2016 Presidential Candidate Profile: Jeb Bush

Follow this link to read about my 2016 Presidential Candidate Profiles.

Candidate Profile: Jeb Bush

Current Office: None

Age: 62 (Born February 11, 1953)

Party: Republican

Real Clear Politics Poll Average (as of November 30, 2015): National 5.3% (5th); Iowa 4.7% (5th); New Hampshire 7.5% (6th)[1]

Campaign Website: jeb2016.com 

Jeb Bush is running in the Republican primary for President. He was the Governor of Florida for two full terms from 1999 to 2007. He is also known for being the son of former President George H.W. Bush and the brother of former President George W. Bush.

JEB BUSH ON THE KEY ISSUES:

IMMIGRATION:

Unlike many of his opponents in the primary, Jeb Bush supports a path to legalization, and ultimately citizenship, for many immigrants who are in the United States illegally. Bush's path to legalization would require applicants to pass a criminal background check, pay fines, pay taxes, learn English, work on a provisional work permit, and not receive government assistance. However, Bush is proposing this in conjunction with policies to buttress immigration enforcement. He proposes numerous interesting policies to make it easier for border patrol agents to prioritize the more porous stretches of the border. He seeks to implement E-Verify nationwide, but with provisions to increase identify theft protection and not punish employers for good faith mistakes based upon incorrect information. He seeks to increase immigration enforcement against visa overstays.[2]

Bush supported both the DREAM Act and the gang of eight immigration reform efforts. He opposes President Obama's executive actions on immigration.

ISRAEL:

Much like his brother was, Jeb Bush promises to be a strong friend of Israel. He vehemently opposes both the Iran deal and the Obama administration's treatment of Israel. Bush understands the broader importance of having a strong U.S. presence in the Middle East.

ISSUE OF INTEREST — EDUCATION REFORM:

Jeb Bush had an impeccable record as an education reformer as Governor of Florida. His efforts to dramatically increase school choice not only benefited children in Florida, but continue to serve as a model nationwide. While all conservatives laud these efforts, some of his positions on the federal role in education are not popular with many conservatives. In particular, there is a definite tension between his support for the common core education standards and the conservative inclination that education is an issue best left to the states.

CONCLUSION:

Jeb Bush was an exceptional Governor and has an impressive command of the complicated issues that our next President will face. While I am wary of plans that end in effective amnesty for people here illegally, Bush is committed to improving immigration enforcement. Readers should note that in Bush's proposal to expand E-Verify, he actually highlights some of the flaws with the system (unlike the majority of his rivals) that I discussed in this blog post.

However, many voters seem to be unenthusiastic about the prospect of a third Bush Presidency in the last 28 years. In addition, for all of his qualifications, Bush has been in many respects an underwhelming presence on the campaign trail compared to some of his exceptional rivals such as Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. Nevertheless, Jeb Bush makes up for his lack of charisma with his record and policy acumen. He is worth your strong consideration.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html (retrieved on November 30, 2015)
2. Jeb Bush discusses these proposals on the “Border Security” section of his campaign website.

RESOURCES AND MATERIALS:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Jeb_Bush.htm

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Asylum and Refugee Q&A with the Nebraska Service Center

On November 12, 2015, an interesting Q and A was conducted with the Nebraska Service Center (NSC) about asylee and refugee issues. You may read the Q&A yourself here.[1]

It is well worth reading yourself, but I will highlight a few of the most interesting points from the Q and A. 

• The NSC explained the best procedures for requesting expedited processing of an application for a refugee travel document.
• The NSC explained that under current policies, a renewed EAD for an asylee or refugee will have a renewal date on the day the Form I-765 is approved, and will not be backdated to the day after the previous EAD expired. However, USCIS is considering changing this policy.
• The NSC stated that asylees and refugees should continue following instructions on the Form I-485 regarding required documentation that must be submitted with the Form I-485.
• The NSC stated that a refugee who has had an overseas medical examination and has no Class A medical issues “only needs to submit the vaccination supplement (Part 1, 2, 4 (biographical info/signature pages) and Part 7 (vaccination supplement) of Form I-693).”

