On December 8th, in the wake of the attacks in Paris, the House overwhelmingly voted to pass the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) reform bill to enhance and bolster the national security. This reform bill that was initially introduced by Rep. Candice Miller introduces many promising and effective security enhancements such as the use of a multi-layered and comprehensive system of security screening and enhanced sharing of intelligence between the VWP countries and the US. As president Obama has openly endorsed the increase of security measures to prevent terrorist activities and has signed the omnibus bill into law that includes this VWP reform bill, there is no doubt that this reform law will remarkably increase national security.

USCIS is proposing regulatory amendments to better enable U.S. employers to hire and retain certain foreign workers who are beneficiaries of approved employment-based immigrant visa petitions and are waiting to become lawful permanent residents (LPRs).

Read the notice of proposed rulemaking published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2015: Retention of EB-1, EB-2 and EB-3 Immigrant Workers and Program Improvements Affecting High-Skilled Nonimmigrant Workers. The public has until February 29, 2016 to comment. To submit comments, follow the instructions in the notice.

Among other things, DHS is proposing to amend its regulations in order to:

• Clarify and improve longstanding agency policies and procedures implementing sections of the American Competitiveness in the Twenty-First Century Act (AC21) and the American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act (ACWIA) related to certain foreign workers, which will enhance USCIS’ consistency in adjudication.
• Better enable U.S. employers to employ and retain certain foreign workers who are beneficiaries of approved employment based immigrant visa petitions (I-140 petitions) while also providing stability and job flexibility to these workers. The proposed rule will increase the ability of such workers to further their careers by accepting promotions, making position changes with current employers, changing employers, and pursuing other employment opportunities.
• Improve job portability for certain beneficiaries of approved I-140 petitions by limiting the grounds for automatic revocation of petition approval.
• Clarify when individuals may keep their priority date to use when applying for adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence, including when USCIS has revoked the approval of their approved I 140 petitions because the employer withdrew the petition or because the employer’s business shut down.
• Allow certain high-skilled individuals in the United States in E-3, H-1B, H-1B1, L-1, or O-1 nonimmigrant status to apply for one year of unrestricted employment authorization if they:

1. Are the beneficiaries of an approved I-140 petition,
2. Remain unable to adjust status due to visa unavailability, and
3. Can demonstrate that compelling circumstances exist which justify issuing an employment authorization document.

Such employment authorization may only be renewed in limited circumstances.

• Clarify various policies and procedures related to the adjudication of H-1B petitions, including, among other things, extensions of status, determining cap exemptions and counting workers under the H-1B visa cap, H-1B portability, licensure requirements, and protections for whistleblowers.
• Establish a one-time grace period during an authorized validity period of up to 60 days for certain high-skilled nonimmigrant workers whenever their employment ends so that they may more readily pursue new employment and an extension of their nonimmigrant status.

These proposed changes do not take effect with the publication of the notice of proposed rulemaking. Instead, they would take effect on the date indicated in the final rule when the final rule is published in the Federal Register.

Where an immigration officer determines that an individual is an applicant for admission under the VWP and is inadmissible, the applicant will be refused admission into the United States and removed, without referral to an Immigration Judge for a determination of deportability, except that an Immigration Judge has jurisdiction over any application for asylum, withholding of removal, or protection under the Convention Against Torture filed by the alien. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.2(c)(1)(iii), (3)(i), 217.4(a), 1208.2(c)(1)(iii), (3)(i) (2015); see also Matter of Kanagasundram, 22 I&N Dec. 963 (BIA 1999).

Similarly, an individual who already has been admitted to the United States under the VWP and is determined by an immigration officer to be deportable from the United States will be removed to his or her country of nationality or last residence unless the applicant requests an opportunity to have a claim for asylum and related relief heard by an Immigration Judge. See 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.2(c)(1)(iv), (3)(i), 217.4(b), 1208.2(c)(1)(iv), (3)(i).

