What is Registered Provisional Immigrant Status?

With a vote coming up in the Senate, one of the hot topics in Washington is immigration reform.  While passage of immigration reform is by no means guaranteed, even critics of current reform bill, such as Rush Limbaugh, believe that passage in the Senate is likely.  It is prudent, therefore, to prepare for the passage of immigration reform, and in particular the creation of a new immigration benefit, Registered Provisional Immigrant.

Under the current bill (click here for the text of the Senate bill, S. 744), Registered Provisional Immigrant, or RPI, status can be granted to those who are already present in the country illegally.   

The current qualificationsfor RPI status are that the applicant:

• have been present on or before December 31, 2011;
• have continuous physical presence in the United States since December 31, 2011;
• pay a $500 fine along with the filing fee for the application;
• pay all taxes due;
• not have been convicted of an aggravated felon as defined by U.S. immigration law, any other felony, three of more misdemeanors, an offense in a foreign country that would otherwise render the applicant inadmissible under U.S. immigration law, or unlawful voting;
• is not a threat to national security;
• does not have a communicable disease such as tuberculosis;
• is of good moral character.

Dependent spouses and children of the applicant may also be eligible.

While the bill has not passed, potential applicants would be prudent to start collecting documentation necessary to prove eligibility.  This is of particular importance because the bill contains a deadline of one year from the date of the publication of the application procedures in the Federal Register in order to make the application.

What documents are you likely to need?  At this time, there is no definitive list.  However, using other programs as a guide, certain requirements can be expected:

•  Proof of identity:  birth certificates, passports, documento unico de indentidad (DUI)
• Proof of physical presence:  official mail such as utility bills, tax records, school records, church records, leases, marriage certificates (if married in the United States), birth certificates of children born in the United States
• Proof of taxes paid: tax returns, W-2 forms, 1099 forms, employment records
• Criminal issues: criminal background reports from your local police, criminal background reports from the FBI, criminal background reports from your home country, certified copies of all judgments and proof of completion of sentence (including any proof of payment of fines, fees or restitution)
• Good moral character:  letters from friends, relatives, employers, religious leaders

Those who qualify for RPI status will be eligible to apply for full permanent residency after 10 years.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.

info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

(703) 837-8832

Want to Help a Brother or Sister Come to the U.S.? You May Need to Act Soon!

The so-called "Gang of Eight" unveiled its immigration reform proposal in the Senate today.  The proposal contained a lot of changes; too many to detail in a blog entry such as this.  It does appear that that in order to account for the undocumented aliens who may be permitted to stay in the United States, other visa categories may be restricted or eliminated altogether.  The full text of the 844 page immigration reform bill, titled the "Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act," can be found at this link.

One of the more surprising proposals is the elimination of permanent residency visas for brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.  Currently, a U.S. citizen can petition for a visa for a foreign-born brother or sister.  A very limited number of such visas are available on an annual basis, meaning that there is currently a backlog of approved visa petitions waiting for a visa to become available.  Dubbed category F4, for most countries visas for brothers or sisters of U.S. citizens are just becoming available for petitions which were filed on or before May 1, 2001.  For brothers and sisters from the Philippines, visas are just becoming available where the visa petition was filed on or before October 1, 1989.

The bill will now be introduced in the Senate, and will go through debate and "mark-up."  Mark-up is where amendments to the bill can be considered.  Even if the bill passes the Senate, it must pass the House of Representatives as well.  This means that it is likely that the bill which was introduced today will undergo numerous changes should it become law.

Nonetheless, the proposal to eliminate the brothers and sisters of U.S citizens category should cause some degree of urgency for those who wish to assist their sibling in coming to the United States.  If a citizen wants to help a sibling, that citizen should not delay in filing the visa petition.  Waiting to file could mean that the citizen and the sibling have lost their opportunity to obtain a permanent residency visa.

If you want to consult with an immigration attorney about filing a sibling petition, or for any other immigration matter, call me at (703) 837-8832 for an appointment.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Movement on Immigration Reform Expected After Easter

The President predicted that immigration reform could pass by the end of the summer.  The President expected an immigration reform bill to be ready after the Easter break, and New York Senator Chuck Schumer confirmed his belief that a birpartisan group of Senators called the Group of Eight was "90 percent" done with drafting the bill.