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. NSC Liasion Q&As on Refugee and Asylee Issues (Nov. 12, 2015), published on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No. 15101463 (Nov. 25, 2015)

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

2016 Presidential Candidate profile: Ted Cruz

Candidate Profile: Ted Cruz

Current Office: United States Senator from Texas

Age: 44 (Born December 22, 1970)

Party: Republican

Real Clear Politics Poll Average (as of November 25, 2015): National 11.3% (4th); Iowa 17.3% (3rd); New Hampshire 10.0% (3rd)[1]

Campaign Website: tedcruz.org 

Elected in 2012, Ted Cruz is the junior United States Senator from Texas. He served as the Solicitor General of Texas. He was a law clerk for then-Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist in 1995.

IMMIGRATION:

Senator Cruz was one of the leading opponents of the gang of eight effort, proposing numerous “poison pill” amendments to spur its defeat. He categorically opposes a “path to citizenship” for those here illegally. He proposes a substantial increase on the number of border patrol agents. Despite previously having supported an increase in H1B visas and Green Cards, he now proposes suspending the H1B program for 180 days to investigate alleged abuse and tying any increases in legal immigration to U.S. employment levels. Senator Cruz sought to defund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in response to President Obama's immigration actions, and he pledges to rescind all of them on his first day in office (see footnote 5 of my blog post here to learn more about that effort).

Senator Cruz opposes birthright citizenship as a matter of policy. See my thoughts here.

ISRAEL:

Senator Cruz has been a stalwart supporter of Israel in the Senate. He was one of three Senators to vote against John Kerry's confirmation as Secretary of State. He has pledged that he would move the U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem on his first day in office. In a terrific interview with the Jerusalem Post, Senator Cruz argued that the United States should support Israel unequivocally, and that it should not “attempt to lecture the Israeli people or dictate the terms of peace.”[2]

Senator Cruz continues to oppose the legitimacy of the terrible Iran deal, and pushed his colleagues to fight much harder against it than they have thus far.

ISSUE OF INTEREST — PARTY CONFLICT

Senator Cruz has made waves in the Senate by clashing with the leaders of his own party. Starting with the government shutdown over Obamacare in 2013, Senator Cruz has argued that Republicans must be willing to take a hard line in negotiations, whereas others have argued that his approach hurts the party. By campaigning against both Democrats and his own party, he seeks to change the Republican Party both by making it more conservative and by making it assume a more aggressive posture in negotiations.

CONCLUSION:

While Cruz has proven to be a strong contender for the nomination with his fundraising, oratorical skills, and campaign organization, I have concerns with Senator Cruz's electability in a general election due to his strident conservatism and his heavy emphasis on social issues.

Nevertheless, Senator Cruz is the most conservative candidate in the field, one of the most outspoken defenders of Israel, and very intelligent and qualified. While there are valid questions about his support for legal immigration, I believe that Senator Cruz will be open to increasing legal immigration once stronger border security measures are in place. I have confidence he would be an effective President if elected. Although he is not my first or second choice, the Senator from Texas is worthy of your strong consideration.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html (retrieved on November 25, 2015)
2. Glick, Caroline, “Senator Cruz to 'Post': US should stop lecturing the Israelis,” The Jerusalem Post, http://www.jpost.com/International/Senator-Ted-Cruz-to-Post-US-should-stop-lecturing-the-Israelis-427601

RESOURCES AND MATERIALS:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Ted_Cruz.htm

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

2016 Presidential Candidate Profile: Donald Trump

Candidate Profile: Donald Trump

Current Office: None

Age: 69 (Born June 14, 1946)

Party: Republican

Real Clear Politics Poll Average (as of November 25, 2015): National 27.5% (1st); Iowa 25.5% (1st); New Hampshire 26.6% (1st)[1]

Campaign Website: donaldjtrump.com

Donald Trump is a businessman and former reality television host who, after considering running for President in 2000 and 2012, decided to seek the Republican nomination in 2016.

IMMIGRATION:

Trump's immigration proposals are as disastrous as they are fanciful. From apparently forcing Mexico to pay for a wall by the sheer force of his personality to restricting legal immigration and apparently deporting 11 million people, there is nothing in the way of a sound proposal here. I am not a fan of amnesty or policies that encourage illegal immigration, but I am no more a fan of ridiculous schemes that would indiscriminately tear families apart and make my entire party look like a refuge for bigots and wingnuts.

