USCIS Transfers I-485s to NSC and TSC
VIA AILA
AILA’s Service Center Operations (SCOPS) Liaison Committee reports that
in anticipation of the next phase of Bi-Specialization, I-485
applications are being transferred from CSC to NSC, and from VSC to
TSC. This includes cases that are subject to visa retrogression and
security/background checks. Transfer notices will be sent and the USCIS
online system will be updated when a transfer occurs. SCOPS has
confirmed that transferred cases will go into the queue based on
original filing date and not the date of the transfer.
VISA BULLETIN FOR JANUARY 2007
Visa Bulletin
Number 101
Volume VIII
Washington, D.C.
VISA BULLETIN FOR JANUARY 2007
A. STATUTORY NUMBERS
1.
This bulletin summarizes the availability of immigrant numbers during
January. Consular officers are required to report to the Department of
State documentarily qualified applicants for numerically limited visas;
the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of
Homeland Security reports applicants for adjustment of status.
Allocations were made, to the extent possible under the numerical
limitations, for the demand received by December 7th in the
chronological order of the reported priority dates. If the demand could
not be satisfied within the statutory or regulatory limits, the
category or foreign state in which demand was excessive was deemed
oversubscribed. The cut-off date for an oversubscribed category is the
priority date of the first applicant who could not be reached within
the numerical limits.
Only
applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may
be allotted a number. Immediately that it becomes necessary during the
monthly allocation process to retrogress a cut-off date, supplemental
requests for numbers will be honored only if the priority date falls
within the new cut-off date.
2.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual
minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide
level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least
140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for
preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored
and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent
area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.
3. Section 203 of the INA prescribes preference classes for allotment of immigrant visas as follows:
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.
Second: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent
Residents: 114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide family preference level exceeds 226,000, and any unused
first preference numbers:
A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;
B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.
Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.
Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES
First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth
and fifth preferences.
Second:
Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of
Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference
level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.
Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first
and second preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to “Other Workers”.
Schedule
A Workers: Employment First, Second, and Third preference Schedule A
applicants are entitled to up to 50,000 “recaptured” numbers.
Fourth: Certain Special Immigrants: 7.1% of the worldwide level.
Fifth:
Employment Creation: 7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000
of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or
high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional
centers by Sec. 610 of P.L. 102-395.
4.
INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based
preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which
a petition in behalf of each has been filed. Section 203(d) provides
that spouses and children of preference immigrants are entitled to the
same status, and the same order of consideration, if accompanying or
following to join the principal. The visa prorating provisions of
Section 202(e) apply to allocations for a foreign state or dependent
area when visa demand exceeds the per-country limit. These provisions
apply at present to the following oversubscribed chargeability areas:
CHINA-mainland born, INDIA, MEXICO, and PHILIPPINES.
5.
On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that
the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); “C” means current, i.e.,
numbers are available for all qualified applicants; and “U” means
unavailable, i.e., no numbers are available. (NOTE: Numbers are
available only for applicants whose priority date is earlier than the
cut-off date listed below.)
| Fam-ily | All Charge- ability Areas Except Those Listed | CHINA-mainland born | INDIA | MEXICO | PHILIPP-INES |
| 1st | 22APR01 | 22APR01 | 22APR01 | 01JAN94 | 15DEC91 |
| 2A | 15MAR02 | 15MAR02 | 15MAR02 | 15MAR00 | 15MAR02 |
| 2B | 08APR97 | 08APR97 | 08APR97 | 01MAR92 | 08SEP96 |
| 3rd | 01JAN99 | 01JAN99 | 01JAN99 | 01JAN95 | 08FEB91 |
| 4th | 08JAN96 | 22JUN95 | 01OCT95 | 22JAN94 | 01JUL84 |
*NOTE:
For January, 2A numbers EXEMPT from per-country limit are available to
applicants from all countries with priority dates earlier than 15MAR00.
2A numbers SUBJECT to per-country limit are available to applicants
chargeable to all countries EXCEPT MEXICO with priority dates beginning
15MAR00 and earlier than 15MAR02. (All 2A numbers provided for MEXICO
are exempt from the per-country limit; there are no 2A numbers for
MEXICO subject to per-country limit.)
|
All |
CHINA- mainland born |
INDIA | MEXICO | PHILIP-PINES | |
| Employ-ment -Based |
|||||
| 1st | C | C | C | C | C |
| 2nd | C | 22APR05 | 08JAN03 | C | C |
| 3rd | 01AUG02 | 01AUG02 | 08MAY01 | 15MAY01 | 01AUG02 |
| Schedule A Workers |
15JUN04 | 15JUN04 | 15JUN04 | 15JUN04 | 15JUN04 |
| Other Workers |
01OCT01 | 01OCT01 | 01OCT01 | 01OCT01 | 01OCT01 |
| 4th | C | C | C | C | C |
| Certain Religious Workers | C | C | C | C | C |
| Iraqi & Afghani Translators | 18SEP06 | 18SEP06 | 18SEP06 | 18SEP06 | 18SEP06 |
| 5th | C | C | C | C | C |
| Targeted Employ-ment Areas/ Regional Centers |
C | C | C | C | C |
The
Department of State has available a recorded message with visa
availability information which can be heard at: (area code 202)
663-1541. This recording will be updated in the middle of each month
with information on cut-off dates for the following month.
Employment
Third Preference Other Workers Category: Section 203(e) of the NACARA,
as amended by Section 1(e) of Pub. L. 105 – 139, provides that once the
Employment Third Preference Other Worker (EW) cut-off date has reached
the priority date of the latest EW petition approved prior to November
19, 1997, the 10,000 EW numbers available for a fiscal year are to be
reduced by up to 5,000 annually beginning in the following fiscal year.
This reduction is to be made for as long as necessary to offset
adjustments under the NACARA program. Since the EW cut-off date reached
November 19, 1997 during Fiscal Year 2001, the reduction in the EW
annual limit to 5,000 began in Fiscal Year 2002.
B. DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT (DV) CATEGORY
Section
203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides a maximum of up
to 55,000 immigrant visas each fiscal year to permit immigration
opportunities for persons from countries other than the principal
sources of current immigration to the United States. The Nicaraguan and
Central American Relief Act (NACARA) passed by Congress in November
1997 stipulates that beginning with DV-99, and for as long as
necessary, up to 5,000 of the 55,000 annually-allocated diversity visas
will be made available for use under the NACARA program. This reduction has resulted in the DV-2007 annual limit being reduced to 50,000.
DV visas are divided among six geographic regions. No one country can
receive more than seven percent of the available diversity visas in any
one year.
For
January, immigrant numbers in the DV category are available to
qualified DV-2007 applicants chargeable to all regions/eligible
countries as follows. When an allocation cut-off number is shown, visas
are available only for applicants with DV regional lottery rank numbers
BELOW the specified allocation cut-off number:
| Region | All DV Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed Separately | |
|---|---|---|
| AFRICA | 11,300 |
Except: |
| ASIA | 3,800 | |
| EUROPE | 9,900 | |
| NORTH AMERICA (BAHAMAS) | 7 | |
| OCEANIA | 460 | |
| SOUTH AMERICA, and the CARIBBEAN | 700 |
Entitlement
to immigrant status in the DV category lasts only through the end of
the fiscal (visa) year for which the applicant is selected in the
lottery. The year of entitlement for all applicants registered for the
DV-2007 program ends as of September 30, 2007. DV visas may not be
issued to DV-2007 applicants after that date. Similarly, spouses and
children accompanying or following to join DV-2007 principals are only
entitled to derivative DV status until September 30, 2007. DV visa
availability through the very end of FY-2007 cannot be taken for
granted. Numbers could be exhausted prior to September 30.
