USC I130 Petitioners Should file a Class Action Lawsuit against the Obama Administration

[Monalisa22 84]

United States Citizens are getting the shaft in the US immigration process. Due to the Obama administration signing the executive order DACA which allows children of illegal immigrants to obtain visa's has hurt United States citizens who are petitioning their immediate relatives. The backlog I130 petitioners are experiencing are due to the president's action. Some of President's critics argue this executive order is unconstitutional because the action was not approved by congress. USC petitioners rights are being violated. Illegal immigrants and permanent residents have become a priority over United States citizens in the immigration process. This is unacceptable and it must end now.

[cdneh 3,112]

United States Citizens are getting the shaft in the US immigration process. Due to the Obama administration signing the executive order DACA which allows children of illegal immigrants to obtain visa's has hurt United States citizens who are petitioning their immediate relatives. The backlog I130 petitioners are experiencing are due to the president's action. Some of President's critics argue this executive order is unconstitutional because the action was not approved by congress. USC petitioners rights are being violated. Illegal immigrants and permanent residents have become a priority over United States citizens in the immigration process. This is unacceptable and it must end now.

No, they are not being violated. It is not a right, it is a privilege.

[aaron2020 11,651]

Disagree with you.

What is the right that is being violated?

Stop with the "me me me only attitude." Work on my case because it's important and screw others.

[apple21 953]

Do not equate illegal aliens with LPRs.

You are free to sue the government. Good luck.

[Monalisa22 84]

No, they are not being violated. It is not a right, it is a privilege.

Evidently the person who wrote this is not a US citizen and does not understand the laws of our country. United States Citizens have the right to petition their immediate relatives. It is a law congress enacted. Illegal immigrants should not have any rights over United States citizens. We are not talking about obtaining a driver's license. If United States citizens knew what the hell was going on they would not be so supportive of immigration reform. This is an election year and this issue needs to be debated in the press.

[Monalisa22 84]

1. Citizens have full rights and protections under the United States Constitution. Non-citizens, even lawful permanent residents with long term residence in the United States, may face the loss of their status under certain circumstances as a result of changes in immigration law.
2. U.S. citizens are able to sponsor immediate relatives (spouses, unmarried minor children and parents) for Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status without a long wait for a visa to become available. The may also sponsor these other relatives, subject to visa availability:
   1. unmarried adult sons and daughters;
   2. married sons and daughters; and,
   3. brothers and sisters.
3. Possession of a United States passport.
4. Ability to travel, and even live, abroad without fear of jeopardizing LPR status.
5. Citizens may not be removed, or deported, from the United States. They are also able to re-enter the United States easily without being required to establish admissibility each time.
6. Ability to vote and fully participate in the U.S. electoral process.
7. Only U.S. citizens are able to hold elected public office.
8. Eligibility for many government-related jobs is restricted to citizens only.
9. Eligibility for public benefits from which non-citizens, including LPRs, may be excluded.
10. Receipt of Social Security benefits worldwide without concern over reciprocity agreements.
11. Entitlement to substantial deductions on U.S. estate tax.
12. No address change or other CIS reporting requirements.
13. Citizens are always eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits, which many non-citizens may not be.

http://immlaw.com/citizenship.html

[Ontarkie 14,151]

~~Moved to General Immigration-Related Discussion~~

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

• Citizens have full rights and protections under the United States Constitution. Non-citizens, even lawful permanent residents with long term residence in the United States, may face the loss of their status under certain circumstances as a result of changes in immigration law.
• U.S. citizens are able to sponsor immediate relatives (spouses, unmarried minor children and parents) for Legal Permanent Resident (LPR) status without a long wait for a visa to become available. The may also sponsor these other relatives, subject to visa availability:
  • unmarried adult sons and daughters;
  • married sons and daughters; and,
  • brothers and sisters.
• Possession of a United States passport.
• Ability to travel, and even live, abroad without fear of jeopardizing LPR status.
• Citizens may not be removed, or deported, from the United States. They are also able to re-enter the United States easily without being required to establish admissibility each time.
• Ability to vote and fully participate in the U.S. electoral process.
• Only U.S. citizens are able to hold elected public office.
• Eligibility for many government-related jobs is restricted to citizens only.
• Eligibility for public benefits from which non-citizens, including LPRs, may be excluded.
• Receipt of Social Security benefits worldwide without concern over reciprocity agreements.
• Entitlement to substantial deductions on U.S. estate tax.
• No address change or other CIS reporting requirements.
• Citizens are always eligible for Social Security and Medicare benefits, which many non-citizens may not be.

http://immlaw.com/citizenship.html

Are you saying *all* USC immigrant petitions should take precedence over LPRs? Curious as to why this is only raised now, given that for years the waiting list for certain family petitions (married children, siblings - I.e. immediate relatives, as per your original post) has been 10-20 years, whereas of course LPRs have been able to sponsor certain family members much quicker. And of course this has been the case long before the Obama administration came in.