He also does not think that the Fourteenth Amendment ensures birthright citizenship. See my thoughts here.

ISRAEL:

On Israel itself, Trump says the right things. He has expressed support for Israel and he vehemently opposes the Iran deal. However, Trump has shown absolutely no command of foreign policy or knowledge of the Middle East, although he likes to remind us that he once met Vladimir Putin. While Trump may support Israel, there is little reason to believe with any degree of confidence that a Trump Presidency would be good for Israel.

ISSUE OF INTEREST — TRUMP'S “CONSERVATISM”:

It puzzles me how Trump, who is not conservative, is doing so well in the polls thus far. This man was recently a registered Democrat, praised Hillary Clinton, supported single-payer healthcare, and supported large tax increases. That Trump's “views” seem to change on a day-to-day basis evinces the fact that Trump's campaign is not about ideas for the country, it is about ideas to keep Trump at the forefront of the news-cycle.

CONCLUSION:

I appreciate greatly being able to freely vote for my representatives every election day. Unlike Donald Trump, I do not miss election day.[2] Because of this, I ask my fellow Republicans to please — please — stop damaging the Republican Party by supporting him in the polls. Donald Trump's campaign is not about America, advancing conservative principles, or doing anything productive for anyone but himself. He has shown consistently that he is willing to say and propose whatever will get him the most attention at any given moment. The Republican field in 2016 has no shortage of exceptional candidates offering a variety of views on how to improve America, and there is no reason that anyone should support a narcissist who is both unqualified and actively damaging the chances that a qualified Republican is our next President both by his inflammatory rhetoric and his relentless attacks against his superior opponents.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html (retrieved on November 25, 2015)
2. Melchoir, Jillian Kay, “Donald Trump Hasn't Voted in the Last Six Presidential Primaries,” (June 28, 2015), National Review Online, http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420435/donald-trump-voting-record-jillian-kay-melchior

RESOURCES AND MATERIALS:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Donald_Trump.html

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

2016 Presidential Candidate Profile: Marco Rubio

Follow this link to read about my 2016 Presidential Candidate Profiles.

Candidate Profile: Marco Rubio

Current Office: United States Senator from Florida

Age: 44 (born May 28, 1971)

Party: Republican

Real Clear Politics Poll Average (as of November 25, 2015): National 12.5% (3rd); Iowa 11.8% (4th); New Hampshire 12.0% (2nd).[1]

Campaign Website: marcorubio.com 

Marco Rubio is running in the Republican primary for President. He is the junior United States Senator from Florida. Prior to being elected to the Senate in 2010, Senator Rubio was the Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives. He has declined to run for reelection in the Senate in 2016 in order to focus on his Presidential campaign.

MARCO RUBIO ON THE KEY ISSUES:

IMMIGRATION:

Senator Rubio was part of the “gang of eight” seeking to pass “comprehensive immigration reform.” He has since backed away from certain aspects of the ultimately-failed gang of eight effort. He states on his website that he supports granting certain persons here illegally temporary nonimmigrant visas, and allowing some to then apply for permanent residency after 10 years. Senator Rubio supports reforms prioritizing immigration enforcement and increasing the preference for “merit-based visas” (such as employment-based immigrant visas) over family-based immigrant visas before addressing people already present in the United States illegally. He opposed both DACA and DAPA.

ISRAEL:

Senator Rubio is not only one of the strongest supporters of Israel in the field, but also one of the strongest voices for defending American values around the globe. In a powerful speech on the Senate floor in March of this year, he placed his unwavering support for Israel in that context: “If America doesn't stand with Israel, who would we stand with?”[2] He opposed the disastrous Iran deal at every step and worked to strengthen the Congressional review process.

ISSUE OF INTEREST — TAX REFORM:

Senator Rubio, along with Senator Mike Lee of Utah, has an interesting tax proposal (follow the link to read the proposal).[3] His proposal promises to cut rates and simplify the tax code just like most conservative tax reform proposals. However, the Lee-Rubio proposal includes a substantial child tax credit. While there are valid concerns about the high top rate (by conservative tax proposal standards) and the overall cost about the plan, the Lee-Rubio proposal is a compelling addition to the conservative tax reform debate.