C. ADVANCE NOTIFICATION OF THE DIVERSITY (DV) IMMIGRANT CATEGORY RANK CUT-OFFS WHICH WILL APPLY IN FEBRUARY
For
February, immigrant numbers in the DV category are available to
qualified DV-2007 applicants chargeable to all regions/eligible
countries as follows. When an allocation cut-off number is shown, visas
are available only for applicants with DV regional lottery rank numbers
BELOW the specified allocation cut-off number:
| Region | All DV Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed Separately | |
|---|---|---|
| AFRICA | 11,850 |
Except: |
| ASIA | 3,800 | |
| EUROPE | 10,400 | |
| NORTH AMERICA (BAHAMAS) | 7 | |
| OCEANIA | 550 | |
| SOUTH AMERICA, and the CARIBBEAN | 825 |
D. SCHEDULE A WORKER VISA CATEGORY
A
small amount of Schedule A Worker numbers which had been provided to
consular offices for November use were returned unused after the end of
the month and thus became available for reallocation. All remaining
Schedule A Worker numbers have been made available to applicants whose
priority dates are within the January cut-off date (15JUN04). The
Schedule A Worker category will be removed from the listings beginning
with the February cut-off dates.
E. OTHER NOTES ON VISA AVAILABILITY
FAMILY:
Demand for numbers in the Mexico and Philippines Family Third
preference category has been very heavy during the first quarter. No
movement of those cut-off dates can be expected, and continued heavy
demand may require the retrogression of the dates at some point in the
future.
EMPLOYMENT:
Demand for numbers in the Employment Third “Other Workers” category, as
well as the China and India Employment Second preference categories,
has been escalating. No movement in those cut-off dates will be
possible until the current level of demand subsides.
F. OBTAINING THE MONTHLY VISA BULLETIN
The Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs offers the monthly “Visa Bulletin” on the INTERNET’S WORLDWIDE WEB. The
INTERNET Web address to access the Bulletin is:
From the home page, select the VISA section which contains the Visa Bulletin.
To
be placed on the Department of State’s E-mail subscription list for the
“Visa Bulletin”, please send an E-mail to the following E-mail address:
listserv@calist.state.gov
and in the message body type:
Subscribe Visa-Bulletin First name/Last name
(example: Subscribe Visa-Bulletin Sally Doe)
To be removed from the Department of State’s E-mail subscription list for the “Visa Bulletin”, send an e-mail message to the
following E-mail address :
listserv@calist.state.gov
and in the message body type: Signoff Visa-Bulletin
The
Department of State also has available a recorded message with visa
cut-off dates which can be heard at: (area code 202) 663-1541. The
recording is normally updated by the middle of each month with
information on cut-off dates for the following month.
Readers may submit questions regarding Visa Bulletin related items by E-mail at the following address:
VISABULLETIN@STATE.GOV
(This address cannot be used to subscribe to the Visa Bulletin.)
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO
ecember 7, 2006
Senator’s wife in hiding after deportation threat
Via CNN.com
12/05/2006
ATLANTA, Georgia (AP) — State Sen. Curt Thompson has been a
strong advocate of immigration rights, once speaking in Spanish from
the steps of the Georgia Capitol against the adoption of some of the
nation’s strictest immigration controls.
Now Thompson’s Colombian-born wife is in hiding as federal immigration officials try to deport her.
Sascha
Herrera, 28, has been in hiding since Immigration and Customs
Enforcement officers arrived at her home November 28 with an order to
remove her from the U.S. She was not home at the time.
Her
attorney, Charles Kuck, claims she was duped by a man handling her
immigration requests and that she never received the immigration
notices that triggered her deportation order. While Kuck says neither
he nor her husband know where Herrera is, he said that she will turn
herself in Tuesday.
“It’s the right thing to do. She needs to get the law to work for her,” Kuck said.
Kuck
filed a petition Monday to halt her deportation order and reopen her
case, arguing that a man filed an asylum petition on her behalf without
her knowledge and before her husband sponsored her green card
application based on their April marriage.
The deportation order
stems from Herrera’s repeated failure to appear before a judge on the
asylum application, which Kuck said she did not know had been filed.
The
case hinges on whether Herrera received a notice to appear in court,
and whether the asylum application could have been filed without her
knowledge, said Victor Cerda, former general counsel for Immigration
and Customs Enforcement.
According to Kuck, Herrera came to the
U.S. — where her parents have been living — on a visitor visa in
2003. She applied for an extension to the visa through a “notario” — a
man who claimed he was qualified to handle legal immigration matters —
but did not get it until 20 days before the extension was due to expire.
The
notario then suggested an asylum application, which Herrera signed, but
she got a “bad vibe” from the man and decided not to proceed, Kuck said.
Later
in 2004, she was accepted as a student at Kennesaw State University,
which earned her a student visa. She then told the notario she did not
want anything to do with him.
She met Thompson last year and they
got married in April, when he applied for her to become a permanent
resident. Kuck said Herrera’s husband, a Democrat and attorney, would
not comment on the case.
But in the meantime, the notario filed
the asylum application, listing his address as hers. A telephone number
listed for the notario, identified as Tomas Vilela, was being answered
Monday by a fax machine.
Cerda said the deportation order in the
asylum case would trump any pending green card application and trigger
mandatory detention.
Her decision to hide could hurt her request
for a judge’s stay on deportation, Cerda said. If she turns herself in,
she could remain in the U.S. while her petition is pending, either in
jail or released on bond.
U.S. Department of State – Priority Dates for Family Based Preferences, October 2006
U.S. Department of State – Priority Dates for Family Based Preferences, October 2006
NOTE: This information has been obtained
from the Department of State visa bulletin.
|
Family |
All |
CHINA-mainland |
INDIA |
MEXICO |
PHILIP-PINES |
|
1st |
01MAY00 |
01MAY00 |
01MAY00 |
01JAN93 |
01NOV91 |
|
2A |
22APR01 |
22APR01 |
22APR01 |
15OCT99 |
22APR01 |
|
2B |
01JAN97 |
01JAN97 |
01JAN97 |
15FEB92 |
22JUL96 |
|
3rd |
22OCT98 |
22OCT98 |
22OCT98 |
01JAN94 |
01AUG90 |
|
4th |
15SEP95 |
01FEB95 |
01AUG95 |
15SEP93 |
01APR84 |
|
1st: |
Unmarried Sons and Daughters of |
|
2A: |
Spouses and Children: 77% of the |
|
2B: |
Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 |
|
3rd: |
Married Sons and Daughters of |
|
4th: |
Brothers and Sisters of Adult |
19 arrested in major marriage and immigration fraud scheme
Via ICE.gov
News Release
September 7, 2006
|
ALEXANDRIA, VA – Chuck Rosenberg, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of As described in the government’s affidavit, nine defendants are Aliens who participated in the fraud generally paid large fees, Arlington County Police Chief Scott stated, “Alert employees in the As alleged in the affidavit, the defendants who facilitated the sham For instance, couples were told to memorize the name of their sham “Immigration and benefit fraud is not simply a nuisance crime, it The investigation was conducted by a task force of federal and local The task force received important assistance from several other Defendants are presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty. |
|
— ICE — |
U.S. turning to DNA to prove family ties
Via The Seattle Times
08/24/2006
After waiting nearly 12 years to help his sister and her family
obtain green cards so they could move to the U.S., Nak Sieng faced one
final hurdle: proving he and his sister really are related.
