Our law firm is still open for business. In furtherance of Washington's "Stay Home, Stay Healthy" Order and CDC guidelines, beginning Monday, March 23, 2020 until further notice we will be doing consultations and meetings through telephone or video conferencing. To schedule a consultation please call (425) 947-1130 or email info@gillinlaw.com
1 Comment
The President issued a proclamation last Friday that will potentially bar new immigrants from the U.S. if they do not have unsubsidized health insurance or cannot prove they have a demonstrated ability to pay for unsubsidized health insurance.
The proclamation gives immigrants 30 days from entry to acquire unsubsidized health insurance, meaning that any plan part of the Affordable Care Act or other government program is ineligible. It is unclear whether immigration officers will enforce the requirement before entry, or if families will be allowed entry with proof they are financially able to purchase health insurance. This proclamation will hit family-based immigration and the diversity lottery the hardest. Exceptions to the rule include children of U.S. citizens and children adopted by U.S. citizens, among others. The rule will go into effect on November 3. Anyone who is able to adjust status from within the United States, rather than filing for an immigrant visa, should do so, because adjustment of status is outside the scope of the proclamation. Also, anyone able to get their immigrant visa before November 3, 2019 should make every effort to do so. It was reported by a spokesperson from the USCIS Seattle Field Office yesterday that effective immediately, Naturalization applicants living south of Seattle and on the Olympic Peninsula will have to go to the USCIS Field Office in Portland, Oregon for their Naturalization interviews. Applicants living east of Seattle will have to go to the USCIS Field Office in Yakima, Washington.
This information, obtained by a colleague of mine with AILA-WA, shared the reasons given by USCIS for this change: - Due to increased processing times of Natz cases in Seattle office there has been a national decision to shift pending N-400 applications to other USCIS offices close by; - Pending applications with address "South of Seattle proper" (including Auburn, Des Moines, Federal Way and south from there) will be interviewed and adjudicated in Portland (he wasn't sure about Kent and Renton); - Pending applications with address "East of Seattle proper" (including Bellevue, Issaquah and east from there) will be interviewed and adjudicated in Yakima; - This is a temporary measure and the end date is TBD; - All biometrics appointment appointments will still take place in Seattle; - First notices to come in the next 45 days with first interviews in late July - early August; - Reschedule requests will have to be directed to the offices at which the interview was to take place. ![]() USCIS updated its Policy Manual to clarify that violations of federal controlled substance law (even where such activity has been decriminalized), including violations involving marijuana, are generally a bar to establishing good moral character for naturalization, even where that conduct would not be an offense under state law. Federal law classifies marijuana as a “Schedule I” controlled substance whose manufacture (which includes production, such as planting, cultivation, growing, or harvesting), distribution, dispensing, or possession may lead to immigration consequences. ![]() Updating earlier guidance, USCIS announced new guidance last week that it would now hold interviews earlier in the Form I-130 adjudication process for certain spousal petitions involving minors. Those certain petitions involve situations where:
This new guidance will pose an additional obstacle, likely in the form of additional waiting times, for certain spousal petitions involving minors. Petitions that fall under these scenarios will also likely have a higher bar in showing the bona fides of the spousal relationship earlier in the petition process. The guidance relates to spousal petitions in both Adjustment of Status and immigrant visa cases. By Brandon Gillin
On July 11, 2014, USCIS published a new Interim Policy Memorandum providing guidance on the adjudication of H-1B petitions for nursing occupations. This new guidance updates previous guidance published in 2002. USCIS indicates that this new guidance is needed "because of changes in the nursing industry." Generally, nurses do not qualify for H-1B status because a four-year degree is not required to become a registered nurse (RN). However, USCIS notes, "the private sector is increasingly showing a preference for more highly educated nurses." To that end, certain "Advance Practice Registered Nurses" who practice in more specialized areas such as in addiction, cardiovascular, critical care, emergency room, genetics, neonatology, nephrology, oncology, pediatrics, peri-operative (operating room), and rehabilitation, may qualify for H-1B status. However, each occupation is defined