If you don't think all USC petitions should take precedence, can you explain (1) where you think the dividing line is and why, and (2) why previous administrations escape blame?

For context, I'm a new LPR, lucky enough to have won the DV lottery. But my father, a USC, filed an immigrant petition for me over 5 years ago, and the current priority date in my category is still about 5 years earlier than the one assigned to our case...

Edited January 23, 2014 by SusieQQQ

[Monalisa22 84]

USC petitions always had precedence over LPR's petitions and this always should be the case. I am not understanding why people think this should not be the case. American citizens take precedence over non-citizens. It appears no one is fighting for the rights of US citizens anymore and allowing injustices to happens. Obama signed an executive order allowing children of illegal immigrants to obtain visas(DACA). This action has caused a massive back log for USC who petition for their immediate relatives. I am also seeing LPR's obtaining approvals much faster than USC. This is unfair. Immigration reform is being debated and the American people need to know how it's citizens are being treated. Many of Obama's critics believe his executive order is unconstitutional by not letting congress have a say. This issue needs to dealt with in the courts. United States Citizens must be the one who brings the case. If we don't fight for our rights no one else will.

[thedude6752000 360]

You're right, but LPR's are not the culprits. Illegals are. The suit would have to be about them, not the LPR's. LPR's still have to wait for the PD to become current before they can get through the NVC, our USC petitions get picked up straight away. The crime comes in what Obama has done with illegals, giving them precedence over us. The President does not have the right to give status to illegals, only Congress can do that, and he certainly does not have the right to give them precedence over us in naked defiance of the INA. There's your lawsuit.

[Boiler 44,980]

You appoint a lawyer file the case.

Let us know how you get on.

[SusieQQQ 11,586]

USC petitions always had precedence over LPR's petitions .

If you are lumping immediate relatives as one, no this has not always been the case. Certain immediate family petitions by USCs have been in backlog for so many years that you can measure them in terms of decades. Current priority dates for F3 preference category range from 1993-2003, and for F4 from 1990-2001. Even those petitions that haven't hit a per-country limit have therefore been waiting over a decade. If these had always had preference, there would have been no visas issued at all for LPR petitions for years already, until this backlog had been cleared. But I'm guessing you're not concerned about these, so the question is whether you object on principle or for your own petition reasons.

Edited January 24, 2014 by SusieQQQ

[Hotter Otter 1,211]

I don't think attacking LPR's is a great idea and I don't think a lawsuit would ultimately be successful. I think the best chance of achieving something is making the issues with our petitions and the prioritising of DACA widely known so that it becomes a political issue. What I really want is some accountability at USCIS.

[Monalisa22 84]

If you are lumping immediate relatives as one, no this has not always been the case. Certain immediate family petitions by USCs have been in backlog for so many years that you can measure them in terms of decades. Current priority dates for F3 preference category range from 1993-2003, and for F4 from 1990-2001. Even those petitions that haven't hit a per-country limit have therefore been waiting over a decade. If these had always had preference, there would have been no visas issued at all for LPR petitions for years already, until this backlog had been cleared. But I'm guessing you're not concerned about these, so the question is whether you object on principle or for your own petition reasons.

Did you not understand what I wrote. USC immediate relatives are spouses, parents,children under 21. I am not talking about brothers, children over 21. These are not considered immediate relatives.

[Monalisa22 84]

You're right, but LPR's are not the culprits. Illegals are. The suit would have to be about them, not the LPR's. LPR's still have to wait for the PD to become current before they can get through the NVC, our USC petitions get picked up straight away. The crime comes in what Obama has done with illegals, giving them precedence over us. The President does not have the right to give status to illegals, only Congress can do that, and he certainly does not have the right to give them precedence over us in naked defiance of the INA. There's your lawsuit.

I agree the LPR's are not the culprit. But I am noticing they are getting approvals a lot faster than USC. But you are correct DACA is really the issue. The courts need to set a precedence on this issue.