An exercise that might have been simple for some was a monumental
challenge for the siblings who had lived through Cambodia’s
revolutionary war and, as a result, couldn’t obtain certain documents —
like birth certificates or school or medical records — to prove their
relationship.
Childhood photos the family was able to save from the war years were
too old, authorities told them. And photos from Sieng’s more recent
visits to Cambodia in 2000 were too new.
Then U.S. embassy officials in Thailand asked for a kind of evidence
that attorneys say is becoming increasingly common in immigration
cases: a DNA test.
The test proved unequivocally that the two are brother and sister.
VISA BULLETIN FOR AUGUST 2006
Visa Bulletin
Number 95
Volume VIII
Washington, D.C.
VISA BULLETIN FOR AUGUST 2006
IMMIGRANT NUMBERS FOR AUGUST 2006
A. STATUTORY NUMBERS
1. This bulletin summarizes the availability of immigrant numbers during August. Consular officers are required to report to the Department of State documentarily qualified applicants for numerically limited visas; the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of Homeland Security reports applicants for adjustment of status. Allocations were made, to the extent possible under the numerical limitations, for the demand received by July 10th in the chronological order of the reported priority dates. If the demand could not be satisfied within the statutory or regulatory limits, the category or foreign state in which demand was excessive was deemed oversubscribed. The cut-off date for an oversubscribed category is the priority date of the first applicant who could not be reached within the numerical limits. Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the cut-off date may be allotted a number. Immediately that it becomes necessary during the monthly allocation process to retrogress a cut-off date, supplemental requests for numbers will be honored only if the priority date falls within the new cut-off date.
2. The fiscal year 2006 limit for Family-sponsored preference immigrants determined in accordance with Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is 226,000. The fiscal year 2006 limit for Employment-based preference immigrants calculated under INA 201 is 143,949. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,896 for
FY-2006. The dependent area limit is set at 2%, or 7,399.
3. Section 203 of the INA prescribes preference classes for allotment of immigrant visas as follows:
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
First: Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.
Second: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent Residents: 114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide family preference level exceeds 226,000, and any unused first preference numbers:
A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;
B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.
Third: Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.
Fourth: Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES
First: Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based
preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth and fifth preferences.
Second: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference
level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.
Third: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second
preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to “Other Workers”.
Schedule A Workers: Employment First, Second, and Third preference Schedule A applicants are entitled to up to 50,000 “recaptured” numbers.
Fourth: Certain Special Immigrants: 7.1% of the worldwide level.
Fifth: Employment Creation: 7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000 of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional centers by Sec. 610 of P.L. 102-395.
4. INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of each has been filed. Section 203(d) provides that spouses and children of preference immigrants are entitled to the same status, and the same order of consideration, if accompanying or following to join the principal. The visa prorating provisions of Section 202(e) apply to allocations for a foreign state or dependent area when visa demand exceeds the per-country limit. These provisions apply at present to the following oversubscribed chargeability areas: CHINA-mainland born, INDIA, MEXICO, and PHILIPPINES.
5. On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); “C” means current, i.e., numbers are available for all qualified applicants; and “U” means unavailable, i.e., no numbers are available. (NOTE: Numbers are available only for applicants whose priority date is earlier than the cut-off date listed below.)
| Family | All Charge- ability Areas Except Those Listed | CHINA-mainland born | INDIA | MEXICO | PHILIP-PINES |
| 1st | 01JAN97 | 01JAN97 | 01JAN97 | 01JUN92 | 01OCT92 |
| 2A | 08SEP99 | 08SEP99 | 08SEP99 | 08SEP99 | 08SEP99 |
| 2B | 22SEP96 | 22SEP96 | 22SEP96 | 01DEC91 | 01DEC92 |
| 3rd | 08SEP98 | 08SEP98 | 08SEP98 | 01JAN81 | 01DEC85 |
| 4th | 15JUN95 | 01JUL94 | 01JAN95 | 01JAN93 | 15JAN84 |
*NOTE: For August, 2A numbers EXEMPT from per-country limit are available to applicants from all countries with priority dates earlier than 08SEP99. 2A numbers SUBJECT to per-country limit are “Unavailable”.
| Employ- ment Based | All Charge-ability Areas Except Those Listed | CHINA | INDIA | MEXICO | PHILIP-PINES |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | C | C | 01JAN06 | C | C |
| 2nd | C | 01MAR05 | U | C | C |
| 3rd | 01OCT01 | 01OCT01 | 01APR01 | 22APR01 | 01OCT01 |
| Schedule A Workers | C | C | C | C | C |
| Other Workers | U | U | U | U | U |
| 4th | C | C | C | C | C |
| Certain Religious Workers | C | C | C | C | C |
| 5th | C | C | C | C | C |
| Targeted Employment Areas/ Regional Centers | C | C | C | C | C |
The Department of State has available a recorded message with visa availability information which can be heard at: (area code 202) 663-1541. This recording will be updated in the middle of each month with information on cut-off dates for the following month.
Employment Third Preference Other Workers Category: Section 203(e) of the NACARA, as amended by Section 1(e) of Pub. L. 105-139, provides that once the Employment Third Preference Other Worker (EW) cut-off date has reached the priority date of the latest EW petition approved prior to November 19, 1997, the 10,000 EW numbers available for a fiscal year are to be reduced by up to 5,000 annually beginning in the following fiscal year. This reduction is to be made for as long as necessary to offset adjustments under the NACARA program. Since the EW cut-off date reached November 19, 1997 during Fiscal Year 2001, the reduction in the EW annual limit to 5,000 began in Fiscal Year 2002.
B. DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT (DV) CATEGORY
Section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides a maximum of up to 55,000 immigrant visas each fiscal year to permit immigration opportunities for persons from countries other than the principal sources of current immigration to the United States. The Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) passed by Congress in November 1997 stipulates that beginning with DV-99, and for as long as necessary, up to 5,000 of the 55,000 annually-allocated diversity visas will be made available for use under the NACARA program. This reduction has resulted in the DV-2006 annual limit being reduced to 50,000. DV visas are divided among six geographic regions. No one country can receive more than seven percent of the available diversity visas in any one year.
For August, immigrant numbers in the DV category are available to qualified DV-2006 applicants chargeable to all regions/eligible countries as follows. When an allocation cut-off number is shown, visas are available only for applicants with DV regional lottery rank numbers BELOW the specified allocation cut-off number:
| Region | All DV Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed Separately | |
|---|---|---|
| AFRICA | 33,900 | Except: |
| ASIA | 7,700 | |
| EUROPE | 16,000 | |
| NORTH AMERICA (BAHAMAS) | 15 | |
| OCEANIA | 1,115 | |
| SOUTH AMERICA, and the CARIBBEAN | 1,900 |
Entitlement to immigrant status in the DV category lasts only through the end of the fiscal (visa) year for which the applicant is selected in the lottery. The year of entitlement for all applicants registered for the DV-2006 program ends as of September 30, 2006. DV visas may not be issued to DV-2006 applicants after that date. Similarly, spouses and children accompanying or following to join DV-2006 principals are only entitled to derivative DV status until September 30, 2006. DV visa availability through the very end of FY-2006
cannot be taken for granted. Numbers could be exhausted prior to September 30.
