Although applications will be accepted on April 1^st, it is anticipated that demand will exceed the 65,000 available and the quota be filled by April 5^th. This will result in a visa lottery; something that has not occurred since 2008. USCIS has announced that it will inform the public when the quota has been reached.  It has also modified the date for those who have elected for premium processing, until April 15^th.

The urgency to prepare the necessary documentation required for the H1-B application NOW cannot be expressed enough.

All applications are subject to an initial filing with the Department of Labor (DOL) before filing an application with USCIS, is permitted.

Anyone wishing to apply for the visa should regard this consideration as a call to action and move forward immediately, if they are to be considered as a viable candidate for the H1-B visa. Also, in order maximize success and a timely filing, those wishing to apply are advised to consult with a reputable and experienced attorney, with knowledge of the complicated process involved.

Only those working for non-profit organizations that are affiliated to private schools or institutes of higher learning, are exempt from the quota. Anyone who is already in possession of an H1-B and currently working and resides in the US, are also considered exempt.

The H1-B visa is highly desirable since it is a six-year visa that can be additionally renewed annually, thereafter, provided that an application for alien labor certification has been filed, at least 1 year prior to the expiration of the sixth year. Simultaneously, the applicant is permitted to seek permanent residence or “Green-Card,” status and eventually citizenship, should they so choose.

The process is considered somewhat dysfunctional, especially for employers whom are forced to anticipate the numbers of employees, six months prior to any expansion or contraction of normal business.

Students who are currently engaged in Optional Practical Training (OPT) are also affected by the quota; although are granted extensions of OPT status, until the October 1^st H1-B visa takes effect.

The program was in place for a little over a year in 2009, but was suspended in January 2010, after a shooting incident at Fort Hood, Tex. The program filled quickly which inspired eager applicants to turn to Facebook, urging the army to reinitiate it.

The program, known as Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest, or MAVNI, allows legal immigrants in the US on temporary visas to enlist in the Army for a period of two or more years.

The response has been, apparently, overwhelming and has attracted an unusually educated and skilled coterie of immigrants in to the armed forces. Most importantly for some, it permits applicants to naturalize as an American citizen at the end of basic training, which many choose to do.

 A spokeswoman for the Pentagon said that the program was intended to fill the “most critical readiness needs.” During this round of recruiting, the army is seeking dentists, surgeons and mental health professionals to help with the severe emotional strains on soldiers who have seen combat action during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.  Most recruits who enter the program are likely to be sent to combat zones.

In general, those who are not citizens must possess a “Green-Card” or permanent resident visa to be eligible.

Speaker of the House, John Boehner, speaking to ABC News, seeking to clarify their new-found positions, stated that he was ready for a “comprehensive approach” and expressed his confidence that congress and President Obama, could find “common ground to take care of this issue once and for all.”

Mr. Boehner, received support from the Attorney General of Utah, Mark Shurtleff, who is also a conservative Republican. He is part of an education initiative aimed at encouraging other Republicans that “they need to reject the run-‘em out, deport-‘em, enforcement only approach,” that has dominated the Republican Party, thus far.

The whisperings of immigration reform in the Republican Party are thought to be a direct result of the overwhelming landslide of support for President Obama, among the Latino electorate, a stunning 77%.  Mitt Romney, the Republican challenger garnered only 27%.

Mr. Romney never fully recovered after making public his views on “self-deportation” as a solution to the estimated 12 million immigrants in the US illegally. It was also probably no co-incidence that President Obama’s administration decided to adopt a policy of deferred action at around the same time. The President’s initiative is thought to offer relief for as many as 1.2 Million young immigrants, who were brought to the US as minors. The measure became instantly popular among Latinos who chose to overlook the 1.4 million immigrants deported, during the course of his first term. 

However, it is unlikely that any new immigration reform would occur without dissent and there are already rumblings of disagreement. Many, including Sean Hannity, the right-leaning, political commentator, said that although his views on immigration reform had “evolved,” he would like to see the borders secured before any there was a concrete offer of a path to citizenship.