The bill is expected to include stronger border security measures, a pathway to citizenship for undocumented aliens already in the country, an expansion of visas available to high-tech workers, and some form of a guest worker program.  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stated her expectation that any new reforms would be fee-based so that the costs would not be borne by the taxpayers.  Addressing those aliens present in the country without legal status, Napolitano stated, "They need to get right with the law -- they did break the law."

One big issue that could slow the pace of reform was disagreement over the guest worker program.  Despite this issue, the President stated that he saw "enormous progress over the last month and a half" between Republicans and Democrats, adding that both sides "have been very serious about the negotiations."

The Christian Science Monitor has also reported that border security could be an issue that impedes progress on reform.

Regarding the pace of reform, some Republicans Senators have urged Senator Patrick Leahy, Chiar of the Committee on the Judiciary, not to rush reform without proper debate.  Leahy responded that he intended "to proceed to comprehensive immigration reform with all deliberate speed."

Senator John McCain, however, a member of the Group of Eight, would not commit to a timetable, noting that there were still major points of contention.

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Congress to Increase H-1B Caps?

A bill, called the Immigration Innovation Act or I2, (I-Squared) has been introduced in Congress in an effort to expand the number of foreign workers who can obtain temporary visas to work for U.S. companies.  The bill would expand the number of H-1B visas available each year on a sliding scale, depending on the demand by U.S. empoyers for such workers.

The H-1B visa is open to workers to be employed in specialty occupations.  A specialty occupation is defined as an occupation that requires a bachelor's degree, or its equivalent, or higher as the normal entry requirement for the position.

Each year, there are 65,000 temporary visas available for specialty workers.  Another 20,000 visas are set aside specifically for workers who hold a U.S. master's degree.  The temporary visas can eventually lead to permanent residency.  They are often used for U.S. companies seeking to fill high-tech positions, although any job which requires a bachelor's degree may be able to qualify for the basis of an H-1B visa.

U.S. employers may apply for the H-1B visas up to six months before the visas are to take effect.  The visas become available at the beginning of the fiscal year, or October 1.  This means that an employer may submit an application as early as April 1.  In times of an expanding economy, it is not uncommon for the cap of all 85,000 visas to to be met on the first day of filing.

If passed, I2 would raise the number of H-1B visas available each year from 65,000 to 115,000. More H-1B visas could be made available, depending on the demand.  If the cap is met within the first 45 days of when petitions can be filed, another 20,000 wold be made available.  If the cap is met within the first 60 days, then another 15,000 would be made available.  If the cap is met within the first 90 days, then another 10,000 visas would be made available.  If the cap is met again by the 275th day on which petitions can be filed, another 5,000 visas would be made available.  Under the proposed legislation, the cap on foreign workers holding U.S. master's degrees would be eliminated.

This bill has received bi-partisan support, as it is co-sponsored by such Republicans as Orrin Hatch and Marco Rubio, and such Democrats as Bill Nelson and Mark Warner.

However, passage of the bill is not assured.  Senators Dick Durbin and Charles Grassley, for example, have been critical of the H-1B program, arguing that it permits U.S. employers to bypass hiring available U.S. workers.  U.S. technology companies, by contrast, have been pushing for the expansion of available H-1B visas.

The President has promised to press for comprehensive immigration reform this year.  The Obama Administration's strategy has been to push through a single bill addressing various immigration issues.  By contrast, the Republicans, many of whom believe it critical to press for reform in the aftermath of the 2012 election defeat, wish to press forward with many bills, each addressing a discrete immigration issue.  The goal for Republicans appears to be to avoid a show-down within the party over anything perceived by the far-right to be amnesty.  Whether this bill passes, or is absorbed by a larger, more comprehensive bill, remains to be seen.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Political Wrangling Over Immigration Reform Begins

In the aftermath of the 2012 presidential election, some Republicans began pressing to change the party's stance on immigration reform as a way to change the party's image with Latino voters.  Over 70% of Latinos voted for President Obama, and was seen by many as a key reason for the President's victory.

Comprehensive immigration reform will take time and negotiations.  Some Republicans eager to start changing the party's image have introduced smaller proposals in Congress now, during the lame duck session, in an effort to give the GOP some credibility.

One such proposal is the expansion of the number of permanent residency visas available for workers in science, technology, engineering and math, so-called STEM workers.  I have already discussed the arduous process of hiring foreign-born STEM workers and applying for their visas on this blog.