C. ADVANCE NOTIFICATION OF THE DIVERSITY (DV) IMMIGRANT CATEGORY RANK CUT-OFFS WHICH WILL APPLY IN SEPTEMBER
For September, immigrant numbers in the DV category are available to qualified DV-2006 applicants chargeable to all regions/eligible countries as follows. When an allocation cut-off number is shown, visas are available only for applicants with DV regional lottery rank numbers BELOW the specified allocation cut-off number:
| Region | All DV Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed Separately | |
|---|---|---|
| AFRICA | Current | Except: |
| ASIA | Current | |
| EUROPE | Current | |
| NORTH AMERICA (BAHAMAS) | Current | |
| OCEANIA | Current | |
| SOUTH AMERICA, and the CARIBBEAN | Current |
D. RETROGRESSION OF FAMILY AND EMPLOYMENT CUT-OFF DATES
For August, it has been necessary to retrogress many of the cut-off dates in the Family-sponsored and Employment-based visa categories. This has been done in an effort to hold the issuance levels within the applicable annual numerical limits for the affected categories. Those retrogressions are listed below:
Worldwide: Family 1st (to 01JAN97)
China: Family 4th (to 01JUL94)
India: Employment 2nd has become “Unavailable”; Employment 3rd (to 01APR01)
Mexico: Family 3rd (to 01JAN81) and Family 4th (to 01JAN93)
Philippines: Family 2B (to 01DEC92) and Family 3rd (to 01DEC85)
E. IMMIGRANT VISA AVAILABILITY FOR SEPTEMBER
Immigrant visa number use is approaching the annual limits for the year in many categories, and the supply of numbers remaining for allocation is limited. Therefore, for September there is increased possibility of additional retrogressions of cut-off dates such as those experienced in August. Readers should not assume visa availability until the cut-off dates are announced. Categories which could experience retrogressions are:
Worldwide: Employment 4th
China: Employment 2nd and 3rd
India: Employment 1st
Mexico: Employment 3rd
F. SCHEDULE A VISA AVAILABILITY DURING FY-2007
A total of 50,000 numbers were provided for use in the Schedule A (EX) visa category which was established last May. Visa demand in this category is approaching that limit, and may require the establishment of a cut-off date as early as October. Once all 50,000 numbers have been made available under the current limitation, processing under this category will end.
G. DIVERSITY VISA LOTTERY 2007 (DV-2007) RESULTS
The Kentucky Consular Center in Williamsburg, Kentucky has registered and notified the winners of the DV-2007 diversity lottery. The diversity lottery was conducted under the terms of section 203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act and makes available *50,000 permanent resident visas annually to persons from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. Approximately 82,000 applicants have been registered and notified and may now make an application for an immigrant visa. Since it is likely that some of the first *50,000 persons registered will not pursue their cases to visa issuance, this larger figure should insure that all DV-2007 numbers will be used during fiscal year 2007 (October 1, 2006 until September 30, 2007).
Applicants registered for the DV-2007program were selected at random from over 5.5 million qualified entries received during the 60-day application period that ran from 12:00 AM on October 5, 2005, until midnight, December 4, 2005. The visas have been apportioned among six geographic regions with a maximum of seven percent available to persons born in any single country. During the visa interview, principal applicants must provide proof of a high school education or its equivalent, or show two years of work experience in an occupation that requires at least two years of training or experience within the past five years. Those selected will need to act on their immigrant visa applications quickly. Applicants should follow the instructions in their notification letter and must fully complete the information requested.
Registrants living legally in the United States who wish to apply for adjustment of their status must contact the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services for information on the requirements and procedures. Once the total *50,000 visa numbers have been used, the program for fiscal year 2007 will end. Selected applicants who do not receive visas by September 30, 2007 will derive no further benefit from their DV-2007 registration. Similarly, spouses and children accompanying or following to join DV-2007 principal applicants are only entitled to derivative diversity visa status until September 30, 2007.
Only participants in the DV-2007 program who were selected for further processing have been notified. Those who have not received notification were not selected. They may try for the upcoming DV-2008 lottery if they wish. The dates for the registration period for the DV-2008 lottery program will be widely publicized during August 2006.
* The Nicaraguan and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) passed by Congress in November 1997 stipulated that up to 5,000 of the 55,000 annually-allocated diversity visas be made available for use under the NACARA program. The reduction of the limit of available visas to 50,000 began with DV-2000.
The following is the statistical breakdown by foreign-state chargeability of those registered for the DV-2007 program:
| AFRICA | ||
| ALGERIA 912 | ERITREA 582 | NAMIBIA 8 |
| ANGOLA 13 | ETHIOPIA 6,871 | NIGER 62 |
| BENIN 218 | GABON 42 | NIGERIA 9,849 |
| BOTSWANA 1 | GAMBIA, THE 50 | RWANDA 41 |
| BURKINA FASO 95 | GHANA 3,088 | SAO TOME AND PRINCIPE 2 |
| BURUNDI 16 | GUINEA 146 | SENEGAL 228 |
| CAMEROON 1,461 | GUINEA-BISSAU 5 | SEYCHELLES 4 |
| CAPE VERDE 3 | KENYA 2,337 | SIERRA LEONE 540 |
| CENTRAL AFRICAN REP. 13 | LESOTHO 0 | SOMALIA 160 |
| CHAD 28 | LIBERIA 734 | SOUTH AFRICA 287 |
| COMOROS 7 | LIBYA 37 | SUDAN 569 |
| CONGO 687 | MADAGASCAR 21 | SWAZILAND 5 |
| CONGO, DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF THE 42 | MALAWI 18 | TANZANIA 148 |
| COTE D’IVOIRE 308 | MALI 76 | TOGO 1,592 |
| DJIBOUTI 11 | MAURITANIA 17 | TUNISIA 122 |
| EGYPT 7,229 | MAURITIUS 8 | UGANDA 213 |
| EQUATORIAL GUINEA 1 | MOROCCO 4,922 | ZAMBIA 92 |
| MOZAMBIQUE 4 | ZIMBABWE 73 |
| ASIA | ||
| AFGHANISTAN 80 | IRAQ 8 | NEPAL 1,529 |
| BAHRAIN 1 | ISRAEL 126 | OMAN 1 |
| BANGLADESH 5,901 | JAPAN 333 | QATAR 1 |
| BHUTAN 2 | JORDAN 63 | SAUDI ARABIA 27 |
| BRUNEI 0 | NORTH KOREA 6 | SINGAPORE 46 |
| BURMA 651 | KUWAIT 42 | SRI LANKA 383 |
| CAMBODIA 177 | LAOS 9 | SYRIA 40 |
| HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMIN. REGION 81 | LEBANON 86 | THAILAND 81 |
| INDONESIA 245 | MALAYSIA 76 | TAIWAN 398 |
| IRAN 1,361 | MALDIVES 0 | UNITED ARAB EMIRATES 19 |
| MONGOLIA 113 | YEMEN 43 |
| EUROPE | ||
ALBANIA 1,988 | GERMANY 1,047 | NORTHERN IRELAND 42 |
ANDORRA 0 | GREECE 41 | NORWAY 21 |
| ARMENIA, 691 | GREENLAND 3 | PORTUGAL 29 Macau 8 |
ARUBA 5 | HUNGARY 138 | ROMANIA 1,255 |
AUSTRIA 74 | ICELAND 13 | SAN MARINO 0 |
AZERBAIJAN 125 | IRELAND 160 | SERBIA & MONTENEGRO 505 |
BELARUS 705 | ITALY 214 | SLOVAKIA 171 |
BELGIUM 57 | KAZAKHSTAN 177 | SLOVENIA 7 |
BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA 90 | KYRGYZSTAN 123 | SPAIN 97 |