SUMMARY:

Senator Rubio is my second choice from the strong Republican field behind Chris Christie, and I believe that he is our best prospect for winning the White House in 2016. While his positions on immigration have been somewhat fluid over his tenure, he now strikes a delicate balance between supporting legal immigration while emphasizing immigration enforcement. Senator Rubio has been a true friend of Israel in the Senate, and his strength on the issue is based upon his commitment to our shared values.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_republican_presidential_nomination-3823.html (retrieved on November 25, 2015)
2. C-Span, http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4531970/marco-rubio-israel&start=0, (March 20, 2015) [From the Congressional Record]
3. Retrieved from www.rubio.senate.gov

RESOURCES AND MATERIALS:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Marco_Rubio.htm

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Releases Form I-918 Statistics

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) recently released Form I-918, Petition for U Nonimmigrant Status statistics from fiscal year (FY) 2009 to 2015. The chart includes Form I-918 petitions for principal beneficiaries (U1) and derivative family member beneficiaries (U2, U3, U4, and U5). Although only 10,000 U1 visas may be granted each year, the chart shows that the number of U1 visa applications has increased each year. Consequently, the number of outstanding Form I-918 petitions has increased each year. As of the publishing of this chart, there are 63,762 pending U1 visa petitions. I have included the chart (link) for your convenience.

Please read our site's resources about applying for U visas, the benefits of U status, and U visa law enforcement certification.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS releases Form I-829 Statistics

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released statistics for Form I-829 (Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions) adjudications from fiscal year (FY) 2008 to 2015. USCIS also included quarterly statistics for FY 2015. USCIS received the most petitions in FY 2015 of the eight years included on the chart. USCIS had the highest rate of approved Form I-829s to denied Form I-829s of any of the eight years in FY 2015 (1,067 to 11), although USCIS approved significantly more Form I-829s in FY 2014. At the time of the publishing of the chart, there are 4,049 pending Form I-829s. I have included the chart for your convenience.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Releases Form I-485 Statistics by Field Office/Service Center

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released comprehensive statistics regarding the processing of the Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjust status. The statistics cover the period from July 1, 2015 to September 30, 2015. The chart contains statistics for each USCIS Field Office and Service Center that processes Form I-485s, and for each displays the number of received, approved, denied, and pending Form I-485s. In addition, the chart separates Form I-485s into family-based, employment-based, humanitarian-based, and other applications. In total, USCIS approved 157,110 applications, denied 11,800, and had pending 418,907 as of September 30, 2015. I have included the chart (link) for your convenience.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Releases Form I-129 Statistics (for L1B petitions)

United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released statistics for the number of Form I-129 petitions for L1B intracompany transferees in fiscal year (FY) 2015. Of the petitions that were fully adjudicated in FY 2015, the ratio of approved L1B petitions to denied L1B petitions was approximately 3:1 (10,368 to 3,446). As of the publishing of the chart, there are still 2,116 pending I-129 petitions for L1B intracompany transferees. I have included the chart below for your convenience.

Period	Applications Received	Approved	Denied	Pending
Fiscal Year — Total
2015	13,626	10,368	3,446	2,116

Please consult our articles about L1 visas in general, L1A visas, L1B visas, L1 blanket petitions, and my blog post about changes to L1B visa adjudications. 

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Government Asks Supreme Court to Uphold DAPA and Vacate Fifth Circuit Injunction

I posted a blog a couple of weeks ago about the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit's decision to uphold a preliminary injunction against the imposition of the Deferred Action for Parents and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA) Program. Unsurprisingly, the federal government filed a petition for a writ of certiorari (cert) with the United States Supreme Court, asking the Supreme Court to vacate the preliminary injunction and uphold its authority to implement DAPA.[1] As I discussed in my blog about the Fifth Circuit decision, I believe that both the District Court and the Fifth Circuit were correct in granting Texas the preliminary injunction against the implementation of the DAPA program. In this post, I will provide a brief overview of the government's arguments followed by my thoughts at the end of the article.