In the interim, Deferred Action is still on the table as a means for young immigrants to avoid deportation, obtain a work permit and a US driver’s license. In lieu of any new proposals, this will have to suffice for now. Anyone who believes they may be eligible for the DACA initiative is encouraged to continue to apply.

When an undocumented parent is detained by law enforcement, they are often removed to a detention center with little or no opportunity to arrange for alternate childcare. If a parent is unable to arrange for a replacement parent or relative to care for the child, there is a distinct possibility that they may forfeit all parental rights, a situation that may continue for a period of months or even years.  Since the benchmark for children in foster care or under the supervision of child welfare agencies is impossibly high, parental rights may be terminated while the parent is deported back to their country of citizenship. This scenario is even more likely if the child is a US citizen.

The two bills passed in California.

•  AB2015-Calls for Kids ensures that parents who are detained by law enforcement agencies are able to make phone calls to arrange for childcare. This law is based on the existing California statute that allows anyone arrested to make two phone calls. However, in actuality this is often not properly explained or is ignored. The bill requires the arresting officer to inquire (in their native tongue) if the arrestee is a parent and inform them that they have the right top two phone calls.
•  SB 1064 Reuniting Immigrant Families- permits juvenile courts to allow detained or deported parents, more time to reunite with their children. It also affirms that a person’s immigration status is not a disqualifying factor in evaluating a child’s placement. It also permits an individual to use a non-US form of identification (I.D. card, passport, etc.) to obtain a fingerprint clearance and become a placement option for a relative’s children. Finally, it offers guidelines to social workers working with minors requiring specific immigration options and authorizes state authorities to work with foreign consulates to protect the rights of the parent.

The move has been hailed as “a victory for those who were brought to this country through no fault of their own and are only asking to be included in and contribute to American Society,”  said Assemblyman, Gil Cedillo. He also spoke in support of the Governor, praising him for choosing “public safety over politics.”

However, Governor Brown vetoed another immigration bill, known as the ‘Trust Act.’ which if effected, could have prevented some illegal immigrants from deportation for minor infractions, such as traffic offenses. The bill was aimed at the federal ‘Secure Communities’ program which allows law enforcement officials to check the fingerprints of those they arrest against a federal immigration database. The bill would also have prevented law enforcement from detaining suspected illegal immigrants for possible deportation, unless they were charged with a serious or violent felony.

The ‘Secure Communities’ program has created a storm of controversy and is resented by many states because of its detrimental effects on the community. With no clearly defined mandate and no regulatory body to govern the program, law enforcement has been criticized for using it as a general deportation facilitation tool.

Supporters of the ‘Trust Act’ argue that ‘Secure Communities’ targets otherwise law-abiding citizens and wastes valuable local resources. The program is also credited with generating immense distrust between immigrant communities and law-enforcement agencies.

Anyone, who has had an unlawful presence in the US for more than 180 days, is subject to the 10 year bar, when applying for permanent resident status.  It is always triggered when individuals leave the US, for consular processing in their country of citizenship.  In addition, anyone who entered the country illegally, without inspection, is compelled to return home to obtain a lawful visa and to re-enter the US legally.

Most recently, the United States Customs and Immigration Service (USCIS) has stated that the 10 year bar will be waived if the US citizen spouse or parent can prove that there will be an extreme hardship if the family is separated for any prolonged period.  It must be stated that demonstrating an ‘extreme hardship ‘ is a complicated and involved process and applicants are advised to consult with an experienced attorney with knowledge of this matter.

Under the program, which is being called a “Stateside Waiver”, immediate relatives of a US citizen are permitted to apply for an unlawful presence waiver of the 10-year bar, while still in the US, which eliminates the fear and risk of being denied a waiver, while outside of the US. This also reduces the possibility that the individual will be denied re-entry to the US. Immediate relatives are a spouse, parents of a US citizen at least 21 years of age, parents of a US citizen and unmarried children under the age of 21 years.

Under current USCIS guidelines, applicants are only permitted to apply for the waiver to the 10–year, from abroad and only after departing the US.

The ‘Stateside Waiver’ program is expected to be in place before the end of 2012.

Presidential hopeful, Mitt Romney, appears virulently anti-immigration and hence, there is no guarantee that this waiver will remain in place, if he is elected president. Therefore, anyone who believes they may be eligible for the program is advised to consult with an attorney, before any new immigration mandates issued under the Obama administration, are nullified or changed.