The regulations expressly provide that in such referred asylum-only proceedings, the “scope of review . . . shall be limited to a determination of whether the alien is eligible for asylum or withholding or deferral of removal, and whether asylum shall be granted in the exercise of discretion,” and “all parties are prohibited from raising or considering any other issues, including but not limited to issues of admissibility, deportability, eligibility for waivers, and eligibility for any other form of relief.” 8 C.F.R. §§ 208.2(c)(3)(i), 1208.2(c)(3)(i); see also Matter of A-W-, 25 I&N Dec. 45, 46 n.1, 47?48 (BIA 2009); cf. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.19(h)(2)(ii) (2015) (stating explicitly that nothing in the regulation should “be Cite as 26 I&N Dec. 644 (BIA 2015) construed as prohibiting an alien from seeking a determination by an immigration judge that the alien is not properly included” within the category of aliens subject to mandatory detention).

Under the governing regulations, applicants for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture are required to submit to identity, law enforcement, or security investigations or examinations, which include the submission of biometrics and other biographical information. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.47(b)(1), (7), (d) (2015). According to the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 1003.47(d),

At any hearing at which [an applicant] expresses an intention to file or files  an application for relief for which identity, law enforcement, or security  investigations or examinations are required . . . , unless [the] DHS advises  the immigration judge that such information is unnecessary in the  particular case, [the] DHS shall notify the [applicant] of the need to  provide biometrics and other biographical information and shall provide a  biometrics notice and instructions to the [applicant] for such procedures.  The immigration judge shall specify for the record when the [applicant]  receives the biometrics notice and instructions, and the consequences for  failing to comply with [these] requirements . . . .

Failure to comply with the biometrics requirement “within the time allowed” constitutes abandonment of the application, and the Immigration Judge may then dismiss the application, unless the applicant demonstrates that such failure was the result of good cause. 8 C.F.R. § 1003.47(c), (d).

Comments (0)

On September 10, 2015, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (‘CBP’) launched a redesigned website for VISA WAIVER PROGRAM (VWP) visitors to apply for Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) prior to traveling to the United States.

Opinion: Yes, It’s America and I Speak Spanish Because I Can

Whenever I’m in a situation where I pick up that someone has a Spanish accent, I’ll switch to speaking Spanish. I also make the effort with French or Italian, though I’m not nearly as fluent. Speaking to somebody in their first language forges an instant connection that’s usually lovely and can make buying a cup of coffee a great story.

But I’ve noticed that the only time I’m ever questioned about my habit is when I speak Spanish. Apparently every other language – especially French – makes me look sophisticated as I’m asking for a coffee refill or ordering my croque monsieur. Speaking French gets you smiles; c’est magnifique! But if I switch to Spanish I will invariably get a side eye, like I’ve opened the door and let the savages in. A video that went viral a couple of weeks reminded me of this.

RELATED: Latina Mom Berated Publicly For Speaking Spanish in a Restaurant

The clip shows a Southern California woman berating Norma Vasquez and her son Carlos for speaking Spanish amongst themselves at an IHOP. One—it was a private conversation between mother and son. Two—the name of the establishment is International House of Pancakes. And three—it’s in Koreatown. You’d think the diversity of the situation alone would make the rageful woman think twice before going off like a roman candle. But the irony of it was lost on her. She chose to tell this Salvadorean family to go back to Spain. Because you know, that’s the only place in the world Spanish should be spoken.

It would be easy enough to blame her outburst on the divisive seeds being planted by GOP presidency hopefuls, struggling to “out-patriot” others in the political race to the bottom. But The Donald didn’t start this ugly, he just gave people a target and a licence to attack it.

Can you imagine Ms. Southern California doing this to a French family or a German one? Nien! But she had no qualms about doing this to a Latino family because every xenophobe has put our community in ‘Amerikuhs’ crosshairs.

This lady decided to go historical, so I will too. Let’s look at why English is spoken in America. Let’s look at the pilgrims.

Pilgrims were thrown out of England. A fact that bears repeating—they were thrown out of England. The English don’t throw anything away—they tried to take half the world through colonization and settled for their art and artifacts when they failed. But with the Puritans they said, ‘Yeah, no…leave!’ They wanted their belief systems and influences an ocean away.