THE GOVERNMENT'S ARGUMENTS

At the root of many of the government's arguments is the claim that the DAPA program is indistinguishable from other smaller deferred action programs. As I explained in my previous post, the Fifth Circuit held that DAPA is, in fact, distinguishable from the deferred action programs that the federal government has cited as precedent for DAPA.

In asking the Supreme Court to grant cert and review the case immediately, the government made three central arguments.

I. TEXAS DOES NOT HAVE ARTICLE III STANDING

The government argues that Texas[2] does not have standing to bring this suit. The main thrust of the government's argument is that nothing in DAPA compels Texas to grant to beneficiaries of DAPA the benefits that Texas cited as burdens to the state. Thus, the government argued that Texas cannot show a “cognizable injury” that affects it in an “individual way” that is “fairly … traceable” to the DAPA program.[3] Furthermore, the government argues that the Fifth Circuit's decision sets a dangerous precedent by allowing states to use costs incurred in implementing their own laws, not mandated by the federal government, to claim injury incurred as a result of federal government policies that are the exclusive province of the federal government.

Similarly, the government argues that Texas does not have a claim under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The government contends, based upon 5 U.S.C. 702, that judicial review under the APA is limited to plaintiffs who are “adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute.” The government argues that Texas' claim of injury is based on the costs incurred by Texas in implementing its own state laws, and that this does not satisfy section 702 which would entitle Texas to participate in notice and comment. Furthermore, the government argues that the APA bars the suit because deferred action is a decision that is “committed to agency discretion by law.”[4] Because of this, the government argues that deferred action is not subject to judicial review.

II. THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY (DHS) HAD AUTHORITY TO ISSUE THE DAPA MEMO

The government argues that it has ample statutory authority to grant deferred action. Firstly, the government argues that the Congress has not placed constraints on the discretionary authority Secretary of DHS to grant deferred action. In fact, the government argues that Congress has protected deferred action from judicial intervention.[5] The government argues that it has discretionary authority to grant employment authorization to aliens who have been granted deferred action.[6]

Secondly, the government rejects the Fifth Circuit's holding that parents are ineligible as a class to benefit from DAPA because deferred action is, by definition, for those who lack lawful status and would be otherwise removable. Thus, according to the government, that parents would not be eligible for permanent residency or cancellation has no negative effect on their eligibility for deferred action.

III. THE DAPA GUIDANCE IS EXEMPT FROM NOTICE AND COMMENT

The government rejects the finding that DAPA is subject to notice and comment because it is a “general statement of policy” [exempt under 5 U.S.C. 533(b)(A)] and not a binding rule. The government faults the District Court and the Fifth Circuit for speculating whether individual DHS officials would be free to exercise discretion under DAPA, contending that the proper question is whether the guidance is within the Secretary of DHS' discretion. In any case, the government also rejected the Fifth Circuit's holding that individual DHS officials would likely not be able to exercise real discretion, both based upon the language of the DAPA Memo and the fact that the policy has not yet been implemented.

IV. THE CASE WARRANTS IMMEDIATE REVIEW BY THE SUPREME COURT

The government argues that the Supreme Court should review the case immediately, despite it still being in the pre-trial stage, because the preliminary injunction interferes with the Secretary of DHS's exercise of discretion and prevents the implementation of his discretionary policy, which many states support. The government also appeals to humanitarian considerations for the many aliens who are left in limbo by the temporary injunction, and the danger that the Fifth Circuit's reasoning could also cast a cloud over the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Finally, the government argues that the Supreme Court should grant cert because this issue is unlikely to be heard by another Circuit.

