WorldEsquire Law Firm

THE MISAPPLICATION OF IMMIGRATION AND NATIONALITY ACT (INA) 245i AS RE-ENACTED IN THE LIFE ACT IS ABSOLUTELY UNCONSTITUTIONAL Part Two ... Since the passage of the Life Act however, then INS and now Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have burdened this law to the point that it denies most potential beneficiaries of the privilege conferred upon them by Congress and only works for a select group of people selected by DHS. This is contrary to the law enacted by Congress in the first place and is a blatant exercise of the legislative powers by an agency that is constitutionally prohibited from enacting laws. The truth is that, had 245i been applied as intended, the number of undocumented immigrants would have been much, much less than the 11 million currently talked about. Just like DOMA now declared unconstitutional, 245i should be interpreted as per the edicts of Congress, not those of a federal agency. In a nutshell, the confusion stems from the BrandX/Chevron line of cases in which the US Supreme Court directed its lower courts to defer to federal agencies under the executive power created to apply Congress' legislation (like USCIS, IRS, etc.) where such agencies existed. Of course, give them an inch, they will take a mile. What ended up happening is that the federal agencies, instead of executing Congress' will, began to shape Congress' laws into regulations according to their desires with the result of completely changing the intent and efficacy of the law itself. The concerned agencies, one of which is DHS’s USCIS and the US Department of Justice’s Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), created a new de facto 245i law by peeling the layers of that law as contained in the Life Act of 2000 and proceeded to execute it unabashedly without any input from Congress at all. Those agencies are prohibited from doing that, no matter who tells them they can, US Supreme Court and all. What needs to be understood is that the US Supreme Court can no more confer upon me the right to legislate than it can to the executive branch. The executive branch is prohibited from dictating to the judiciary branch how to interpret laws. And yet, that is exactly what is happening in Immigration Law. Section 245i is broader than the DHS' unconstitutional interpretation. No branch of the government has been given power under the Constitution to usurp the jurisdiction conferred upon another; and neither can that jurisdiction be voluntarily relinquished to the benefit of another branch. The Constitution requires three (3) separate and independent branches. Period.

USCIS SIMPLIFIES IMMIGRANT FEE PAYMENT PROCESS On 8/31/2015 USCIS simplified the process for paying the USCIS Immigrant Fee online in their electronic immigration system or ELIS. The revised payment process reduces the amount of information an immigrant must provide to USCIS. Also now, anyone like a family member, friend, employer, attorney, etc. can pay the USCIS Immigrant Fee for any given immigrant as long as they have the immigrant’s Alien Registration Number (A-Number) and NVC Case Number. The USCIS Immigrant Fee is required for individuals immigrating to the United States as lawful permanent residents following their successful interview at a US Consulate abroad. USCIS uses this fee to process, produce, and deliver Permanent Resident Cards (Green Cards)."

THE BEGINNING OF THE RESTORATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL ORDER IN IMMIGRATION LAW I thought you should read this: USA v. Diaz Aguilar...Continue reading

URGENT: SOME DACA RECIPIENTS WHO RECEIVED THREE-YEAR WORK PERMITS MUST RETURN THEM IMMEDIATELY 07/27/2015. DACA recipients should be advised the three-year work permit recall only applies to SOME individuals who received a card after the February 16, 2015, court order. If you received a letter or were contacted directly by USCIS regarding the recall of certain three-year work permits, you must IMMEDIATELY return your three-year work permit, also called an Employment Authoriza...tion Document, to your local USCIS office. If you fail to return your card, USCIS will terminate your DACA and all employment authorizations effective July 31, 2015. Please carefully read the information USCIS sent to you or visit uscis.gov for details. New resources are available at uscis.gov including: A new online tool that three-year DACA recipients can use to verify whether they need to return their work permit A new quick facts Web page A fact sheet (also available in Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Tagalog and Vietnamese) If you have not been contacted by USCIS and you received a three-year card after February 16, 2015, you should use the new online tool or call the USCIS Customer Service line at 800-375-5283 and select option 1 for English, then option 8 to verify whether you are affected BEFORE returning your card. Please do not forget to like WorldEsquire.com on Facebook. It laways encourages us to post more knowing that someone is reading the posts. Thanks.

