It never fails. Whenever a new immigration provision is presented to Congress for consideration, or is proposed by the President or some other official in the Executive Branch, the media takes the ball and runs with it. It’s either presented as something it is not, or simply misunderstood to be something it’s not. Either way, the US audience, ranging from the general American John Q. Public demographic to the vulnerable 12 million undocumented demographic, gets excited, in different ways, and for different reasons. Notably, this provision will impact only limited number of prospective applicants, applicants who are ineligible to “adjust” status/ undergo all permanent residence processing in the U.S. and who are willing to visit a U.S. consular post in their home country for their “green card” interview.

The latest news has to do with an Obama administration initiative for processing “waivers of inadmissibility” and it proposes to streamline processing of certain applicants for permanent residence who under current law, must leave the US for an extended period for their final green card/ interview, and appear before a US consular officer in their home country. Instead of facing a 3 months or so wait to receive a decision on their waiver application while outside the US, the new proposal will allow for a wait as little as a few days outside the US, since the 3 months of processing is now being proposed to take place before the applicant’s departure.

And what is being decided in this period is an “I-601 waiver” application to excuse, or “waive”, the individual’s previous period of unlawful presence in the U.S. and consequent 3 or 10 year bars to reentry, where cases are approved only if the applicant can demonstrate that his denied reentry will pose extreme hardship for his U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse or parent. Of course, there’s no guarantee all applicants for a waiver will be approved under this proposed program, but this new procedure will no doubt be of great comfort to families by letting them know ahead of time if the main obstacle (3 year bar) to their loved one’s reentry has been removed – and repeat, before the applicant leaves the US for their interview in their home country. Thus, if the applicant’s waiver application is denied, that decision will be known before any trip outside the US takes place. The applicant will then know there is no reason for the applicant to appear for their interview before a US consular officer in their home country, since he will know he will indeed be subject to a bar to reentry that has NOT been waived.

Again, this new provision is only at the proposal stage, and a final, working rule has yet to be implemented. In the meantime, no waiver filings will be decided in the US as proposed above. If implemented though, the rule will not impact applicants currently outside the U.S., who will continue to be subject to ordinary processing procedures now in place. Further, since this processing change is being presented as an act of Executive/Administrative “rulemaking” and not legislation, there is no need for congressional approval. All developments regarding implementation of this provision will continue to be reported on here.

PUBLISHED January 12, 2012 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2012, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

This column is as much a warning to prospective victims as it is a source of basic immigration law information – especially for the 12- 15 million individuals living in the U.S. without immigration status.  Why a warning?  Because no matter the intelligence level of the prospective victim, the combination of his vulnerable state and the scammer’s profit motive, leads to the formation of the perfect storm in which the undocumented individual gets swindled.  The swindlers are neighborhood “notaries” or consultants, as well as even a few established attorneys.  Compared to the honest attorney who will conduct a consultation and advise the undocumented individual that no options to legalize his status exist at this time (and without a change in the law), the swindler will invent fictitious avenues toward legal status.

And the fictitious avenues sometimes will present as genuine, since after the swindled client plops down his $5,000 or $10,000 retainer, some type of approval notice may get issued by either the U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Services or the U.S. Department of Labor.  As the con progresses, and the swindled client further convinces himself that a bona fide service is being provided, he avoids asking and/or getting real answers to questions like:  A) “ok, yes, we have an approval on this stage of the case, but what is my end game?” or B) “when will I be issued my employment authorization, or green card?”   In the context of the scamming lawyer/consultant – client relationship, the answers to those questions – which should have been asked from the start of the relationship – are:  A) none and B) never.

An important step an undocumented, or any type of immigration law client can take to avoid getting scammed is by requesting that the attorney or service provider put in writing exactly which services are being provided and which goals are sought to be achieved.  Although a lawyer can never ethically guarantee a result in any given case, he/she certainly can confirm in writing what the client qualifies to be considered for under present law, and that such goals are viable or achievable under present law.   As to the fictitious avenues referenced above, the only way the swindled client will eventually achieve an end game, such as obtain employment authorization or green card is IF the law changes.

My guess is very few, if any, of the clients presented with fictitious avenues, would be otherwise willing to fork over tens of thousands of dollars to initiate a process if they knew the process they were initiating will only yield a result if the law changes.  It’s the “if the law changes” part that I have seen the swindling attorney purposely forget to include in his discussion with potential victims who are all too ready and willing to put money in the swindler’s pocket.