MY ANALYSIS

For reasons that I discussed in my blog on the Fifth Circuit's upholding of the preliminary injunction, I believe that Texas is right as a matter of law. Not surprisingly, I am unpersuaded by the content of the government's cert petition. In particular, the government's argument that DAPA is analogous to individual instances of deferred action, or far more limited uses of deferred action programs, is not compelling, and it is upon that premise that many of the government's arguments rely. Unlike the federal government, I do not believe it is urgent for the Supreme Court to intervene immediately in this case in order that DAPA may be implemented before President Obama leaves office. However, if the Supreme Court grants cert, I hope that they will follow the sound reasoning of the Fifth Circuit and ultimately find that the federal government has overstepped its statutory authority.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

1. United States v Texas (Docket 15-674)
2. The government argued that none of the states suing along with Texas have standing either. I will use “Texas” in this article, however, because both the District Court and the Fifth Circuit only found that Texas has standing, and did not reach the question for the other 25 other states in the suit.
3. Citing Arizona Christian Sch. Tuition Org. v. Winn, 131 S.Ct. 1436, 1442 (2011)
4. Citing 5 U.S.C. § 701(a)(2)
5. Citing 8 U.S.C. § 1252(g)
6. Citing 8 U.S.C. 1103(a)

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

USCIS Releases Updating Processing Time Statistics for EB5 forms

On November 17, 2015, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) released updated processing times for three forms associated with the EB5 Immigrant Investor Program.[1] The chart shows the average processing times for the Form I-526, Form I-829, and Form I-924 as of September 30, 2015. While the chart provides the average processing time for each form, some cases may take longer for USCIS to process. I have included the chart below for your convenience.

AVERAGE PROCESSING TIMES FOR IMMIGRANT INVESTOR PROGRAM OFFICE AS OF: SEPTEMBER 30, 2015

Form	Title	Classification or Basis for Filing:	Processing Timeframe:
I-526	Immigrant Petition By Alien Entrepreneur	For use by an entrepreneur who wishes to immigrate to the United States	14.4 Month(s)
I-829	Petition by Entrepreneur to Remove Conditions	Removal of lawful permanent resident conditions (immigrant investors)	15.4 Month(s)
I-924	Application For Regional Center Under the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program	I924 — Application For Regional Center Under the Immigrant Investor Pilot Program	11.6 Month(s)

1. USCIS, “USCIS Processing Time Information for the Immigrant Investor Program Office,” (November 17, 2015), AILA InfoNet Doc. 15111811 (Posted 11/18/15).

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Fam Update: Length of Stay Increased for Certain B1 Personal/Domestic Employees

The Department of State (DOS) has updated the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) to increase the length of stay for B1 personal/domestic employees accompanying U.S. citizen employers on temporary assignment to the United States.[1] The new provision, found in 9 FAM 41.31 N9.3-2(b), increases the maximum length of stay for a personal/domestic employee on a B1 visa in this case from 4 years to 6 years. The new provision does not alter any of the other underlying requirements found in 9 FAM 41.31 N9.3-1 and N9.3-2.

This new guidance only applies to B1 personal/domestic employees of U.S. citizens on temporary assignment. It does not have an effect on B1 personal/domestic employees of nonimmigrant visa holders in the United States. B1 visas are unavailable for personal/domestic employees of lawful permanent residents.[2]

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

____________________

1. Unclassified 15 State 127766
2. 9 FAM 41.31 N9.3-4

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Vermont Service Center Stops Processing Form I-918s Due to U Visa Cap

The Vermont Service Center (VSC) VAWA/U/T Unit, which processes U visa petitions, notified AILA on November 13, 2015, that it will stop processing Form I-918s (the petition for a U visa) because it is currently focused on updating U visa cap numbers. This is a routine process that will not ultimately change whether pending U visa petitions are ultimately approved. I will update my blog when the VSC provides notification that it has resumed processing Form I-918s.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

E2 Treaty Investor

Introduction

The E-2 (E2) Treaty Investors visa is a nonimmigrant visa for certain nationals of countries with which the United States maintains a treaty of commerce and navigation.  The E2 visa is available for investors and for employees of E2 treaty investors or companies that, by virtue of their ownership and operations in the United States, can qualify as E2 petitioners.  This article will provide a brief overview of the E2 visa category.

Eligibility for an E2 Visa

 

The eligibility requirements for an E2 visa as a treaty investor and an E2 visa as an employee of an E2 treaty investor are slightly different.  However, in both cases, the alien applicant must be the national of an E2 treaty country (follow this link for a chart of qualifying countries).  To learn about interesting rules regarding dual nationals seeking change to E2 status, please follow this link.