In the Americas, these little guys took root and their intolerance and confidence bloomed so much so, that not only did the disregard entire populations already living for centuries on this land, they decided to demonize every new wave of immigrant that landed on these shores. Their attitude was enslave, trick or ignore them (think Native Americans) and ONWARD!’

The lie that America is ‘white’ and should only speak English in order to be ‘great’ has been perpetuated ever since. It’s so ingrained in our national development that we’ve all accepted it as a default even though it’s a fabrication. Don’t believe me? Let’s go back to our history lessons and what countries settled what lands in the U.S. Whose family was here first—Meryl Streep’s or Eva Longoria’s? Families like the Longorias (Spanish-Americans) had the Streeps beat by 245 years, but who do we consider the ‘American’ actress while Longoria gets the subcatgorization of Latina Diva?

If you think it may be a select few that are so willfully ignorant, look at Trump’s poll numbers. The guy has a vocabulary of five words (total, loser, very, I’m, huge), and has yet to present a viable policy point. Yet all he’s had to do to jump miles ahead in the primary race was to declare that Mexicans are rapists and criminals.

• Facebook
• Twitter
• Google Plus
• Embed

Trump Boots Reporter from News Conference 0:49

Last week, when two men from Boston beat a Mexican homeless man to a pulp, he shrugged it off as people being ‘passionate about America being great again’. On Tuesday, El Donald had Univision anchor Jorge Ramos temporarily kicked out of a press conference, telling him to ‘go back to Univision’. Is ‘the Donald’ too busy rating women’s appearances and figuring out how to build fences to have read that Univision is America’s highest-rated network for three years in a row? Big mistake, ‘huge’.

While Trump may seem like an outlier, consider how the other GOP candidates are scrambling to own the term ‘anchor baby’ instead of showing up Trumps’ monstrous campaign. Jindal, Rubio and Cruz are all first generation immigrants and they won’t even stand up for themselves.

Instead of embracing what makes this country unique, they’re doubling down an absurd belief system that will cut them off at the knees. You can’t get the keys to the White House without the Latino vote. As Mr. Ramos pointed out yesterday when he was let back in to the room, it simply does not happen.

Speaking of Ramos, more than a few in the media are commenting that he acted inappropriately by blurting out a question without being called on. That’s like complaining that an ump is calling a strike enthusiastically at a baseball game. It’s a press conference, that’s what happens at these highly charged events. Why are the talking heads clutching their pearls over his style when they should be jumping on the fact that Trump tried to humiliate a veteran reporter instead of dealing with the substance of his question?

Now back to Ms. Southern California…I don’t know what this woman’s story is, but I do know the Vasquez family. Without having met them, I know they’re humble, hardworking and sincere. Even as she was being attacked, Norma tried to justify her imperfect English with her effort to speak it. Her son Carlos tried to engage with the non-sensical trembling woman, calmly pointing out the hypocrisy of her ways, displaying a patience and a composure that most are incapable of. This family should give us all hope because they stood up to the lie and exposed it for what it is, fear.

I don’t know why some parts of ‘English America’ are so intimidated by Latinos. But we’re dyed in the wool of this country. We always have been and we always will be. Many of us refuse to abandon our heritage and our language because we don’t believe in limiting our abilities. That doesn’t make us less American, it makes this a greater America.

Whether we’re cleaning toilets or running corporations, we’re keeping the American Dream alive because we’re not afraid of hard work. We know how to confront our deepest fears, it’s what got our families here in the first place. It’s in our DNA. The question now is, will English-only America be able to confront theirs? Time will tell and a country full of possibility waits for the answer.

Author: Carmen Perez. Posted on Aug. 28, 2015 at https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/opinion-yes-its-america-i-speak-spanish-because-i-can-n416576?hootPostID=14dc3610d94fdc5eec76429364b24229.

Brazilian Congress recently approved a legislation-for the first time- authorizing  the use of binding arbitration clause to resolve individual labor disputes.

