benefit not only myself but also other people.
This is why I have been posting my messages here.
If some of people would support this project with endorsement, I am very pleased.

> I would propose to reduce the number of years from 5 to 3, not only to employment based green cards, but for everyone.
> This simplifies the law, no more special married to U.S. citizen case.

I really like this proposal.
I will discuss this proposal when I talk to the staff of Anna Eshoo next time.

> I would suggest to do as in Canada, and count time spent in the country prior to acquire permanent resident status as half time towards the three years requirement.

I think this is also nice to have,
but I'm afraid that it makes our request complicated.
I'd like to keep our proposal simple.

> I would require that time in the country to have been in legal status.
> Please note I am not saying legal working status, as your petition seems to discriminate against dependents of permanent resident (H4 and the like).

I agree on this item.

If you had a further comment, it would be welcome.
Thanks again,
-kashmir
 
I don't give it a darn about citizenship

Do you still want to be here in another 15 or 20 years? Given the current attitude/polocies toward legal immigrants and other countries and the faster growth rate of the "developing countries", I don't see any bright future of US. :o :D :mad:
 
Bill (draft) to amend INA aboutI 5-year residence requiment for Naturalization

http://immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=683639#post683639

(Originally posted at Project Ocean main thread)

I drafted the part of bill to amend INA about Five-Year Requirement for Naturalization.

SEC. 101. DATE OF LAWFUL ADMISSION FOR PERMANENT RESIDENCE
(a) Section 245(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1255(b)) is amended by striking "the order of the Attorney General approving the application for the adjustment of status is made" and inserting "the application for the adjustment of status is filed".

SEC. 102. FIVE-YEAR RESIDENCE REQUIREMENT FOR NATURALIZATION
(a) Section 316(a)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1427(a)(1)) is amended by inserting "after the application for the adjustment of status is filed or" before "after being lawfully admitted for permanent residence".

Here is the background.
Especially, the second part was one of requests in our original petition.
If you have some comment or suggestion, let me know.
Thanks,
-kashmir
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top