Eligibility Requirements for Investors

 

Department of State (DOS) regulations[1] require that an applicant for an E2 visa as an investor must meet the following requirements:

• (i) Has invested or is actively in the process of investing a substantial amount of capital in a bona fide enterprise in the United States, as distinct from a relatively small amount of capital in a marginal enterprise solely for the purpose of earning a living; and
• (ii) Is seeking entry into the United States solely to develop and direct the enterprise; and
• (iii) Intends to depart from the United States upon the termination of E2 status.

In order for an investment to qualify, the applicant must place his or her capital “at risk in the commercial sense with the objective of generating a profit.”[2] This regulation precludes non-profit organizations from qualifying.[3] The investment must be “substantial” relative to the size of the commercial enterprise and to demonstrate the investor’s commitment to the enterprise.[4] The enterprise must be a “bona fide enterprise” that is a real and active commercial or entrepreneurial undertaking that is producing a service or commodity for profit.[5]

The “develop and direct requirement” is usually satisfied by the investor showing that he or she controls at least 50% of the enterprise.[6]  It is possible to satisfy the requirement with less than 50% ownership, but this requires substantial evidence demonstrating that despite not having a controlling ownership state, the investor will have the capacity to develop and direct the enterprise.[7]

The E2 visa category permits dual intent.  In general, an applicant’s unequivocal intention to depart upon the termination of E2 visa status will satisfy Consular officials.  An applicant may obtain or renew an E2 visa even if he or she is the beneficiary of an approved labor certification application.[8]

Eligibility Requirements for Employees of Treaty Investors

 

First, the alien must be the employee of a treaty investor and be of the same nationality as the treaty investor. In accordance with DOS regulations,[9] the following may qualify as employers of an E2 employee:

• (i) A person having the nationality of a treaty country, who is maintaining the status of treaty investor if in the United States, or, if not in the United States, who would be classifiable as a treaty investor; or
• (ii) An organization at least 50% owned by persons having the nationality of the treaty country who are maintaining nonimmigrant treaty investor status if residing in the United States or, if not residing in the United States, who would be classifiable as treaty investors.

If the employer is in the United States, he or she must be in E2 status as a treaty investor.  If the employer is outside of the United States, he or she must be otherwise classifiable as an E2 treaty investor.  The ownership stake of a lawful permanent resident (LPR) or U.S. citizen may not be counted, even if the LPR or U.S. citizen is the national of a treaty country.[10]

If the E2 enterprise is owned 50/50 by nationals of two treaty countries, the E2 employee may be a national of either one of the treaty countries.[11]

Provided the alien is the national of the same country as a qualifying E2 employer, he or she must be seeking to enter the United States to work for the treaty enterprise in a:

• Executive and Supervisory Character;
• Special Qualification/Essential Employee Capacity.

Please refer to the section-header link to learn more about the specific evidentiary requirements for working in an executive and supervisory character and working in a special qualification/essential employee capacity.

“Job shop” employment, where the treaty enterprise would pay the E2 employee to work at another U.S. company, is strictly prohibited under E2 status.[12]

Just as is the case with persons applying for E2 visas as treaty investors, the “intent to depart” may be established even if the employee is the beneficiary of an immigrant visa petition.[13]

Application Process

 

A person applying for change to E status must file a Form I-129 along with an E Supplement.  A person filing for an E visa from a Consular post abroad must file a DS-160 visa application along with a DS-156E supplemental form.  The validity period of an E visa will depend on the specific treaty country, but will be, in most cases, 5 years.

Admission on E Status

 

A person may be admitted for an initial period of up to 2 years on E status.[14] Prior to the expiration of 2 years, an E2 treaty investor or employee may file a Form I-129 with E Supplement to apply for an extension of stay, which if granted, may be granted for a maximum of 2 years.[15] Provided that the E2 visa holder continues to meet all of the E2 eligibility requirements, there is no limit to the number of extensions of E status.

