Change in status (merged)

[Alabamak1 688]

https://qz.com/1323136/a-uscis-immigration-policy-change-threatens-non-citizens-with-deportation-if-they-lose-status/

 

This policy and not a liberal thing. Thanks Trump!

[Crazy Cat 41,857]

1.  Keep legal status

2.  Don't commit crimes

Problem solved......This article is stating that people, who have no RIGHT to remain in the US, are swiftly ushered out of the country.....Is there a problem with that?  I don't think so.

 

" It’s no coincidence that brown and black people bear the brunt of these attacks. "-  always bring up the race card to anger people.......

Edited July 7, 2018 by missileman

[Ischnura 285]

Where's the problem? If you're committing crimes you don't deserve to be here. Nobody should have their cake and be allowed to eat it. All of the examples on that page aren't unreasonable justification for deportation, there is no guaranteed right to stay just because you're already here. Nor should there be. It's absolutely a privilege and you should have to dot all your i's and cross all your t's to be permitted to stay. 

 

 It's so easy to blame the white man - like the page repeatedly does - but take a look on Visa Journey, for example, the diversity of people coming to the US doesn't start and stop with South America and Africa. 

 

 I read yesterday that a woman from Honduras told her immigration judge that she should be allowed to stay 'for a chance'. Another had actually gone through the legal system in her home country to press charges against her abusive husband, the outcome wasn't what she liked so she decided she would come to the US - the judge rightfully told her it's not the US' problem. 

 

 Also, it's worth noting that the photos of all those kiddies looking like they've been crammed in to an animal shelter are from 2014 and nothing to do with the current administration. But you're not going to slate Obama for his methods, are you?

[geowrian 22,337]

This was always the case. It just sounds like they are issuing NTAs more often/quicker.

Edited July 7, 2018 by geowrian

[JFH 12,190]

The examples provided in the article are so ridiculous that it would be funny if the subject matter weren’t so serious. The one I take particular exception to is the K-1 visa holder who develops breast cancer. It even says that her husband has health insurance. So she does too. And if she doesn’t it’s because he’s a bad husband and hasn’t added her. There’s no way an AOS would be denied for “risk of being a public charge” because of cancer when the husband is working and had medical insurance. I have epilepsy and will have for the rest of my life.  There has never been any question of my ineligibility to live here because of that. And my husband was unemployed when I had my immigrant visa interview (approved on the spot). 

[florida racer 73 200]

I read that earlier and gave the article the attention it deserved...... it just scream of a upset liberal writing it.

 

easy way to avoid any of these situations.... stay in status and follow the rules to the letter!

 

Stop blaming the “white Man” for your problems, did anyone look to see who the name of the writer was? 😂

 

[Crazy Cat 41,857]

1 hour ago, JFH said:

The examples provided in the article are so ridiculous that it would be funny if the subject matter weren’t so serious. The one I take particular exception to is the K-1 visa holder who develops breast cancer. It even says that her husband has health insurance. So she does too. And if she doesn’t it’s because he’s a bad husband and hasn’t added her. There’s no way an AOS would be denied for “risk of being a public charge” because of cancer when the husband is working and had medical insurance. I have epilepsy and will have for the rest of my life.  There has never been any question of my ineligibility to live here because of that. And my husband was unemployed when I had my immigrant visa interview (approved on the spot). 

I agree.  The article is not an objective journalistic analysis.  It is simply another hit piece directed at Trump. 

[poh 125]

N:

 

On June 28, USCIS announced that non-citizens who apply for a “benefit”–such as an extension or change of status, a green card, or citizenship—would be placed in deportation proceedings if that benefit is denied. For years, a criminal conviction has been required to be fast-tracked for deportation. Now, merely losing your petition for visa extension, being charged with a crime, or doing something DHS considers to be criminal (even if never arrested or charged) places you on the same fast-track

 

Once in deportation proceedings, the non-citizen must prove she is eligible to stay in the United States. She will not be provided a lawyer; she may be detained, sometimes with no bond. There is no right to a speedy trial, nor trial by jury. Here are a few examples highlighting the full extent of the new rule.

 

Jack, a foreign student, files for an extension of his visa. He’s always been in status. He moves off campus, and properly files a change of address with USCIS (he even gets the receipt). Later, the agency sends a request for evidence to his old address anyway. Jack never receives it. USCIS denies the extension of status for failure to respond. Jack now faces deportation.

Maria is in the US on a fiancée visa and files for a green card. Her US citizen husband has a good job with health insurance. Before the green card interview, Maria is diagnosed with breast cancer. The officer finds out and denies Maria’s green card, saying she’s likely to become a public charge. Maria now faces deportation.

Sam is a software engineer. His employer sponsors him for a green card—but is then acquired by another firm. USCIS denies the petition, saying there is insufficient proof the new employer can continue the sponsorship in the shoes of the old employer. Sam now faces deportation.

 

https://qz.com/1323136/a-uscis-immigration-policy-change-threatens-non-citizens-with-deportation-if-they-lose-status/

Edited July 7, 2018 by poh

[Roel 7,192]

8 minutes ago, poh said:

 

Maria is in the US on a fiancée visa and files for a green card. Her US citizen husband has a good job with health insurance. Before the green card interview, Maria is diagnosed with breast cancer. The officer finds out and denies Maria’s green card, saying she’s likely to become a public charge. Maria now faces deportation.

 

Yeah somehow I don't believe this one. BS.  

[mushroomspore 3,044]

A quiet policy change from USCIS. They will now place anyone who is denied an immigration/visa benefit into deportation proceedings. Read article for details and examples.

 

What do you guys think of this?

[poh 125]

Yes. Kets

9 minutes ago, Roel said:

Yeah somehow I don't believe this one. BS.  

Yes. Let's hope it isn't so. 

[Jeanne Adil 1,651]

13 minutes ago, Roel said:

Yeah somehow I don't believe this one. BS.  

neither do i as how did they acquire this knowledge as it is against the HIPAA laws

[tachi88 4]

Extremely scary if the examples are to be believed. My husband hasn't done anything wrong but what sort of minor, bs reason could they potentially get him for, who knows? We are in AoS right now...

[geowrian 22,337]

The example given regarding cancer is not realistic. Yes, somebody can be denied due to a public charge concern. They could be referred to removal hearings as a result of the denied I-485 since they no longer have a legal status or authorized stay.

This has always been the case regarding somebody out of status who applies for an immigration benefit...it just sounds like they intend to do it more often.

Having cancer is not a reason for a public charge finding (let alone, they have no way to find out unless you tell them directly...this is not part of an immigration medical exam).

[mushroomspore 3,044]

20 minutes ago, tachi88 said:

Extremely scary if the examples are to be believed. My husband hasn't done anything wrong but what sort of minor, bs reason could they potentially get him for, who knows? We are in AoS right now...

Yeah we are in AoS right now too. It's been okay but the past couple months have worried me a lot as well. I have no criminal history, have always been here legally etc. But it's hard not to wonder if they'll pick something minor or even make something up entirely to try and control the people who want to live here.