While Republicans may not be completely unified on comprehensive immigration reform, STEM worker visas is one area where the GOP does have a degree of unity.  One Republican proposal on STEM worker visas was brought to a vote in September of this year.  The plan would have increased the number of visas available for STEM workers by 50,000, while eliminating the diversity visa program.  The diversity visa program, also known as the visa lottery, makes 50,000 visas available to people born in areas of the world that have sent the fewest immigrants to the United States in the past five years.

The GOP bill was brought to the floor in September under the suspension calendar, and needed a two-thirds majority to pass in the House of Representatives.  While the proposal failed to gain the required support in September, the bill to expand the number of STEM visas came to the floor on the regular calendar, and passed the House on November 30, 2012.  The bill passed, and was introduced in the Senate.

In the Senate, Republican John Cornyn sought unanimous consent to bring the bill on STEM worker visas to a vote.  Democrat Chuck Schumer objected, noting that while Democrats favored expanding the number of visas available for STEM workers, that Democrats did not believe it had to be done by eliminating the visas available under other immigration programs.

The political wrangling over immigration reform has therefore begun.  There is a question over whether the Democrats will even permit immigration reform to pass.  If immigration reform were to pass, it would rob the Democrats of a political issue where they believe they have an advantage over Republicans. 

This first foray into the issue of immigration reform, therefore, does not bode well for the passage of comprehensive reform.  If political parties cannot agree on the specifics of this one issue, where there is general agreement for the need to expand the visas available for STEM workers, then finding common ground on a host of other immigration topics could prove elusive.

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Dream to Achieve: Comparison of Proposals to Address Young Undocumented Aliens

In the wake of the presidential elections, many in the Republican Party have shown a greater willingness to consider comprehensive immigration reform. In particular, many have seen a softening of the GOP's stance on immigration reform necessary in light of the overwhelming majority of Latino voters who supported President Obama.

Nonetheless, the Republicans may not be in complete uniformity on what shape comprehensive immigration reform should take.  One issue that may prove to be the most difficult to address could be what to do about the many undocumented aliens already in the country.  The issue of creating a guest worker program, with some pathway to citizenship, may complicate the drive for comprehensive reform.

In the meantime, there appears to be some agreement that young people, brought to this country as children and who have grown up as if they were Americans, deserve some form of relief.  This is on the heals of the President's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, which could grant a promise not to deport such young people who meet certain qualifications.  The program has its roots in the DREAM Act, which failed in 2010 when a Senate filibuster prevented the bill from coming up for a vote.

At least two Republicans have been working on a similar bill over the past year.  Senators Kay Bailey Hutchison and Jon Kyl, both of whom will retire in January, have been working on the Achieve Act as an alternative to the DREAM Act.  There appears to be a movement to try to bring the Achieve Act up for a vote before January.

The Achieve Act, however, has some major differences in qualifications when compared to the President's deferred action program.  If the Achieve Act were to pass, it could cause a number of people, who have applied for and already received deferred action, out in the cold as far as permanent relief is concerned.

The requirements for relief under the Achieve Act are:  (1) the applicant must have completed high-school and be admitted to college or earned a college degree, or completed high school and be enlisted in or have completed four years of military service; (2) the applicant must have entered the country before the age of 14; (3) the applicant must have lived in the U.S. continuously for five years; (4) the applicant must have not committed a felony, two misdemeanors with a jail term of over 30 days, or a crime of moral turpitude; (5) the applicant must not be subject to a final order of removal; (6) the applicant must pay a $525 fee; and (7) the applicant must be under the age of 28 (or 32 if they have a bachelor's degree from a U.S. university).

The major differences are:  (1) the deferred action program only requires that the applicant be enrolled in a U.S school, have a high school diploma, have a GED or be enrolled in classes to work toward a GED; (2) the deferred action program only requires that the applicant enter the United State before age 16; and (3) the deferred action program only requires that the applicant be under age 31 as of June 15, 2012.

With these key differences, there are several young people who would qualify under the deferred action program,  who would not qualify under the Achieve Act.  People who entered the United States after age 14, but before age 16, for example, would be out of luck under the Achieve Act.  Likewise, people who have a high school diploma, but who chose not to go on to higher education would be left out.  Finally, the cut-off age is lower for the Achieve Act.

