AILA’s SSA Liaison Committee Clarifies Misconception on SSNs, Issues Reminders and Requests Member Feedback
AILA’s SSA liaison committee notes that contrary to popular belief, neither
immigration law nor federal tax law requires an individual to possess an SSN to
begin working. IRCA does not require an employee to present an SSN Card but,
rather, lists the Card as a possible “List C” document of work authorization.
Similarly, the Internal Revenue Code does not require an employee to possess an
SSN to begin working. It requires only that an application for an SSN be made
within seven days of commencing employment for taxable wages. 26 USC Section
6011; 26 CFR Section 31.6011(b)-2. Usually, the real obstacle to commencing
employment is the software of a third-party payroll preparer, which cannot
generate a paycheck without the number. Under these circumstances, if permitted
by its system, the preparer can use a “dummy” SSN solely to generate a paycheck,
provided the actual SSN or other required information is provided on the
information returns at the time of filing. Further instructions are on the SSA
website at www.ssa.gov/employer/.
BIA Rules on Failure of Trial Court to Advise of Immigration Consequences of Guilty Plea
BIA court rules that a conviction vacated for failure of the trial court to advise the alien defendant of the possible immigration consequences of a guilty plea is no longer a valid conviction for immigration purposes.
State Dept. Remarks on Outlook for Employment-Based Visa Numbers
Via AILA (posted Jan. 26, 2006) – The Department of State has advised AILA DOS Liaison Chair Liam Schwartz that it has seen a decrease in demand for employment-based visa numbers for USCIS adjustment of status cases. This has resulted in the rapid advancement of the established cut-off dates. DOS does not want to be in a position where there are large amounts of numbers available for use late in the fiscal year, and not enough time to make use of them. But, when/if the USCIS demand does materialize it may be necessary to hold or retrogress (at some point) those dates. Below are DOS’ comments on the outlook for employment-based numbers:
“Worldwide: Based on the current level of number use in the Employment First and Second preference categories there will be no need to impose a cut-off date for the categories. While the First preference number use is relatively close to my target, the Second preference is significantly below my target which doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Third: I had been concerned that the amount of 245(i) filings during March/April 2001 would result in a large concentration of demand, and limit movement of the cut-off date. So far this has not been the case, and it may be that such cases (if they exist in large numbers) are still in the DOL backlog.
China and India: The same lack of demand comments apply to these First and Second preference cut-offs. This has resulted in the rapid advancement of the China and India cut-offs, which I expect to continue for the next several months.
China Third – Should stay at the Worldwide date.
India – This cut-off should continue to move, but such movement may become more limited. “
The U.S. Immigration Law Blog by Ashwin Sharma 
New IPC Report Reveals Voting Patterns Behind House’s Passage of Immigration Enforcement Bill
02/28/2006
Via AILA (The American Immigration Lawyers Association)
The Immigration Policy Center,
a division of AILF, AILA’s sister foundation, has released a new
report–“Playing Politics on Immigration”–showing that U.S.
Representatives with low numbers of undocumented immigrants residing in
their districts were most likely to support the Border Protection,
Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act (H.R. 4437), passed
by the House in December. IPC Research Fellow Rob Paral writes,
“Lawmakers whose constituents experience relatively little impact from
undocumented immigration have the luxury of playing politics on the
issue rather than confronting it directly.” View the full report.