BULGARIA 1,674 | LATVIA 75 | SWEDEN 121 |
CROATIA 40 | LIECHTENSTEIN 0 | SWITZERLAND 104 |
CYPRUS 7 | LITHUANIA 298 | TAJIKISTAN 84 |
CZECH REPUBLIC 85 | LUXEMBOURG 6 | TURKEY 1,418 |
DENMARK 50 | MACEDONIA , FORMER YUGOSLAV REP. | TURKMENISTAN 59 |
ESTONIA 40 | MALTA 4 | UKRAINE 7,205 |
FINLAND 33 | MOLDOVA 273 | TUNISIA 124 |
FRANCE 380 | MONACO, 1 | UZBEKISTAN 1,536 |
GEORGIA 323 | NETHERLANDS 88 Netherlands Antilles 8 | VATICAN CITY 0 |
| NORTH AMERICA | ||
BAHAMAS , THE 12 |
|
|
OCEANIA | ||
AUSTRALIA 532 Christmas Islands 0 Cocos Islands 1 | NAURU 1 | SOLOMON |
| FIJI 514 | NEW ZEALAND 205 Cook Islands 3 | TONGA 109 |
KIRIBATI 0 | PALAU 3 | TUVALU 7 |
MARSHALL ISLANDS 1 | PAPUA NEW GUINEA 6 | VANUATU 0 |
MICRONESIA , FEDERATED STATES OF 4 | SAMOA 10 |
|
SOUTH AMERICA, CENTRAL AMERICA, AND THE CARIBBEAN | ||
ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA 2 | DOMINICA 12 | PERU 1,274 |
ARGENTINA 86 | ECUADOR 170 | SAINT KITTS AND NEVIS 4 |
BARBADOS 9 | GRENADA 6 | SAINT LUCIA 4 |
BELIZE 5 | GUATEMALA 43 | SAINT VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES 3 |
BOLIVIA 88 | GUYANA 17 | SURINAME 3 |
BRAZIL 488 | HONDURAS 28 | TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 85 |
CHILE 42 | NICARAGUA 19 | URUGUAY 4 |
COSTA RICA 18 | PANAMA 14 | VENEZUELA 226 |
CUBA 427 | PARAGUAY 20 |
Natives of the following countries were not eligible to participate in DV-2007: Canada, China (mainland-born, excluding Hong Kong S.A.R., and Taiwan), Colombia, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Pakistan, the Philippines, Poland, Russia, South Korea, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) and its dependent territories, and Vietnam.
H. DETERMINATION OF THE NUMERICAL LIMITS ON IMMIGRANT REQUIRED UNDER THE TERMS OF THE IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA)
The State Department is required to make a determination of the worldwide numerical limitations, as outlined in Section 201(c) and (d) of the INA, on an annual basis. These calculations are based in part on data provided by the Citizenship and Naturalization Service regarding the number of immediate relative adjustments in the preceding year and the number of aliens paroled into the United States under Section 212(d)(5) in the second preceding year. Without this information, it is impossible to make an official determination of the annual limits. To avoid delays in processing while waiting for the CIS data, the Visa Office (VO) bases allocation on the minimum annual limits outlined in Section 201 of the INA.
- Worldwide Family-Sponsored preference limit: 226,000
Worldwide Employment-Based preference limit: 143,949
Under INA Section 202(A), the per-country limit is fixed at 7% of the family and employment annual limits. For FY-2006 the per-country limit is 25,896. The dependent area annual limit is 2%, or 7,399.
I. OBTAINING THE MONTHLY VISA BULLETIN
The Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs offers the monthly “Visa Bulletin” on the INTERNET’S WORLDWIDE WEB. The INTERNET Web address to access the Bulletin is:
http://travel.state.gov
From the home page, select the VISA section which contains the Visa Bulletin.
To be placed on the Department of State’s E-mail subscription list for the “Visa Bulletin”, please send an E-mail to the following E-mail address:
listserv@calist.state.gov
and in the message body type:
Subscribe Visa-Bulletin First name/Last name
(example: Subscribe Visa-Bulletin Sally Doe)
To be removed from the Department of State’s E-mail subscription list for the “Visa Bulletin”, send an e-mail message to the following E-mail address :
listserv@calist.state.gov
and in the message body type: Signoff Visa-Bulletin
The Department of State also has available a recorded message with visa cut-off dates which can be heard at: (area code 202) 663-1541. The recording is normally updated by the middle of each month with information on cut-off dates for the following month.
Readers may submit questions regarding Visa Bulletin related items by E-mail at the following address:
VISABULLETIN@STATE.GOV
(This address cannot be used to subscribe to the Visa Bulletin.)
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO: July 10, 2006.
Backlog holds up legal path into U.S.
Via The Charlotte Observer
07/15/2006
Millions forced to wait for thousands of visas
Members of the Morales family have been waiting almost two decades for green cards.
Family patriarch Miguel Morales Alcala gained legal permanent residence through a 1986 amnesty. He has since tried to get residency for his wife and six of his children.
But the wait became such an ordeal that he ended up paying a coyote $7,000 to smuggle his family into the U.S. from Mexico.
“It’s such a long time,” Morales, 66, said from his Charlotte home. “They told me I could bring my children, but we’re still waiting and wondering when we can get the papers.”
Often lost in the debate over illegal immigration is the massive list of applicants waiting to legally move to the United States.
The wait for a visa can take years, even decades, as several million people worldwide petition for limited spots.
Many immigration lawyers and advocates argue that immigration limits are too restrictive and it should be made easier for people to come here legally.
At the same time, advocates for more restrictive immigration rules acknowledge the process is cumbersome, but say limits benefit the country.
“There are way too many people than we can absorb,” said Ron Woodard, director of NC Listen, an immigration reform group. “Would-be immigrants need to understand that just because you’re a nice person willing to work hard doesn’t mean you can come to America.”
Continue reading
USCIS NOTIFIES PUBLIC OF NEW POLICY CONCERNING FIANCÉ(E) PETITIONS – ANNOUNCED 10,000 RFE’s (REQUESTS FOR EVIDENCE)
06/13/2006 USCIS Press Release
Washington, DC – <a href="/files/4941-4844/publicnotice061306i_129F.pdf”>U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced today that in order to comply with provisions of the International Marriage Brokers Regulation Act of 2005 (IMBRA), it will need to issue “Requests for Evidence” for more than 10,000 Alien Fiancé(e) Petitions (Form I-129F) currently being held at USCIS Service Centers. USCIS will begin immediately to issue RFEs to affected petitioners using an RFE template that has been approved and cleared by the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB )
Visa Bulletin For July 2006
Number 95
Volume VIII
Washington, D.C.
VISA BULLETING FOR JULY 2006
A. STATUTORY NUMBERS
1.
This bulletin summarizes the availability of immigrant numbers during
July. Consular officers are required to report to the Department of
State documentarily qualified applicants for numerically limited visas;
the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services in the Department of
Homeland Security reports applicants for adjustment of status.
Allocations were made, to the extent possible under the numerical
limitations, for the demand received by June 9th in the chronological
order of the reported priority dates. If the demand could not be
satisfied within the statutory or regulatory limits, the category or
foreign state in which demand was excessive was deemed oversubscribed.