AND LET THERE BE PROVISIONAL WAIVERS FOR ALL The Department of Homeland Security aims to expand eligibility for provisional waivers of certain grounds of inadmissibility based on unlawful presence to all aliens who are statutorily eligible for such a waiver and are seeking said waiver in connection with an immigrant visa application, if they meet other conditions. DHS proposes to do this in two principal ways. First, under this proposed rule, the provisional waiver would b...e made available to everyone who statutorily eligible for a waiver of unlawful presence and meets certain conditions and not just certain immediate relatives of U.S. citizens. Second, an applicant for a provisional waiver would be permitted to establish eligibility by showing extreme hardship to any qualifying relative (U.S. citizen, LPR spouses or parents). USCIS will do this to encourage the completion of the visa process abroad as required by law in certain circumstances and improve administrative efficiency. Stay tuned, we’ve got at least 6 months until this happens. See more

QUE PASO REALMENTE CON DAPA EN LA DECISION DEL QUINTO CIRCUITO FEDERAL? Dos jueces federales sobre los tres que dieron audiencia para poder seguir con la ejecución de la DAPA decidieron en contra porque pensaron que el gobierno federal no va a lograr el caso cuando este examinado en fondo. Estos jueces son ya conocidos como jueces muy involucrados en la política. Nada mas paso. El caso propio de la DAPA será examinada en fondo en el mes de Julio este ano, si la administració...n Obama no gana ahí, entoces lo apelara a la corte mas alta del país. La lógica aplicada por estos jueces no fue en línea con las decisiones previas de este mismo circuito de la corte federal. Uno de los jueces no fue de acuerdo con esta decisión y publico su propio razonamiento para una decisión contraria a la que se tomo y era mucho mas informativo e logico. De todos modos, se trata de las leyes de Inmigracion en este caso y eso es una aria totalmente controlado por el gobierno federal. Los estados tienen que obedecer a la autoridad federal en esta aria de las leyes. Entonces nada importante realmente paso con DAPA. Seguimos adelante.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED WITH DAPA AT THE 5TH CIRCUIT? Two very political federal judges of the sitting three refused to lift the injunction on the implementation of DAPA because they believed that among other things, the Obama Administration’s Appeal will not likely succeed on the merits. Nothing else. Their reasoning is something tortured and new frankly since it does not line up with their own circuit’s previous decisions on similar issues. The Appeal itself will be taken up t...his coming July and if not successful, the Administration will certainly appeal to the US Supreme Court and win there. The dissenting opinion is more informative and provides a blue print as to how to deconstruct the overbroad faulty logic applied in the prevailing opinion. Keep in mind that after all is said and done, this is about Immigration Law, which is an area the federal government has total control over. All others are subordinate to it and must bend the knee. Nothing very important really happened to DAPA as of yet. Stay tuned. See more

CONGRESS SHOULD AT LEAST UPDATE THE REGISTRY DATE Under the the Registry provision of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), those people of good moral character who have continuously resided in the US since January 1, 1972 and are not otherwise inadmissible, can apply to adjust to legal permanent resident status or green card. This is because they have been here in the US since or before January 1, 1972 and therefore have arguably elected to and established ...residency in the US. Their status should and will be adjusted upon request and if they meet the other green card requirements. This is yet another tool in the basket that Congress is neglecting to use in order to boost the revenues, numbers and demand for goods and services among other things. The last time that the registry provision was changed was 40 years ago. Prior to that, it had taken Congress another 41 years to update the Registry provision. This provision seems ripe for updating lest it should become insignificant in the fabric of our immigration laws. Among the grown-ups of both conservative and liberal persuasion, a consensus exists as to the need to update all of our immigration laws. It was President John F. Kennedy who said in his book published in 1958, A Nation of Immigrants, that Immigration policy should be generous, fair and flexible. JFK posited that [e]very ethnic minority, in seeking its own freedom, helped strengthen the fabric of liberty in American life. Similarly, every aspect of the American economy has profited from the contributions of immigrants. Unless the point of the Registry provision under IRCA is to bestow the privilege of residency upon those at the bottoming arch of their lives and usefulness, it should be updated at more regular intervals so that those able to qualify for it may be able to repay the kindness visited upon them during the height of their usefulness in life. This is preferable in order to minimize the time that a potentially qualified applicant spends at the fringes of the legal productive society.

CIR HOPES REMAINS ALIVE FOR 2013 On Sunday November 24, 2013, the Assistant Majority Leader of the House Rep. Kevin McCarthy (a Californian, of course) announced on "Face the Nation" that Immigration Reform was not dead at all for 2013 and could be achieved before the end of the year. He said that it would have to be on a piecemeal approach. Better than nothing, right? Not to be outdone, President Obama announced his support for a piecemeal approach advocated by the GOP all t...his time. Whether that constitutes the kiss of death for CIR remains to be seen, but at some point the GOP is going to have to accept a victory, any victory, for what it is. It looks like the GOP is winning the day on Immigration Reform and now, there is nowhere to hide. The GOP is going to have to make good on its own piecemeal version of Immigration Reform. Are we to trust that this GOP Reform is somewhere in the offing? I trust and I will verify if you catch my drift. See more

WorldEsquire Law Firm Newsletter http://conta.cc/19Fc0rD