Thats my fear aswell lol what a bad luck we have lol
Trump attacks Diversity Visa program
- Thread starter rafi-cairo
- Start date
Thats my fear aswell lol what a bad luck we have lol
EURO2014
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't be overly concerned about retroactive changes to current immigration law concerning DV-2018 at this stage. Of course nobody knows for sure what will happen in terms of agreement in congress, yet changes will undoubtedly occur as part of any DACA resolution before March of 2018.
Interesting point. In the EU, this would be impossible, since laws CANNOT have retroactive effect, and DV2018 selectees already gained the right to have a shot at applying for an immigrant visa. Normally, any change would not affect DV2018 selectees. But I'm not sure the same principles are applied in the US. I would like to hear something from @Britsimon about the matter.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Britsimon has a post on his website about this issue, if you would like to see his views.
I already read it, but he said:
Which doesn't answer my question.
So theorically, if they do succeed to implement a bill or vote for a new immigration law,...fast enough no matter how unlikely it sounds, let's say by January 2018. Would there be a retroactive effect?,cancelling the process for DV2018 selectees who haven't received a visa yet?
As I said in the EU, a new immigration law wouldn't affect those who applied for a visa or a resident permit under the old law (as long as they started the process before the new law entered into effect),...is it the same in the US?
I wonder in these conditions what would happen to DV-2019 applicants?
EURO2014
Well-Known Member
My earlier response above would certainly apply to DV-2019 as well. At the moment all that can be done is to await the outcome of negotiations which are driven by DACA, the primary center of attention in the United States in respect to immigration law changes at the moment.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Indeed, as has been amply demonstrated through the history of the DV process.
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
Generally it is not retroactive here either, as seen for example recently when the 90-day rule was introduced to succeed the old 30-60 days rule. What do you mean by “applied”, will be key here too. There is no guarantee of receiving a visa just because you’ve been selected or filled in a DS260 anyway, already seen by the victims of the travel ban countries having had their processing stopped while the bans were in effect, seen when numbers run out, seen by not being able to reschedule an interview in time, etc etc.
Britsimon
Super Moderator
In recent bans, people already with Green Cards, or those who had approved visas but had not yet activated their status were protected from changes. That is a matter of procedure - and would not change. So worrying about those things is pointless.
Changes *could* theoretically affect an in process DV year for people *not yet approved*. However, that is extremely unlikely (doing knee jerk stuff like that makes legal challenges much more likely). The Raise Act for instance has wording that would start tany changes at the beginning of the fiscal year following it's passing (again - *IF* it were to be passed), so theoretically, a law passed in FY2018 would affect the beginning on DV2019. But again - I really doubt there is going to be common agreement about the Raise Act and the Republicans are in a complete mess right now, and are not able to pass any meaningful changes.
Changes *could* theoretically affect an in process DV year for people *not yet approved*. However, that is extremely unlikely (doing knee jerk stuff like that makes legal challenges much more likely). The Raise Act for instance has wording that would start tany changes at the beginning of the fiscal year following it's passing (again - *IF* it were to be passed), so theoretically, a law passed in FY2018 would affect the beginning on DV2019. But again - I really doubt there is going to be common agreement about the Raise Act and the Republicans are in a complete mess right now, and are not able to pass any meaningful changes.
EURO2014
Well-Known Member
I believe we will find out any impact on DV as part of the forthcoming DACA negotiations in congress. This is not about the Raise Act, but a completely different ball game. Anyway, we will find out before March of 2018 when DACA protection is currently scheduled to expire (which we all know it won't, after respective negotiations).
That's the real question. Those with a visa are theorically protected,...those not-approved-yet however, are in the grey zone. Also as britsimon explained, if a new law is passed, it's likely to take effect the next fiscal year. Conclusion: Wait and see.
PS: I also think it's unlikely Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement. Democrats will never make concessions about chain migration, that's their key for future Democrat permanent rule. And conservative Republicans will never agree to legalize 1-4 million illegal immigrants without an end to chain-migration. DV immigrants are too insignificant (5% of Green card receivers) to be considered a bargaining chip.
Last edited:
SusieQQQ
Well-Known Member
That's the real question. Those with a visa are theorically protected,...those not-approved-yet however, are in the grey zone. Also as britsimon explained, if a new law is passed, it's likely to take effect the next fiscal year. Conclusion: Wait and see.
PS: I also think it's unlikely Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement. Democrats will never make concessions about chain migration, that's their key for future Democrat permanent rule. And conservative Republicans will never agree to legalize 1-4 million illegal immigrants without an end to chain-migration. DV immigrants are too insignificant (5% of Green card receivers) to be considered a bargaining chip.
How on earth is allowing adult siblings and adult children to immigrate to the US in any way going to ensure “permanent Democrat rule”?
EURO2014
Well-Known Member
That's the real question. Those with a visa are theorically protected,...those not-approved-yet however, are in the grey zone. Also as britsimon explained, if a new law is passed, it's likely to take effect the next fiscal year. Conclusion: Wait and see.
PS: I also think it's unlikely Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement. Democrats will never make concessions about chain migration, that's their key for future Democrat permanent rule. And conservative Republicans will never agree to legalize 1-4 million illegal immigrants without an end to chain-migration. DV immigrants are too insignificant (5% of Green card receivers) to be considered a bargaining chip.
SusieQQQ is correct, these two issues (chain immigration and Democratic rule) are not directly connected. Also, Democrats and Republicans will reach an agreement on the future of DACA before March of 2018, there is not really much doubt about that. The open question is: what exactly will be the compromise and DV appears unfortunately to be seen by many as "low hanging fruit" at this stage after the recent terrorist attack and subsequent public discourse, the first time many mainstream Americans actually heard about this program, more often than not in a very negative context.
Last edited:
More Hispanics=More votes for democrats. It's simple. When Texas turns blue (which may be very soon), Game Over for republicans. Democrats are not going to end chain migration. And Republicans are no that stupid to legalize 4 million future democrat voters without something in return.
Last edited:
EURO2014
Well-Known Member
This is much to simplistic, I am afraid. "Hispanics" (a description mainstream Americans would use) are not a homogeneous community and the votes of each group need to be earned by politicians, like everyone's elses. Check out votes of Cuban immigrants for example.
They are directly connected. Dallas didn't become reliably Democrat because their gun-toting bible-thumping natives became liberal overnight. And California till the 80's was fairly republican. 70% of Hispanics vote for Democrats, and most family-based immigrants are hispanics. The connection is undeniable. Democrats are not stupid, they won't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.
EURO2014
Well-Known Member
The other point you need to consider urgently as part of your argument is that "chain migration" is not applicable to immigrants from Latin America only, the suggestion of which may well be deemed racist in itself. This issue is rooted in current immigration law and applies equally to all, independent of native origin.
I'm afraid Statistics do not lie. Aside from wealthy and anti-communist Cuban refugees who came in the 60's and their descendents....Hispanics tend to favor Democrats and tend to skew politics in favor of Democrats in places where they become a majority or a large minority. Denying this is like denying African Americans are largely democrats, christian white men are largely republicans, or that identity politics doesn't exist in the US.