The new guidelines are in keeping with the 2011 decision by DHS to maintain a focus on immigrants with criminal histories and repeat offenders. ICE considers those with no criminal history, and who do not pose a threat to national security, to be a low priority for deportation and removal. However, it should be stressed that this is not permanent legal status, but instead offers a degree of protection against a forced separation, in the face of immigration inequality. Similar to the President’s new DACA initiative, it would seek a form of prosecutorial discretion, in order to defer or stay an order of deportation.

In light of recent remarks by President Obama and the Democratic Party, in support of same-sex marriage, there have been renewed calls to allow the 36,000 Americans in same sex relationships, the opportunity to sponsor their spouses for permanent residence, in the same manner that opposite sex couples can. This would however, require the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be overturned and DOMA currently, only recognizes a legal union between two people of the opposite sex.

The Obama administration has called the law unconstitutional and said it would no longer defend it in court.

 While possession of less than 28 grams of marijuana is generally NOT considered a deportable offense, the mitigating factor in this case, is that the amount and type of narcotic was unspecified and unknown. Therefore, this seemingly innocuous charge and the implication, that the individual was wandering in a neighborhood with the intent to buy or sell narcotics, is considered by Immigration Customs and Enforcement to be on a par with that of drug trafficking. Drug trafficking is classified as an aggravated felony and the permanent resident was ordered deported permanently, back to their country of citizenship.

An ‘aggravated felony’ of this kind, has never been successfully fought prior to Teplen Law Group’s efforts to do so, and historically, the permanent resident is always deported; However, not in this case.

Based on the exhaustive written brief of equity law and the vast array of testimonials by industry and government leaders, assembled by Teplen Law Group in support of the individual, they were able to successfully petition the judge to dismiss the deportation proceeding. The individual is now in the process of applying for naturalization.

With that approval, Teplen Law Group was able to schedule a second interview at the Consulate in Paris where he had been residing. A memo was submitted, along with the petition, arguing that the individual did not need a waiver for the fraud charge, because the misrepresentation was not in fact material. The Consulate was swayed by the argument and agreed that the fraud charge would not bar him from entry into the USA.  The client entered the United States as a green card holder, October 2012.

Thankfully some states in the US are taking a more informed and educated response to the President’s version of the DREAM Act (DACA) instead of the customary knee-jerk reaction that any talk of immigration relief, generally produces. With that in mind, Teplen Law Group applauds the move by the State of Maryland, to allow undocumented immigrants to pay in-state tuition fees.

It has always been generally accepted premise that well-educated students earn more, pay more in taxes and are less likely to rely on government assistance.

Therefore, the Maryland DREAM Act permits illegal immigrants, graduating from in-state high schools (in addition to other criteria) the opportunity to pay in-state tuition at Maryland state community colleges and public universities. 

In a new study from the Maryland Institute for Policy Analysis and Research at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, titled Private and Government Fiscal Costs and Benefits of the Maryland Dream Act; it states that the Maryland version of the DREAM Act would be an economic windfall.   It projects that its own DREAM Act would generate approximately $66 million to the Maryland State economy.

The report also estimates, albeit conservatively, that approximately $24.6 million in fiscal benefits would be generated through higher income tax revenues, increased sales taxes and increases in property taxes, as recipients earn higher incomes. It also states that this demographic would also be less likely to commit crimes, be incarcerated, and receive income support or other government health-care subsidies, all of which could potentially result in reduced public spending.

The statistics for the nation as a whole are even more compelling. It is estimated that passage of the DREAM Act would add more than $329 billion to the economy by 2030, generate 1.4 million new jobs and generate $10 billion in revenue for the federal government.

Although relatively few Maryland high-school graduates will likely take advantage of the opportunity to go onto higher education, the law is nevertheless a common-sense solution, especially at a time when many states are struggling to shore up their budgets and find extra revenue.  Not only is it fair and compassionate, it makes sound economic sense and benefits all its residents; which Governors like Phil Bryant and likely Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, should probably be reminded of, from time to time.