It is unclear why the Republican proposal has stricter qualification requirements than the current deferred action program.  It may be explained by the fact that the bill was drafted before the President announced the program.  Nonetheless, equity would argue that the bill be modified to cover all of those covered by the deferred action program.  Whether that will happen, or the Republicans stick to their guns remains to be seen.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Kay Bailey Hutchison, of Texas, and Jon Kyl, of Arizona

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/republicans-mull-own-version-dream-act-vote-on-achieve-act-by-january/#ixzz2Cte3l3Wt

Kay Bailey Hutchison, of Texas, and Jon Kyl, of Arizona

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/11/16/republicans-mull-own-version-dream-act-vote-on-achieve-act-by-january/#ixzz2Cte3l3Wt

No Republican Uniformity on Immigration Reform

After Romney's presidential election defeat last week, many prominent Republicans began advocating for a change in the party's stand on immigration reform.  Pointing to the overwhelming majority of Latino voters who sided with President Obama, these Republicans saw a softening on the party's stance on immigration as one way that the party could appeal to this demographic group.

However, there does not appear to be uniformity within the Republican ranks on this issue.  Some have argued that changing the party's stance on immigration would amount to nothing more than pandering, and would not guarantee that Latinos would be more attracted to Republican candidates.

A strategy that hoisted all hope on immigration reform may not work to attract more Latino voters to the Republican party.  Such a strategy assumes that Latinos are single-issue voters, leaning heavily on immigration policy to guide their choice.  This, however, appears to be a false assumption.  Indeed, to consider the Latino vote to be a homogenous group itself is something of a fallacy.  Cuban Americans living in Florida, for example, are not the same as Mexican Americans living in California.

 The argument has been made that changing the party's stand on immigration reform could be the first step to changing the GOP's image on diversity in general. Business Insider has pointed out that Romney lost among Asian voters in a slightly larger margin than he did among Latino voters.  This is despite the fact that Romney generally won the vote among Americans with incomes of greater than $100,000 per year, and that on average Asians earn more than caucasians.  The argument here is that the Republicans' stand on immigration issues gives the appearance that the party is not so very tolerant of ethnic minorities.  But, immigration reform alone would not be enough to sway minority voters.

Francis Wilkinson of Bloomberg argues that Republicans place too much emphasis on Christian values, which can alienate Buddhists and Hindus.  Jennifer Rubin in the Washington Post wrote that among the thing Republicans need to consider is running ads in languages other than English, and Democrats do.  A similar thing can be said about campaigns aimed at legislating English as the official language, either of the federal or state governments.  Such actions are insensitive to the diverse population of the United States, and communicate a lack of tolerance to minority groups.

Immigration reform itself may not be a panacea for the Republican party.  But, it can be the first step to changing the party's image provided that harsh-toned rhetoric that appears intolerant of anyone who isn't an English-speaker of European descent is also eliminated.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Is Immigration Reform Around the Corner?

One of the emerging themes from the aftermath of the 2012 presidential election is the notion that the Republican Party must evolve to appeal to demographics other than caucasians.  More specifically, analysts say that Romney lost the Latino vote by a margin of 70% to 30%.  This is the widest margin since Bob Dole lost the White House in 1996.  Latinos are the largest growing ethnic group.  With the changing American electorate, many are saying that the Republicans must attract more Latino voters to be competitive in future elections.

The first step, according to conservative talk show host Sean Hannity, is "to get rid of the immigration issue altogether."Hannity surprised many in his audience by announcing that he has "evolved" on the issue of immigration reform.  Hannity urged that securing the borders had to be the top priority, but that there ought to be a "pathway to citizenship" for those who are already here and who do not have a criminal record.

Hannity is not the only conservative voicing a willingness to address immigration reform.  Speaker of the House of Representatives , John Boehner, stated, "A comprehensive approach is long overdue, and I'm confident that the president, myself, others can find the common ground to take care of this issue once and for all."

On the campaign trail, Republican Florida Senator, Marco Rubio, addressing the issue of young people brought to this country as children, stated that the United States need to find a solution, more permanent than the President's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, that was "humanitarian," and "that solves their problem but that doesn’t encourage illegal immigration in the future."

Given these statements by leading conservatives, there appears to be a possibility that immigration reform will be on the agenda for the next Congress.  The big question is what that reform will look like.