The cut-off date for an oversubscribed category is the priority date of
the first applicant who could not be reached within the numerical
limits. Only applicants who have a priority date earlier than the
cut-off date may be allotted a number. Immediately that it becomes
necessary during the monthly allocation process to retrogress a cut-off
date, supplemental requests for numbers will be honored only if the
priority date falls within the new cut-off date.
2.
Section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) sets an annual
minimum family-sponsored preference limit of 226,000. The worldwide
level for annual employment-based preference immigrants is at least
140,000. Section 202 prescribes that the per-country limit for
preference immigrants is set at 7% of the total annual family-sponsored
and employment-based preference limits, i.e., 25,620. The dependent
area limit is set at 2%, or 7,320.
3. Section 203 of the INA prescribes preference classes for allotment of immigrant visas as follows:
FAMILY-SPONSORED PREFERENCES
First : Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400 plus any numbers not required for fourth preference.
Second
: Spouses and Children, and Unmarried Sons and Daughters of Permanent
Residents: 114,200, plus the number (if any) by which the worldwide
family preference level exceeds 226,000, and any unused first
preference numbers:
A. Spouses and Children: 77% of the overall second preference limitation, of which 75% are exempt from the per-country limit;
B. Unmarried Sons and Daughters (21 years of age or older): 23% of the overall second preference limitation.
Third : Married Sons and Daughters of Citizens: 23,400, plus any numbers not required by first and second preferences.
Fourth : Brothers and Sisters of Adult Citizens: 65,000, plus any numbers not required by first three preferences.
EMPLOYMENT-BASED PREFERENCES
First : Priority Workers: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference level, plus any numbers not required for fourth
and fifth preferences.
Second
: Members of the Professions Holding Advanced Degrees or Persons of
Exceptional Ability: 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based preference
level, plus any numbers not required by first preference.
Third
: Skilled Workers, Professionals, and Other Workers: 28.6% of the
worldwide level, plus any numbers not required by first and second
preferences, not more than 10,000 of which to “Other Workers”. Schedule
A Workers : Employment First, Second, and Third preference Schedule A
applicants are entitled to up to 50,000 “recaptured” numbers.
Fourth : Certain Special Immigrants: 7.1% of the worldwide level.
Fifth
: Employment Creation: 7.1% of the worldwide level, not less than 3,000
of which reserved for investors in a targeted rural or
high-unemployment area, and 3,000 set aside for investors in regional
centers by Sec. 610 of P.L. 102-395.
4.
INA Section 203(e) provides that family-sponsored and employment-based
preference visas be issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which
a petition in behalf of each has been filed. Section 203(d) provides
that spouses and children of preference immigrants are entitled to the
same status, and the same order of consideration, if accompanying or
following to join the principal. The visa prorating provisions of
Section 202(e) apply to allocations for a foreign state or dependent
area when visa demand exceeds the per-country limit. These provisions
apply at present to the following oversubscribed chargeability areas:
CHINA-mainland born, INDIA, MEXICO, and PHILIPPINES.
5.
On the chart below, the listing of a date for any class indicates that
the class is oversubscribed (see paragraph 1); “C” means current, i.e.,
numbers are available for all qualified applicants; and “U” means
unavailable, i.e., no numbers are available. (NOTE: Numbers are
available only for applicants whose priority date is earlier than the
cut-off date listed below.)
| Family | All Charge- ability Areas Except Those Listed | CHINA-mainland born | INDIA | MEXICO | PHILIPPINES |
| 1st | 01JAN00 | 01JAN00 | 01JAN00 | 15MAY92 | 22SEP91 |
| 2A | 01SEP99 | 01SEP99 | 01SEP99 | 01SEP99 | 01SEP99 |
| 2B | 22AUG96 | 22AUG96 | 22AUG96 | 01DEC91 | 08JUL96 |
| 3rd | 22AUG98 | 22AUG98 | 22AUG98 | 15OCT93 | 01JUL88 |
| 4th | 01MAY95 | 01MAY95 | 01OCT94 | 15AUG93 | 15DEC83 |
| Employment- Based |
All Charge- ability Areas Except Those Listed | CHINA-mainland born | INDIA | MEXICO | PHILIPPINES |
| 1st | C | C | 01JAN06 | C | C |
| 2nd | C | 01MAR05 | 01JAN03 | C | C |
| 3rd | 01OCT01 | 01OCT01 | 15APR01 | 22APR01 | 01OCT01 |
| Schedule A Workers | C | C | C | C | C |
| Other Workers | U | U | U | U | U |
| 4th | C | C | C | C | C |
| Certain Religious Workers | C | C | C | C | C |
| 5th | C | C | C | C | C |
| Targeted Employment Areas/ Regional Centers | C | C | C | C | C |
The
Department of State has available a recorded message with visa
availability information which can be heard at: (area code 202)
663-1541. This recording will be updated in the middle of each month
with information on cut-off dates for the following month.
Employment
Third Preference Other Workers Category: Section 203(e) of the NACARA,
as amended by Section 1(e) of Pub. L. 105 – 139, provides that once the
Employment Third Preference Other Worker (EW) cut-off date has reached
the priority date of the latest EW petition approved prior to November
19, 1997, the 10,000 EW numbers available for a fiscal year are to be
reduced by up to 5,000 annually beginning in the following fiscal year.
This reduction is to be made for as long as necessary to offset
adjustments under the NACARA program. Since the EW cut-off date reached
November 19, 1997 during Fiscal Year 2001, the reduction in the EW
annual limit to 5,000 began in Fiscal Year 2002.
B. DIVERSITY IMMIGRANT (DV) CATEGORY
Section
203(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act provides a maximum of up
to 55,000 immigrant visas each fiscal year to permit immigration
opportunities for persons from countries other than the principal
sources of current immigration to the United States. The Nicaraguan and
Central American Relief Act (NACARA) passed by Congress in November
1997 stipulates that beginning with DV-99, and for as long as
necessary, up to 5,000 of the 55,000 annually-allocated diversity visas
will be made available for use under the NACARA program. This reduction has resulted in the DV-2006 annual limit being reduced to 50,000.
DV visas are divided among six geographic regions. No one country can
receive more than seven percent of the available diversity visas in any
one year.
For
July, immigrant numbers in the DV category are available to qualified
DV-2006 applicants chargeable to all regions/eligible countries as
follows. When an allocation cut-off number is shown, visas are
available only for applicants with DV regional lottery rank numbers
BELOW the specified allocation cut-off number:
| Region | All DV Chargeability Areas Except Those Listed Separately | |
| AFRICA | AF 27,850 | Except Ethiopia: 22,800 Nigeria: 14,675 |
| ASIA | AS 7,225 | |
| EUROPE | EU 15,250 | |
| NORTH AMERICA (BAHAMAS) | NA 13 | |
| OCEANIA | OC 930 | |
| SOUTH AMERICA, and the CARIBBEAN | SA 1,610 |
Entitlement
to immigrant status in the DV category lasts only through the end of
the fiscal (visa) year for which the applicant is selected in the
lottery. The year of entitlement for all applicants registered for the
DV-2006 program ends as of September 30, 2006. DV visas may not be
issued to DV-2006 applicants after that date. Similarly, spouses and
children accompanying or following to join DV-2006 principals are only
entitled to derivative DV status until September 30, 2006. DV visa
availability through the very end of FY-2006 cannot be taken for
granted. Numbers could be exhausted prior to September 30.
ITEM C is being worked on and will be posted on this site on Thursday.