For most of the undocumented population, it’s a waiting game – a wait for some type of change in the law to allow a genuine avenue to legalize their status.  In the meantime, below is a summary of options at legalization or adjusting status for the undocumented or visa overstay under present law:

1. )  Visa Overstays May Be Able to Adjust Status if: they are the spouse of a U.S. Citizen, a parent of an adult (over 21) U.S. citizen, or child (under 21) of a U.S. Citizen.  This class of immigrant may have the option to adjust status in the U.S. without having to return to their home country for any step in the process, notwithstanding unauthorized employment or overstaying their authorized period of stay in the U.S. (does not include those entering as “crewman”, or K-1 fiancés who did not marry their petitioner).  Spouses of U.S. citizens, parents of adult U.S. citizens, and under 21 children of U.S. citizens are known as “Immediate Relatives” in immigration law talk and do not require additional legal qualification for eligibility to adjust status in the U.S. such as coverage under INA Section 245(i) – see below – to adjust status in the U.S.

Other types of non-“Immediate Relative” family based immigration applicants or employment based applicants who are visa overstays may be able to adjust their status in the U.S. but only if they were included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to April 30, 2001, or January 14, 1998 - pursuant to Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act –see below.

2)  Entered Without Inspection (EWI): If you are the spouse of a U.S. Citizen, a parent of an adult (over 21) U.S. citizen, or child (under 21) of a U.S. Citizen who entered without being inspected by an immigration official (e.g. no visa), the option to adjust status in the U.S. only exists if you were previously included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted pursuant to Section 245(i) – see below.

Other types of non-“Immediate Relative” family-based or employment-based applicants who entered without visas (EWI) may be able to adjust their status in the U.S. but only if they were included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to April 30, 2001, or January 14, 1998 – pursuant to Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

3) EWI’s or Visa Overstays with an employer willing to facilitate a green card process, and they are a professional and/or have some special skills that may be scarce in the U.S. labor market, an employment based immigration filing may be an option if they are grandfathered under Section 245(i). Word of warning though: most candidates for this option may very well be waiting 5 years – give or take – before any type of immigration benefit, such as an employment authorization is in sight.

4) EWI’s or Visa Overstays who are Battered Spouses or Children of U.S. citizens or residents:   whether you entered with or without a visa, or overstayed your visa, individuals who were the targets of their U.S. citizen or resident spouse’s or parent’s physical abuse or extreme mental abuse are eligible to be considered for US residence, and without having to depart the US for processing in their home country.  No 245(i) grandfathering is required for this type of immigration benefit.

5)  EWI’s or Visa Overstays who are the victims of certain types of crimes:   whether you entered with or without a visa, or overstayed your visa,  victims of certain types of crimes may be eligible for temporary status (U visa), including employment authorization, and eventually U.S. resident status.  Victims of the following types of crime will be eligible for consideration for U visa status, and eventually U.S. residence:  abduction, blackmail, domestic violence, extortion, false imprisonment, felonious assault, incest, involuntary servitude, kidnapping, manslaughter, murder, obstruction of justice, perjury, prostitution, rape, sexual assault, torture, trafficking, unlawful criminal restraint and, witness tampering – among others.  No 245(i) grandfathering is required for this type of immigration benefit.

What is Section 245(i) of the Immigration Nationality Act? Section 245(i) allows for certain otherwise ineligible visa overstay/undocumented immigrants to undergo all steps in the U.S. immigration process in the U.S. and without having to return to a U.S. consular post in their home country (aka “245(i)grandfathering”). To be “grandfathered” under Section 245(i), the applicant must have been:

a.  included in some sort of family or employmentbased immigration filing submitted prior to April 30, 2001, and they were physically present in the U.S. on December 21, 2000 OR

b.  included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to January 14, 1998 (with no physical presence requirement)

Relief in Removal Proceedings: If the visa overstay or undocumented immigrant gets arrested by immigration authorities and placed in removal proceedings, options to remain in the U.S. and even be awarded permanent residence by the Immigration Court indeed are available.  Most notably, relief known as “Cancellation of Removal” allows those without status to be considered for a green card by the Immigration Court if: 1) they have been present in the U.S. for more than 10 years or more prior to being placed in removal proceedings. 2) they are of good moral character and 3) their U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, parent or child will suffer “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” if they were forced to return to their home country.