by the regulatory body (state legislature and Board of Nursing), so it is important that the occupation be one that the regulatory body defines as requiring a baccalaureate or higher degree.. For example, if a state requires at least a bachelor's degree in nursing to obtain a nursing license, an RN position in that state would generally be considered a "specialty occupation" and thus meet that prong of the H-1B eligibility test. Unfortunately at this time no state requires a bachelor's degree in nursing for licensure; but certain APRN positions as noted above may qualify for H-1B if the petitioner shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the proffered position qualifies as a specialty occupation. The interim policy memorandum can be found here. Brandon Gillin is an immigration lawyer with Gillin Law Group, PLLC in Lynnwood, Washington. His practice includes filing H-1B petitions on behalf of nurses. He can be reached at (425) 947-1130. By Brandon Gillin
The case, J.E.F.M. v. Holder, is a class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington which alleges that U.S. Federal agencies with immigration-related responsibilities failed to provide a "full and fair hearing" under the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment to the influx of children migrating to the U.S. from several Central American countries. The plaintiffs of the case are:
Each of these plaintiffs is currently scheduled to appear before an immigration judge for a hearing on removability. None of the plaintiffs are afforded an attorney. U.S. law states that criminal defendants are afforded an attorney at the expense of the government, but that is not the case in immigration court. "It is simply unacceptable that children are forced to stand alone before an immigration judge, pitted against trained attorneys from the federal government," said Matt Adams, legal director for Northwest Immigrant Rights Project. "Any notion of justice or fair play requires that these children be provided legal representation." (from the American Immigration Council). Brandon Gillin is an immigration lawyer with Gillin Law Group, PLLC in Lynnwood, Washington. By Brandon Gillin
Elizabeth Kennedy, a Fulbright Scholar at the American Immigration Council recently wrote a nice piece on why Central American children are arriving in droves at the southern U.S. border. Despite claims of certain U.S. politicians, the Obama administration's August 2012 implementation of the "Consideration of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" policy is not among the reasons for the influx of children arriving from Central America. Instead, the reasons are: (1) organized crime, gangs, and violence in their home countries; (2) extreme poverty in rural areas; (3) no support from the governments of their home countries; and to a lesser extent, (4) family reunification in the United States. Also noted by Kennedy is that many families who are removed from the U.S. (or who are returned via voluntary departure) to their home countries face additional threats of violence and extortion. Immigration policies already in place, such as Temporary Protected Status, have alleviated similar concerns in the past. It is not as if remedies for this influx of children do not exist. Lawmakers simply need to recognize the need for humanitarian relief, and enact clear laws to address such need. Brandon Gillin is an immigration lawyer with Gillin Law Group, PLLC in Lynnwood, Washington. ![]() By Brandon Gillin The Hill reports that House Speaker Boehner has hired Rebecca Tellent, a former John McCain staffer, as an immigration reform aide. This move has many speculating that Boehner wants to pass immigration reform, which is in line with Boehner's statements from late November that immigration reform is "absolutely not" dead. Brandon Gillin is an immigration lawyer with Gillin Law Group, PLLC in Lynnwood, Washington. ![]() By Brandon Gillin Talk Radio News Service reports that earlier this week immigration reform activists delivered 6,000 letters to 60 House Republican lawmakers from children of individuals who have been deported or face deportation from the U.S. Last year USCIS created a program to allow young undocumented individuals the ability to request Deferred Action and two-year work authorization. The program has seen success, but reports show that of the people who are eligible, only about half have applied. Proponents of immigration reform home that a new law (the Senate's version is what many hope for) will enable the parents of these children to gain what may be called Provision Resident Status, which could lead to Permanent Resident Status and perhaps U.S. citizenship if certain eligibility criteria are met for a number of years. Brandon Gillin is an immigration lawyer with Gillin Law Group, PLLC in Lynnwood, Washington. |
Brandon Gillin is an immigration lawyer with Gillin Law Group, PLLC in Lynnwood, Washington, with clients all over the United States and the world.
Archives
March 2020
Categories
All
|