E2 visa holders may only engage in employment that is consistent with what the E2 visa was approved for.[16]  E2 employees may perform work for a parent or subsidiary of his or her E2 employer provided that the qualifying relationship existed at the last approval of the E2 visa, the work requires an executive, supervisor, or essential skill position, and the work is consistent with the work that the E2 employee obtained an E2 visa to perform.[17] Caution should be exercised however, and in the case of a substantial change in employment, an emended Form I-129 with new E Supplement is required to maintain E status.[18]

If there is ever uncertainty for an E2 treaty investor or an E2 employee about whether an amended petition is needed, a Form I-129 with fee along with a complete description of the change may be filed in order to request advice from United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) about whether an amended petition is needed.[19]

Derivative E2 Family Members

 

Spouses and children of E2 visa holders who are otherwise admissible are eligible for derivative E2 visas.[20] A derivative E2 may be admitted for the same duration as the principal (so long as the qualifying relationship continues to exist).  Although derivative E2 visas do not authorize employment incidentally to status, an E2 spouse may apply for employment authorization.[21] E2 derivative children may not obtain employment authorization, but may attend school while on E2 status.[22]

Conclusion

 

The E2 visa is a strong option for those who are eligible in part because there are no limitations on the number of extensions of stay that an E2 visa holder may obtain.

However, the E2 visa is not the best option for everyone.  Those who are seeking to invest in a U.S. enterprise should discuss all of his or her options with an experienced immigration attorney in investment immigration matters in order to determine whether the E2 visa is the best option for meeting his or her investment goals.  The investment immigration section of our website discusses E2 visas and many other investment immigration options.

Persons seeking to employ a person should consult with an experienced immigration attorney to consider all of the available options.  In some cases, a different nonimmigrant work visa, or even an immigrant employment visa, may be more appropriate.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Please read our comprehensive articles to learn more:

For Investors:

http://myattorneyusa.com/immigration-law-and-practice/immigration-to-the-usa/investment-immigration/e2-treaty-investors-visa 

For Employees:

http://myattorneyusa.com/immigration-law-and-practice/immigration-to-the-usa/investment-immigration/e2-employees-of-treaty-investors 

Interesting Issues to Consider for Adjustment of Status from E2 to an Employment-Based Preference Category:

http://myattorneyusa.com/immigration-law-and-practice/immigration-to-the-usa/perm/the-effect-of-modular-container-systems-on-labor-certification

1.   22 C.F.R. § 41.51(b)(1)(i)-(iii)
2.   22 C.F.R. § 41.51(b)(7); 
3.   9 FAM 41.51 N8.1-2
4.   9 FAM 41.51 N10.2
5.   22 C.F.R. § 41.51(b)(8)
6.   22 C.F.R. § 41.51 (b)(11)
7.   9 FAM 41.51 N12
8.   9 FAM 41.51 N15
9.   22 C.F.R. § 41.51(b)(2)
10.   9 FAM 41.51 N14.1
11.   9 FAM 41.51 N3.3
12.   9 FAM 41.51 N13.1; Letter, Lorr, Acting Chief, Benefits Division, INS, HQ 70/6.2.5-6 (Aug 28, 1996), reprinted in 73 No. 37 Interpreter Releases, 1290, 1311-14 (Sept 30, 1996)
13.   9 FAM 41.51 N15
14.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(19)(i)
15.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(20)
16.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(8)(i); Matter of Laigo, 15 I&N Dec. 65 (BIA 1974)
17.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(8)(vii)
18.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(8)(iii)
19.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(8)(v)
20.   8 C.F.R. § 214.2(e)(4); 22 C.F.R 41.51(b)(3)
21.   INA § 214(e)(6); Cable, DOS, 02-State-17328 (Jan. 29, 2002), published on AILA InfoNet at Doc. No 02013032
22.   IFM §§ 15.4(e), 15.5(d)

Resources and Materials:

Chang, Henry J.. “E-2 Visas for Investors in Smaller Businesses.” Immigration Options for Investors and Entrepreneurs. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: AILA, 2010. 13-31. Print. AILA's Occupational Guidebooks.

Kurzban, Ira J. Kurzban's Immigration Law Sourcebook: A Comprehensive Outline and Reference Tool. 14th ed. Washington D.C.: ALIA Publications, 2014. 1012-1017, Print. Treatises & Primers.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com