For those who fear return to their home country due to persecution they might face on account of their race religion, political belief or “social group”, asylum-related relief (and eventually green card issuance) may be available from the Immigration Court.

Getting back to the discussion regarding the immigration law consultation: Sometimes the most valuable piece of information the client will pay for in the course of an immigration law consultation is that no option to legalize his status truly exists under the present law, and that for the time being, he should put his wallet away.

PUBLISHED November 9, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

Before intending family-based immigrants are issued their visa, or approved for adjustment of status, the petitioning U.S. family member or their joint co-sponsor will have to submit an I-864 Affidavit of Support (or acceptable I-864 variation) and most of the time, satisfy certain income requirements.  The most common exception is the option for a petitioner to prove their financial health by way of ownership of sizable liquid assets as evidenced by bank/brokerage account statements or real property appraisals.

The income requirement applicable to most petitioners is 125% of the poverty level as determined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.   For sponsors residing in the lower 48 contiguous states in the U.S., applicable guidelines are set forth below:

2011 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia – as of March 1, 2011

Size of family unit       Poverty guideline       125%

2                                      $14,710                    $18,213

3                                      $18,530                    $23,162

4                                      $22,350                    $27,937

5                                      $26,170                    $37,712

6                                      $29,990                    $37,487

7                                      $33,810                    $42,262

8                                      $37,630                    $47,037

For family units with more than 8 members, add $4,775.00 for each additional member to meet the required 125%.Poverty Guideline level.

PUBLISHED August 12, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

The Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) was enacted some 9 years ago with the primary aim of protecting eligibility for child beneficiaries of immigration filings who are nearing the age of 21. Prior to the CSPA, 21 was the age of visa doom, with children turning into pumpkins and becoming disqualified from deriving immediate permanent residence benefits through their parents under various immigration law avenues, usually resulting in many more years of waiting for the “aged out” child. The CSPA also contains an “Opt-Out” provision – having nothing to do with children turning 21, to protect Family 2B beneficiaries (adult, unmarried children of lawful permanent residents) whose petitions automatically convert to Family First Preference (adult single child of U.S. citizen) when their petitioning parent becomes a U.S. citizen, but where the beneficiary faces a longer backlog in the Family First Preference. At this time, due to the peculiarities arising out of heavy visa demand and longer backlogs for Filipinos seeking to reside in the U.S., only beneficiaries from the Philippines are negatively impacted by automatic conversion of a visa petition to Family First Preference.

For family based immigration beneficiaries petitioned by a permanent resident parent, news of their parent’s naturalization is in almost all cases great news since the wait for visa availability in the Family First Preference (adult single child of a U.S. citizen) is significantly shorter that the Family 2B visa line. For now, for Family 2B beneficiaries from the Philippines though, this is not the case, since the demand for family based immigrant visas in the Family First Preference is even heavier, with the Family First Pref. visa line longer than the Family 2B line for Filipinos.

So what does a Filipino Family 2B preference beneficiary do when their petitioning parent becomes a U.S. citizen? Whether the beneficiary is in the U.S. or overseas awaiting visa availability, the beneficiary must write a letter to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Services office at the U.S. Embassy in Manila, and specifically request that they be Opted-Out of automatic conversion of their family petition to Family First Preference. If the Opt Out request letter meets all requirements, the DHS/CIS Officer in Charge will respond with a letter official confirming the acceptance of the Opt Out request. From there it is up to the overseas beneficiaries to present a copy of the DHS/CIS correspondence to the U.S. Department of State (usually the National Visa Center) to make sure their visa petition continues to be treated as a Family 2B petition, and not subject to the longer Family First Preference line. For beneficiaries in the U.S., the Opt Out confirmation should be presented when their application for adjustment of status is filed, upon visa availability in the Family 2B preference.

PUBLISHED January 26, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

This past week the U.S. Department of Homeland Security/Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) announced the merger of the Employment Authorization Document (EAD) and Advance Parole Travel Document (AP) for certain applicants for adjustment of status applicants. Previously, CIS issued separate documents authorizing employment and international travel for eligible applicants for adjustment of status, and their issuance and renewal required two separate applications. Now, however, a single document will be issued to eligible, pending adjustment of status applicants to prove their ability to work lawfully in the U.S. as well as facilitate a return trip back into the U.S. following international travel. The document will be issued for a period of 1 or 2 years, depending on the how long the applicant’s adjustment of status application is expected to remain pending.