D. RETROGRESSION OF FAMILY F2A CUT-OFF DATE FOR JUNE
For July, it has been necessary to retrogress the F1 and F2A cut-off dates. This has been done in an effort to hold the issuance
levels within the applicable annual numerical limits for the affected categories.
F. IMMIGRANT VISA AVAILABILITY DURING THE REMAINDER OF FY-2006
Readers
are reminded that during the summer months, with immigrant visa number
use approaching the annual limits for the year, the supply of numbers
remaining for use is limited. Thus, cut-off date advances could slow or
stop, and monthly allocations decrease. Additional retrogression of
cut-off dates such as those experienced for July are possible. Readers
should not assume visa availability until the cut-off dates are
announced.
G. OBTAINING THE MONTHLY VISA BULLETIN
The Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs offers the monthly “Visa Bulletin” on the INTERNET’S WORLDWIDE WEB. The
INTERNET Web address to access the Bulletin is:
http://travel.state.gov/
From the home page, select the VISA section which contains the Visa Bulletin.
To
be placed on the Department of State’s E-mail subscription list for the
“Visa Bulletin”, please send an E-mail to the following E-mail address:
and in the message body type:
Subscribe Visa-Bulletin First name/Last name
(example: Subscribe Visa-Bulletin Sally Doe)
To be removed from the Department of State’s E-mail subscription list for the “Visa Bulletin”, send an
e-mail message to the following E-mail address:
and in the message body type: Signoff Visa-Bulletin
The
Department of State also has available a recorded message with visa
cut-off dates which can be heard at: (area code 202) 663-1541. The
recording is normally updated by the middle of each month with
information on cut-off dates for the following month.
Readers may submit questions regarding Visa Bulletin related items by
E-mail at the following address:
(This address cannot be used to subscribe to the Visa Bulletin.)
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO:June 9, 2006
Gay couple may be forced apart by US immigration laws
via pinknews.uk.co
A
Swansea woman and her American partner may have to give up their home
and life in the States, as US immigration laws fail to take gay
partnerships into account.
Belinda
Ryan, a helicopter pilot, has been living with her partner Wendy Daw,
an acupuncturist, in San Francisco. But she will be forced to return to
the UK unless there is a change in immigration laws for gay couples.
Currently
US law defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and
excludes same-sex couples from having the same rights. Though the
debate is raging in Washington, the couple fear that any change to the
law will come to late if it comes at all.
The U.S. Immigration Law Blog by Ashwin Sharma 
AILA’s CIR Daily Update 5/24/07: Debate Continues; Amendment to Massively Increase H-1B Fees Passed
On 5/24/07, the Senate resumed consideration of amendments to the CIR bill (S. 1348).
The highlights:
• A Coleman amendment to allow local government officials to inquire about immigration status was narrowly defeated, 48-49.
• A Dorgan amendment to sunset the new worker program also was defeated, 48-49.
• A Sanders amendment to dramatically increase H-1B fees was passed, 59-35.
• A Vitter amendment to prevent legalization for the undocumented was defeated, 29-66.
Summary of Senate Proceedings—5/24/07
Coleman/Bond Amendment to Allow Local Officials to Ask Immigration Status (#1158)
Yesterday evening, Senator Coleman (R-MN) introduced an amendment, co-sponsored with Senator Bond (R-MO), urging enforcement of what he referred to as “the original intent of Section 642(b) of IIRAIRA.” This amendment, in essence, would override state and local government policies that encourage immigrants to contact the police when they are victims of or witnesses to a crime. Specifically, the amendment would ban what Senator Coleman termed local “sanctuary policies” that currently prevent state and local government officials and law enforcement officers from asking about immigration status during routine stops, including stops for traffic violations. Instead, this misguided amendment would allow those officials, and any government entity or official, in fact—even teachers and health care workers—to inquire about an individual’s immigration status if they have “probable cause to believe the individual is undocumented.”
Senators Menendez and Kennedy opened debate this morning with strong criticism of Senator Coleman’s amendment. Both Senators cited the potential this amendment will have for virtually legalizing racial profiling. “What constitutes probable cause, Senator Menendez asked, “Foreign accent? Skin color? A foreign name?” The Senators also noted that current law already provides ample authority for state and local police to assist federal immigration agents in enforcing the law against criminals and terrorists.
Senator Kennedy then posed the following question: “Does this amendment actually weaken, rather than strengthen, our security?” “Yes!” he declared, since immigrants simply will be unwilling to come forward and report to police on any useful information they might have. “Report to deport” is all the Coleman amendment achieves, he said, a notion that simply “makes no sense.” Another effect that the Coleman amendment will have, he added, is that not only will immigrant be afraid to report to police crimes they have witnessed for fear of being asked their immigration status, they also will fear seeking health care in many situations. For instance, immigrant victims of domestic violence and sexual assault naturally will become even more reluctant than they already are to safely report crimes committed against them to law enforcement agents.
As scheduled, voting on this amendment began at 12:45 pm. Once the final votes were tallied, the amendment was defeated by a very narrow margin, 48-49.
Dorgan Amendment to Sunset New Worker Program (#1181)
Senator Dorgan (D-ND) introduced an amendment, co-sponsored with Senators Durbin (D-IL) and Boxer (D-CA), that would sunset the new worker program after 5 years. In proposing the amendment, Senator Dorgan again recited the criticisms he made of the program prior to his failed amendment on Tuesday, an amendment which sought to eliminate the new worker program entirely. He argued that the new worker program amounts to nothing more than a “Byzantine” attempt by certain interest groups to lower the wages of American workers by hiring cheaper foreign workers. Senator Durbin added that a new worker program without sunset provisions would create a permanent underclass of people who never assimilate into the fabric of the country, who become dispossessed of rights and become disillusioned in the process. By example, he cited the current plight of working class Turks in Germany, and North Africans in France.
Senator Kennedy (D-MA) then took the floor and again issued a strong defense of the new worker program. He stressed the necessity of such a program for the economy and for American businesses, and argued that, far from driving down wages and taking American jobs, such a program actually ensures that American wages remain competitive and fair. Without a new worker program, he added, the hiring of cheaper, undocumented workers will persist and American workers will suffer, quite the opposite of Senator Dorgan’s earlier contentions. Furthermore, Senator Kennedy added that without a new worker program, the exploitation of undocumented workers by unscrupulous employers will continue, and the border will remain a sieve for more undocumented workers to come through. No job can be offered to any immigrant, he continued, before it is openly advertised and offered to American workers first. Finally, he contrasted the situations in Germany and France, brought up by Senator Dorgan, with that in the U.S., stating that the underlying bill provides new workers an opportunity to earn points toward permanent resident status under the new merit-based point system. Such a possibility does not exist in those other countries.
Senator Specter (R-PA) echoed similar sentiments in support of the new worker program, and urged his colleagues to vote against Senator Dorgan’s amendment. Senator Kyl agreed, calling this new Dorgan amendment merely a “light version of the amendment that was defeated” on Tuesday, and adding that “sunsetting” the program does nothing to eliminate illegal immigration into the country, since employers simply won’t have the workers they need to fill labor shortages and immigrants will continue to cross the border seeking available jobs.
This amendment was defeated, 48-49.
McCain Amendment Regarding Payment of Back Federal Taxes (#1185)
Senator McCain introduced an amendment regarding the payment of back taxes. While AILA has not yet seen the actually text of the amendment, we understand that it was included in last year’s Senate bill, S.2611, and requires those who legalize to pay back taxes for periods they worked while in undocumented status.
