Petition / Press, Tv, Radio

Immigration policies

The same immigration policies at the border.

Inspections Merger Elicits Criticism (http://www.immigration-law.com/)

Mr. Krikorian said that a "conflicted
and ambivalent immigration policy right
from the very top" of the Bush
administration made it "difficult for
immigration officers to do their job."
The immigration service effectively had
been "transferred into" customs, he
said, given that CBP chief Robert C. Bonner was formerly the
head of the customs service and was sure how the reforms
would pan out.
 
WHO IS IN CHARGE

Structure of the new Department of Homeland Security (or "Who's in Charge?")

A month since the creation of the new Department of Homeland Security (DHS), new
information has shed further light on the organizational structure, policies and operations of the
three bureaus charged with carrying out immigration-related functions – the Bureau of
Citizenship and Immigration Services (BCIS), the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (BICE), and the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (BCBP). BCIS is
headed by Eduardo Aguirre, a former banker, and is responsible for the adjudication of petitions
and granting of immigration benefits (e.g., work based petitions, adjustment of status,
employment authorization, naturalization). BICE and BCBP are the two new enforcement arms
of the old INS (formerly the Investigations and Detention and Deportation sections, and the
Border Patrol, Inspections, and Customs functions), and fall under the Bureau of Border and
Transportation Security (BBTS), which is headed by Asa Hutchinson, a former Congressman
and most recently, head of the Drug Enforcement Administration. It is alarming to note that
most all in the DHS immigration hierarchy, in all three bureaus, lack any real immigration
experience.

Not surprisingly, BICE believes it is the more muscular and superior immigration entity
because the DHS leadership has indicated immigration enforcement is more important than
benefits at this time. The BICE has already announced a strict interpretation of which
individuals will be considered “in status,” at times contradicting BCIS and long-standing INS
policy, with the result being that individuals are more likely to be placed in removal (deportation)
proceedings. For example, an individual who has filed for adjustment of status to permanent
resident, been fingerprinted for security purposes and received a government-issued work
permit on that very basis nevertheless may be placed in removal proceedings due to this strict
and inflexible BICE policy.

On the operational side, BCIS has slated the Missouri Service Center to become a “remote”
adjudications center that will be responsible for adjustment of status to permanent resident and
citizenship applications for the entire country. At the same time, the BCIS has indicated that
the public and attorneys will cease to have direct phone access to BCIS representatives at this
and the four other regional adjudications centers (Vermont, Nebraska, California and Texas), as
all phone inquiries will be through the BCIS 1-800 number. Thus, service will be remote in every
sense of the word, decreasing the possibility of resolution of problem cases by phone or at the
local BCIS office level.

"Zero Tolerance" at the BCIS

It is a widely held view within the immigration community that a “culture of no” permeates the
government with respect to immigration-related issues. In fact, March 11, 2002 is now viewed
as more of a turning point than September 11th with respect to what has been described as the
new “zero tolerance” attitude at BCIS. March 11th was the date of the INS decision granting
permission to two dead September 11th hijackers to change nonimmigrant status from B-2 to
M-1 to attend a Florida flight school. This embarrassing INS decision has since brought forth
the mentality at BCIS where clearly approvable cases now often result in requests for additional
evidence, and even denials, because examiners fear the personnel consequences of approving
cases for those later deemed to be “bad guys.” Thus, in this new atmosphere, it has become
safer for BCIS adjudicators to deny benefits, even in cases that have been found approvable in
the past. This “zero tolerance” policy has also led to an increased focus on whether the
applicant/beneficiary has always maintained a valid nonimmigrant status, with BCIS now
routinely requesting such proof in order to approve a change, extension or adjustment of status
request (e.g., prior approval notices, I-94 cards, paycheck stubs, I-20s, etc.). Exacerbating the
frustration with these new BCIS interpretations and policies, the current delays in adjudications
of all petition types will inevitably increase with the anticipated disparity in funding between
BCIS benefits and BICE/BCBP enforcement. Already a non-Premium Processed H-1B takes
up to six months at the California Service Center, and it is expected that the delays for
extensions of employment-based visas may soon extend beyond the 240-day automatic
extension in employment authorization that is accorded upon filing an extension of
nonimmigrant work status.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Security checks/ State Dept./Consular/FBI

Security Checks and Consular Processing

BCIS is routinely conducting security-related checks on petitions filed in the United States (of
both the foreign national and the petitioner), while the Department of State (DOS) is subjecting
visa applicants to a variety of security-related checks at the U.S. consulates overseas. The
consular checks in particular have resulted in hardship to visa applicants, their families, and
their U.S. employers, as the waits for clearances take a minimum of 30 days, and in many
cases, much longer.