As a reminder, AP’s and EAD’s are available to foreign nationals undergoing permanent residence processing in the U.S. by way of the filing of Form I-485. To be eligible to file Form I-485, an applicant must be the beneficiary of a qualifying family-based, or employment-based visa petition, and where a visa is immediately available in the applicant’s particular visa category. However, applicants who are out of status for 180 days or more, at the time of the filing of their I-485 Adjustment of Status application are strongly advised NOT to travel internationally while awaiting their permanent residence processing – and even if they are issued an advance parole. For these types of out of status applicants, a 3 or 10 year bar to readmission will kick in upon their departure, leading to the likely denial of their I-485 application and non-issuance of their green card.

Lastly, as long as they are valid, EAD’s and AP’s that are not in a single document will continue to be honored for purposes of proving employment authorization or to facilitate reentry following international travel. Further, separate EAD’s and AP’s will continue to be issued to applicants under certain circumstances.

PUBLISHED February 15, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

Adult U.S. citizens seeking to facilitate overseas immigrant visa processing for their spouse, under 21 year old children, or parents, have likely experienced delays in the processing of their I-130 visa petition filed with the California Service Center over the past few months.  That is because CIS California transferred the cases to the Texas Service Center thinking the staff power there would lead to quicker petition processing.  Well they were wrong and the cases apparently were not attended to, leading CIS officials to last week’s decision to have the vast majority of these petitions transferred back to the California facility to finally get processed.  Normal processing time for petitions for these categories of relatives is around 3 months, if not quicker. According to a recent CIS announcement, impacted parties should see progress in petition processing, if not final decisions, by month’s end.  I give CIS credit for at least trying!

PUBLISHED February 9, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

With the DREAM Act out of the picture for now, the 15 million undocumented/out of status immigrants living in the U.S. are left wondering, what options for living legally in the U.S. are left? Of course leaving the U.S. is not an option for the vast majority of these immigrants – contrary to what the anti-legalization camp see as their next logical step. These individuals have already decided that life in the U.S. in an undocumented status is better than life as a legal resident in their home country. The option most of this population will pursue is to simply wait. At some point, our nation and the U.S. Congress will come to realize that wide scale deportations are not going to happen, and that a path to legalization is the only solution. In the meantime, as stated, for most it’s a waiting game, although the following options at legalization or adjusting status for the undocumented or visa overstay continue to be viable:

1)  Visa Overstays May Be Able to Adjust Status if: they are the spouse of a U.S. Citizen, a parent of an adult (over 21) U.S. citizen, or child (under 21) of a U.S. Citizen. This class of immigrant may have the option to adjust status in the U.S. without having to return to their home country for any step in the process, notwithstanding unauthorized employment or overstaying their authorized period of stay in the U.S. (does not include those entering as “crewman”, or K-1 fiancés who did not marry their petitioner). Spouses of U.S. citizens, parents of adult U.S. citizens, and under 21 children of U.S. citizens are known as “Immediate Relatives” in immigration law talk and do not require additional legal qualification for eligibility to adjust status in the U.S. such as coverage under INA Section 245(i) – see below – to adjust status in the U.S.

Other types of non-“Immediate Relative” family based immigration applicants or employment based applicants who are visa overstays may be able to adjust their status in the U.S. but only if they were included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to April 30, 2001, or January 14, 1998 - pursuant to Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act –see below.

2)  Entered Without Inspection (EWI): If you are the spouse of a U.S. Citizen, a parent of an adult (over 21) U.S. citizen, or child (under 21) of a U.S. Citizen who entered without being inspected by an immigration official (e.g. no visa), the option to adjust status in the U.S. only exists if you were previously included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted pursuant to Section 245(i) – see below.

Other types of non-“Immediate Relative” family-based or employment-based applicants who entered without visas (EWI) may be able to adjust their status in the U.S. but only if they were included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to April 30, 2001, or January 14, 1998 – pursuant to Section 245(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.

3) EWI’s or Visa Overstays with an employer willing to facilitate a green card process, and they are a professional and/or have some special skills that may be scarce in the U.S. labor market, an employment based immigration filing may be an option if they are grandfathered under Section 245(i). Word of warning though: most candidates for this option may very well be waiting 5 years – give or take – before any type of immigration benefit, such as an employment authorization is in sight.