In one of the rare instances where Republican candidate Mitt Romney addressed immigration during the Fall campaign, he stated that graduates with degrees in math and science should "get a green card stapled to their diploma."  In September, a bill written by the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Lamar Smith, came up for a vote.  The bill would have increased the number of visas made available for graduates with advanced degrees in science and technology, but would have also eliminated the diversity visa program.  Representative Michael McCaul from Texas likewise mentions ending the diversity lottery while increasing the number of visas for graduates with advanced math and science degrees when discussing immigration reform.

The time may very well be right for comprehensive immigration reform.  But exactly what shape that reform will take, and whether it will include a pathway to citizenship for the undocumented aliens currently in the United States remains to be seen.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Romney's Position on Immigration Spurring Some to Apply for Deferred Action Now

Last week, I reported that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney had announced that he would not seek the deportation of those who apply for deferred action for childhood arrivals, and are granted the benefit.  But, that he would not continue with the program.  I noted that this would create an incentive to apply for deferred action now, before there is a possible change of administrations.

In this article, it is reported that Romney's position on immigration issues has spurred some undocumented aliens who qualify for the program to apply now.

For some, applying now may make some sense.  If Romney were to become president, and live up to his promises, then those who have been granted deferred action and a work permit would be safe from deportation for at least two years.  With recent public statements by Republican Senator Marco Rubio, there appears to be some hope that even with a Republican Congress that immigration reform is a possibility.  If you consider that the Government's strained resources have already caused ICE to concentrate its efforts on criminal cases, then it seems that the risk to those who do not have a criminal record is fairly low.

I have also stated that for those who are already in removal/deportation proceedings, you might as well move forward with an application, even if you do not meet all of the criteria.  The main reason is that the worst thing that could happen, that you would face deportation proceedings, has already happened.  And, it should be kept in mind that although the President has defined this particular set of undocumented aliens as a class of people to whom he wants to grant deferred action, he still has the discretion to grant it in other cases of merit.

Whether to apply requires a weighing of all of the risks and possible benefits.  For some, the prospect of having work authorization, and being able to accept employment legally is sufficient to take the risks, and apply.  For the best advice, you should consult with an immigration lawyer before applying to discuss the risks and benefits.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832

The Perils of Immigration Reform by Presidential Decree

Immigration reform has certainly been stalled in Congress.  But, does that give the President the authority to push through immigration reform essentially by executive order.  While I agree that much of what the President has been doing falls within his discretion as the chief law enforcement officer, his actions do create a degree of uncertainty, and raise constitutional concerns.

I go into more detail in the article below:

http://ezinearticles.com/?Bucking-Congress,-President-Pushes-Immigration-Reform-Through-Exercises-of-Executive-Discretion&id=7313352

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832

Romney Pledges Not to Deport Those Granted Deferred Action

In a somewhat confusing turn of events, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney stated that he would not deport those who received deferred action under the President's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DREAMers) program.  But, he would not continue with the program.

The waters of exactly where the candidate and his party stand on immigration issues were somewhat muddied further when U.S. Senator from Florida, Marco Rubio, stated that Romney wanted to find a more permanent solution for the young people who would qualify for deferred action under the program.

Both Romney and Rubio emphasized that it would not be fair to yank deferred action away from those who had already paid the filing fee and received the benefit.

Many who would otherwise benefit from the deferred action program have been reluctant to apply, citing the uncertainty involved.  Deferred action is a promise from the Government that it would not seek to deport an undocumented immigrant.  But, it does not lead to permanent residency or citizenship.  Moreover, it is not based on any new law, but on the discretion of the President to decide which cases get brought to Immigration Court.  If Romney were to beat Obama, then there would be no guarantee that the grants of deferred action would continue.

Romney's statements on the issue do create something of an incentive to apply for deferred action now, and not wait until after the election.  With Romney pledging not to deport those who received the benefit, but then saying that he would not continue with the program, those undocumented aliens looking for legal work authorization may be wise to submit their applications now, before a Romney Administration has a chance to terminate the program.

On the other hand, Romney's statements could be seen nothing more as a campaign promise.

Articles on Romeny's and Rubio's statements can be found here:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-immigrant-deportations-ban-20121002,0,5777536.story

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-rubio-dream-act-romney-20121002,0,2181168.story

http://www.boston.com/travel/destinations/2012/10/03/romney-would-end-obama-immigration-policy/8u4PI6NaVX75xTGlVNeEIN/story.html

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832