This amendment was accepted by voice vote.
Akaka Amendment Regarding Children of Filipino WWII Veterans (#1186)
Senator Akaka (D-HI) introduced an amendment yesterday that would exempt from the numerical limitations on family-based immigrants the unmarried and married sons and daughters of naturalized Filipino World War II veterans. Senator Kennedy expressed his support for this amendment.
This amendment passed by a vote of 87-9.
Sanders Amendment Raising Fees for H-1B Visas (#1223)
Senator Sanders (I-VT) introduced an amendment that would increase the fees for H-1B visas from $1,500 to $8,500. This additional fee would be on top of existing fees, and funds would be used for training and scholarship programs. Senator Sanders listed the Teamsters Union and the AFL-CIO among supporters of his amendment. Without this amendment, Senator Sanders said, “skilled middle class and upper middle class Americans” would be hurt, and their wages would continue to be suppressed. Senator Sanders cited evidence that certain U.S. companies admit hiring foreign H-1B workers over American workers because “foreign workers are willing to work for less money than Americans,” earning “huge profits” as a result.
Just prior to the vote, Senator Sanders announced that he had made changes to his amendment, dropping the fee for H-1B visas from the $8,500 he proposed earlier, down to $5,000. Following Senator Sanders’ announcement, Senators Kennedy and Specter expressed their support for the bill.
This amendment was accepted, 59-35.
Vitter Amendment to Prevent Legalization of the 12 Million Undocumented (#1157)
Senator Vitter (R-LA) introduced an amendment that “strikes at the heart” of the underlying bill. The amendment seeks “to eliminate the fundamentally flawed Z visa amnesty” provision from the underlying bill, thereby preventing undocumented immigrants from legalizing. He stated that “rewarding illegal behavior, as was done in
the 1986 amnesty,” sent the wrong message to those outside the country wanting to get in, many of whom are here today in undocumented status. This message, he argued, must not be repeated, so the Z visa provisions in Title VI should be taken out of the underlying bill. Senator DeMint (R-SC) voiced support for this amendment.
Senators Specter and Kennedy attacked this amendment, saying it essentially guts the major thrust behind the underlying legislation, making the entire bill virtually obsolete should the amendment pass.
This amendment failed, 29-66.
The following amendments were introduced, but voting on them was delayed until after the Memorial Day recess.
Dodd Amendment (#1199)
Senator Dodd introduced an amendment he spoke about yesterday, seeking to increase family unification. The amendment would address provisions in the current bill curtailing provisions for parents of U.S. citizen (USC) sponsors. In particular, it would increase the green card cap on visas issued to parents of USCs to 90,000, up from the 40,000 set aside in the underlying bill, making sure sufficient numbers of visas are available to those parents coming to the U.S. It also would lengthen parent visitor stays to 180 days, up from the 30 days allowed for in the underlying bill. Finally, the amendment would make penalties for parent overstays applicable only to those parents, not their USC sponsors.
Senator Menendez expressed strong support for this amendment, as he did yesterday, chastising those who characterize family reunification as mere “chain migration,” and declaring that those who denigrate parents coming to the US, wanting to join their USC children, have simply chosen to dismiss the very essence of what America was built on.
Voting on this amendment was delayed until after the Memorial Day recess.
Cornyn Amendment Expanding Restrictions on Immigration Benefits and Due Process (#1184)
Yesterday, Senator Cornyn (R-TX) introduced an amendment that would expand restrictions on immigration benefits and due process, closing what Senator Cornyn terms “loopholes” in the underlying bill that allow legalization of what he called “absconders,” those who have failed to deport after being ordered deported, or who have reentered the country unlawfully after being removed. The full ramifications of this amendment are still being grappled with, but it is becoming increasingly clear that this amendment, if passed, would exclude a large portion of the undocumented population from the legalization program in the underlying bill. Moreover, because of its retroactivity provisions, this amendment would further aggravate the devastating impact of the
material support bar and would prevent vulnerable populations from certain forms of protection through immigration relief.
Senator Menendez took to the floor to offer his strong opposition to the bill, focusing in particular on the dangers of retroactivity provisions in any legislation. How fair is it, he asked, to punish someone for doing something that was legal when they did it? Regarding immigration laws in particular, such retroactivity, he declared, was near universally recognized as a policy that led to tremendous harm in prior laws, and for this reason, was eliminated in all prior negotiations leading up to the underlying bill. Senator Cornyn was being disingenuous at best, Senator Menendez implied, by trying to insert it into the bill now through his amendment.
Voting on this amendment was delayed until after the Memorial Day recess.
Menendez Amendment (#1194)
Senator Menendez introduced an amendment, co-sponsored by several other senators, that would move the cut-off date for legal immigration applicants from the May 1, 2005 date proposed in the underlying bill, to January 1, 2007, the same date proposed for legalization of the undocumented. “All this amendment does, Senator Menendez said, “is bring justice and fairness to the underlying bill by treating legal applicants and the undocumented the same.” The amendment “provides the same cut-off date for those who played by the rules and are sponsored to come here by a United States citizen, as those who entered in undocumented status with nobody sponsoring them.”
The amendment also would add 100,000 green cards a year to aggressively reduce the backlog and avoid lengthening the eight-year deadline for clearing the adult children and sibling backlog. This backlog clearance must be completed before immigrants in the new legalization program can begin obtaining legal permanent residency status.
Voting on this amendment was delayed until after the Memorial Day recess.
McConnell Amendment Requiring ID Cards to Vote in National Elections (#1170)
Senator McConnell (R-KY) introduced an amendment requiring that individuals across the country present a government issued, valid, photo identification card in order to register to vote. The impetus behind this amendment, he said, was a story about undocumented individuals in San Antonio who voted despite not being citizens of the U.S. Senator McConnell said he was sure that “such a story, if true, is certainly happening elsewhere” as well.
Voting on this amendment was delayed until after the Memorial Day recess.
Feingold Amendment to Set Up Commissions to Study U.S. Treatment of Refugees During WWII (#1176)
Senator Feingold (D-WI) introduced an amendment setting up commissions to review the circumstances surrounding injustices suffered by European Americans, European Latin Americans, and Jewish refugees during World War II.
Sessions Amendment Preventing Those Who Legalize From Collecting Earned Income Tax Credit (#1235)
Senator Sessions (R-AL) introduced an amendment to prevent undocumented workers who legalize from collecting any benefits relating to the Earned Income Tax Credit.
Senator Kennedy offered a brief, but passionate criticism of the Sessions amendment, saying that while murderers and other criminals, many of whom have committed heinous crimes, still can collect the Earned Income Tax Credit, the Sessions amendment would prevent a person from collecting the tax credit simply for being in the country in undocumented status. Senator Kennedy said that he would reserve the rest of his comments on this amendment for a later time during the debate.
Durbin Amendment to Require Jobs Be Offered to Americans Before Y Visa Holders
Senator Durbin (D-IL) introduced an amendment to require that jobs be offered to Americans before they are offered to Y visa holders in the new worker program, and removes a provision in the underlying bill allowing the Secretary of Labor to declare labor shortages. Senator Durbin asked that this amendment be considered after the Memorial Day recess.
In general, AILA believes this “bargain” bill is unacceptable and unworkable in its current form. However, while the process is still very much in flux, we are working closely with our allies to improve the bargain as much as possible during Senate floor debate over the next few weeks. We will keep you posted about amendment information as it becomes available.