What is Section 245(i) of the Immigration Nationality Act? Section 245(i) allows for certain otherwise ineligible visa overstay/undocumented immigrants to undergo all steps in the U.S. immigration process in the U.S. and without having to return to a U.S. consular post in their home country (aka “245(i)grandfathering”). To be “grandfathered” under Section 245(i), the applicant must have been:

a.  included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to April 30, 2001, and they were physically present in the U.S. on December 21, 2000 OR

b.  included in some sort of family or employment based immigration filing submitted prior to January 14, 1998 (with no physical presence requirement)

Relief in Removal Proceedings: If the visa overstay or undocumented immigrant gets arrested by immigration authorities and placed in removal proceedings, options to remain in the U.S. and even be awarded permanent residence by the Immigration Court indeed are available. Most notably, relief known as “Cancellation of Removal” allows those without status to be considered for a green card by the Immigration Court if: 1) they have been present in the U.S. for more than 10 years or more prior to being placed in removal proceedings. 2) they are of good moral character and 3) their U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, parent or child will suffer “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” if they were forced to return to their home country.

For those who fear return to their home country due to persecution they might face on account of their race religion, political belief or “social group”, asylum-related relief (and eventually green card issuance) may be available from the Immigration Court.

PUBLISHED January 26, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

On October 28, 2009, President Obama signed into law important immigration provisions to address the unjust consequences of slow Citizenship and Immigration Services processing, particularly relating to widows and widowers of U.S. citizens. The law also includes ameliorative provisions relating to other types of family relationships and petitions; the death of a petitioning US family member or principal beneficiary will no longer necessarily deal a fatal blow to a pending case. With regard to this latter category of petitioners, however, significant questions have now been answered.

Widows and Widowers of U.S. Citizens Benefit from New Liberal Provisions

Consistent with recent Department of Homeland Security policy, the new legislation effectively eliminates what was known as the “Widow Penalty.” Under previous law, foreign nationals who were the widows or widowers of U.S. citizens only qualified for an initial grant of U.S. residence if they were married for at least two years prior to their spouse’s death. Now, a foreign national spouse is eligible to seek U.S. permanent residence (by completing Form I-360), no matter how long they were married at the time of the U.S. citizen’s death, and regardless of whether their spouse ever initiated the U.S. immigration process or obtained approval of an I-130 petition. The law applies retroactively as well as to surviving spouses who were overseas at the time of their U.S. citizen spouse’s death. Thus spouses of deceased U.S. citizens who were ineligible due to the short term of the marriage can now benefit from U.S. immigration benefits, including foreign spouses who have never set foot into the U.S. — no matter how long ago they were widowed. Also, upon the death of a U.S. citizen, their surviving widows/widowers who were previously the subject of an I-130 petition now have their cases automatically converted/considered as I-360 widow/widower petition – and again, regardless of how long the couple was married at time of their U.S. citizen spouse’s death.

NOTE: 2 year Deadline!!!

Foreign nationals whose U.S. citizen spouses died before the enactment of the new law must apply for U.S. immigration benefits within two years of the enactment date before October 28, 2011. Otherwise, foreign nationals whose U.S. citizen spouse dies following the enactment of this law, must file for U.S. residence within two years of their spouse’s death.

Other Family Based Petitions Where Petitioner Dies Before Petition Approval

Basic immigration law says that if a family based U.S. citizen or resident petitioner dies, so does the petition. In the past, only if the petition was approved prior to the petitioner’s death, could the foreign family member seek to have the petition reinstated by way of a humanitarian reinstatement request. Now, under the new law, if any family based preference I-130 petition on file was unprocessed by the time of the petitioner’s death, CIS now has authority to continue the processing and approve the petition, as long as such continued processing is not determined to be “against the public interest.” This new provision only applies to beneficiaries of family based petitions who resided in the U.S. at the time of their petitioning relative’s death.

Further, as to I-130 petitions that were approved prior to the petitioner’s death, but before the availability of visa numbers in any of the family based preferences, the humanitarian reinstatement process must still be initiated and the request must be approved to preserve the viability of the petition to facilitate an immigration benefit. HOWEVER, based on recently released guidance, it looks like the bar to getting a case reinstated on humanitarian grounds just got lower (again, only for beneficiaries in the U.S. at time of the petitioner’s death) –with the applicable language reading: “While there are no other rules or precedents on how to apply this discretionary authority, reinstatement may be appropriate when revocation is not consistent with the “furtherance of justice, especially in light of the goal of family unity that is underlying premise of our nation’s immigration system.”