Until recently, the Brazilian legislators were silent on the use of arbitration clause in cases involving individual disputes, while the Brazilian courts did allow arbitration clause in disputes involving labor unions against companies, but it prohibited the arbitration clause in disputes involving individuals.

The new legislation limits the use of employer/employee arbitration to cases involving company managers and executives.

Now managers and executives can include in their employment contracts clauses specifying that any labor dispute be dealt with through arbitration.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Colombia significantly curtailed immigration benefits for foreign students in the United States on F-1 visas. In her opinion in the case Washington Alliance of Technology Workers vs. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. District Judge Ellen Segal Hovelled invalidated USCIS’s 2008 17-month Optional Practical Training (OPT) extension rule. DHS argued that it had good cause to publish the regulation in 2008 as an emergency rule because thousands of highly skilled individuals educated at U.S. colleges and universities would otherwise have been forced to leave the U.S.  Judge Hovelled held that DHS failed to show it faced an emergency situation in 2008 that exempted it from carrying out the notice and comment requirement, thus making DHS’ rule invalid.

Judge Hovelled stayed her decision until February 12, 2016 because the “immediate vacatur of the 2008 Rule would be seriously disruptive” and “would force ‘thousands of foreign students with work authorizations . . . to scramble to depart the United States.’”

Unless DHS passes a new rule this decision will adversely affect three key areas of business immigration:

1. F-1 STEM work authorizations will stop being valid on February 12, 2016. This will affect both F-1 students who currently hold STEM OPT as well as individuals who would be eligible for STEM OPT as of February 12, 2016.
2. H-1B/F-1 cap gap will no longer be automatic.  DHS will have to formally announce that the H-1B cap is met and then publish a notice in the federal register. This will result in uncertainty for both employers and F-1 students, as “cap Gap” protections will no longer be automatic but will instead depend on affirmative action by DHS.
3. F-1 students will only be permitted to apply for work authorization while still in school; post- graduation applications will be no longer available.

On July 14, 2015, the Secretary signed the following proposed rule, the Department of Homeland Security sent it to the Federal Register for publication. See the proposal below. 

“The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposes to expand eligibility for provisional waivers of certain grounds of inadmissibility based on the accrual of unlawful presence to all aliens who are statutorily eligible for a waiver of such grounds, are seeking such a waiver in connection with an immigrant visa application, and meet other conditions. The provisional waiver process currently allows certain aliens who are present in the United States to request from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) a provisional waiver of certain unlawful presence grounds of inadmissibility prior to departing from the United States for consular processing of their immigrant visas—rather than applying for a waiver abroad after the immigrant visa interview using the Form I-601, Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (hereinafter “Form I-601 waiver process”). DHS proposes to expand its current provisional waiver process in two principal ways. First, DHS would eliminate current limitations on the provisional waiver process that restrict eligibility to certain immediate relatives of U.S. citizens. Under this proposed rule, the provisional waiver process would be made available to all aliens who are statutorily eligible for waivers of inadmissibility based on unlawful presence and meet certain other conditions. Second, in relation to the statutory requirement that the waiver applicant  demonstrate that denial of the waiver would result in “extreme hardship” to certain family members, DHS proposes to expand the provisional waiver process by eliminating the current restriction that limits extreme hardship determinations only to aliens who can establish extreme hardship to U.S. citizen spouses or parents. Under this proposed rule, an applicant for a provisional waiver would be permitted to establish the eligibility requirement of showing extreme hardship to any qualifying relative (namely, U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident spouses or parents).

DHS is proposing to expand the provisional waiver process in the interests of encouraging eligible aliens to complete the visa process abroad, promoting family unity, and improving administrative efficiency.”

Special Immigrant Juvenile Status is for foster youth; it allows undocumented youth immigrant to stay in the country, work, and eventually get a green card.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) invites you to participate in a stakeholder teleconference on Thursday, July 2, from 1 to 2 p.m. (Eastern) to discuss the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designations and registration extension for Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has extended the deadline for initial registration from May 20, 2015, to Aug. 18, 2015, for eligible nationals of Liberia, Guinea, and Sierra Leone (and people without nationality who last habitually resided in one of those three countries).