The first of the three main consular security checks, and perhaps most important, is that which
utilizes the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) computer database, which has expanded
by seven to eight million new names since September 11th. These entries include pretty much
anyone who has been fingerprinted for any reason whatsoever, including for professional
licenses (e.g., doctors, nurses, lawyers, teachers). An NCIC "hit" can result from having a
similar name and date of birth (i.e., within two years) of an individual in the database, which
unfortunately only indicates that previous fingerprinting occurred, without specifying why. Thus,
even with a "false hit," the consulate must conduct a full investigation with the FBI in the U.S.,
which can take six to 12 weeks. Even more incredibly, according to the DOS, the system is so
inadequate that someone who waits six to eight weeks after an NCIC hit and is issued a visa,
must again wait again for a clearance when he or she next applies for a visa. For this reason,
foreign nationals who have been fingerprinted should advise counsel and anticipate a possible
NCIC delay when applying for a visa abroad.

The second type of consular security check is known as a "condor" check, which generally
applies to males aged 16-45 from certain Muslim countries and all visa applicants 14 years or
older from Cuba, Libya, Syria, the Sudan, Iran, Iraq and North Korea. Condor checks usually
take up to one month, and often longer. Expedites are impossible.

Lastly, the "mantis" security check applies to persons within the purview of the Technology
Alert List (TAL), available at http://travel.state.gov/reciprocity/Mantis_TAL.htm. The TAL
prohibitions apply to individuals from China, Russia, India, Pakistan, and Israel coming to the
U.S. to be engaged in a "critical technology" (e.g., certain areas of the nuclear, biotech,
engineering fields). As these checks can take up to three to four months, whenever possible it
is critical that documentation submitted with the visa application clearly show that the
individual's proposed activity is not subject to the TAL because it is either (1) widely available
to the public (i.e., in the public domain), and/or (2) based on information taught in an academic
course.
 
Inquirer/Press campaign

Guys,

I had Maria Panaritis call me back from the Philadelphia Inquirer. She promised me to have a story on Driver Licenses. The backlog problem is much bigger for her, but this DL issue brings the backlog problem to the surface. I agreed to be interviewed with my wife at a later time...


Continue the fight..write personal letters to the media and develop connections.
 
Nice work, Cinta

Let me know when the piece gets published in the Inquirer (as you can see from my handle, I'm from Philly also).

Nice work on the tomatoes - reading that was definitely the highlight of my day :D :rolleyes:

On a more serious note, you're right about the mobilizing publicity - the US seems to be getting more immigration friendly towards farm workers, illegals and the like, while highly educated legal aliens, who contribute more towards SS/medicare/income taxes, besides diversity and culture are left behind on the sidelines because they do not form a coherent 'voting block'.

Keep up the good work!

K
 
Re: Nice work, Cinta

Originally posted by PhillyKP
Let me know when the piece gets published in the Inquirer (as you can see from my handle, I'm from Philly also).

Nice work on the tomatoes - reading that was definitely the highlight of my day :D :rolleyes:

On a more serious note, you're right about the mobilizing publicity - the US seems to be getting more immigration friendly towards farm workers, illegals and the like, while highly educated legal aliens, who contribute more towards SS/medicare/income taxes, besides diversity and culture are left behind on the sidelines because they do not form a coherent 'voting block'.

Keep up the good work!

K

Join us all and we will be a voting block; besides we can influence without voting!
 
interview

Guys,

Yesterday I was interviewed by a reporter of the Philadelphia Inquirer about the Driver Licence issue in PA, the EAD and I also mentioned the Backlogs. Waiting for a favorable article..I declined a request for photos..

This proves that once we develop a dialogue with reporters we can do something.
 
Top