For surviving beneficiaries residing abroad, the usual humanitarian reinstatement process and tougher adjudicative standard will be at play, where the following factors will be taken into account and assessed:

• Impact of revocation on the family unit in the U.S., especially on the U.S. citizen or LPR relatives or other relatives living in the U.S. lawfully.
• Beneficiaries advanced age or poor health,
• Beneficiary’s having resided in the U.S. lawfully for a lengthy period,
• Beneficiary’s ties to his or her home country and
• Significant delay in processing the case after approval of the petition AND after a visa number has become available.

Other foreign national family members of a deceased who reside in the U.S. who were previously ineligible for U.S. immigration benefits, but have new eligibility based on the above law include:

• Derivative (spouse and children under 21 years) family members of a Deceased Principal Beneficiary of an Employment Based Immigration Petition (I-140)
• Certain T and U visa family members
• Certain Asylees/Refugees relative petition beneficiaries.

Like the federal statute at issue, the recently released guidance is quite complicated, and likely each person’s situation will require a careful individual assessment and analysis to determine exactly what benefits are available and which processes and standards govern.

PUBLISHED January 13, 2011 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2011, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

Effective November 23, 2010, filing fees for most immigration applications and petitions are set to increase, on average, some 10-15%. On the other hand, filing fees for 6 categories of applications are actually set to be reduced, including for I-129F/Petition for Fiance, I-539/Application to Extend/Change Nonimmigrant Status, N-565 Application for Replacement Naturalization/Citizenship Document and I-131 – Application for Travel Document – but only when filed for Refugee Travel Document. Also, fee waivers based on an applicant’s economic hardship will be accepted in more types of application categories.

Approximately 90% of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services’ budget comes from the fees it collects for the various immigration related applications and petitions that get filed each year. For fiscal years 2008 and 2009, revenues collected – according to CIS – were significantly less than what was projected, thus prompting this new increase. For certain, the decrease in filings and revenues is not based on a decrease in demand for immigration benefits, such as for green cards, just that the population of eligible immigration benefit applicants is smaller and the options available for the tens of millions of interested applicants are fewer – especially for those in the U.S. without legal status.

It is important to note that the filing fee for standard N-400 Applications for Naturalization did NOT increase, although the required biometrics fee (which must accompany many types of commonly used applications) does increase from $80.00 to $85.00. Below is the new fee schedule (MAKE SURE TO ADD THE INCREASED $85.00 BIOMETRICS FEE TO APPLICATIONS SUCH AS I-485, I-90, N-400, I-751 and several others)

PUBLISHED November 17, 2010 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2010, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois

In recent years, government officials have increasingly been turning to high technology to gather information to assess marital relationships that are the basis of immigration filings, such as for green cards or expedited citizenship. From credit reports to utility bills, agents for the Department of Homeland Security, are tapping into the vast informational resources that flow freely from having an individual’s social security number in an effort to test claims that husband/wife immigration applicants are residing together and otherwise engaged in a bona fide relationship. Most recently the Department of Homeland Security, has taken the leap into social networking. A report was just released describing how DHS agents are utilizing social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and others to conduct covert surveillance of applicants for permanent residence or naturalization where eligibility depends on the applicant demonstrating a shared residence and bona fide relationship with a U.S. citizen.

To say the least, online behavior of many in the social networking context can best be described as peculiar, with networking site account holders letting complete strangers into their life without qualification and sharing all kinds of personal information, including the particulars of their social life, tastes and sexual habits. Taking advantage of this societal phenomenon, DHS agents are posing as “innocent strangers” looking to “friend” either or both the foreign national applicant and petitioning US citizen spouse. Once the friend request is accepted, the government essentially is given the open door to conduct a type of cyberspace “home visit” to assess the sincerity of the relationship at issue. Does the person list themselves as married on their site? Are they engaged in online activities that would present doubts about how genuine the relationship at issue is?

Clearly, the online, high tech world we live in is ripe for information gathering. But anyone who has ever seen their own credit report knows, big questions remain regarding the relevance of the gathered information, along with the accuracy of the government’s interpretation of the information.

PUBLISHED October 20, 2010 – “IMMIGRATION LAW FORUM”
Copyright © 2010, By Law Offices of Richard Hanus, Chicago, Illinois