Supreme Court allows Trump administration to move forward with 'public charge' rule (merged)

[NikLR 13,227]

1 hour ago, jasonlzak said:

Um, under Trump administration (any immigration rules that come out from this president are designed to cut the numbers of legal immigration), one could be subjected to public charge but it does not necessarily mean that person will be under other administrations. Telling one should not reapply if he/she was denied for public charge under this anti-immigration administration is pretty,... uhm,..... Since you mentioned you are an immigrant, I bet you came to this country through the old system and Trump was not the president at that time. So I guess "Me is Okay but not the others".

Uh no.  There was never any possibility of me becoming a public charge.  There never will be.  Your point is moot.  My husband qualified on his own.  Had he not, he would have moved to my country where I qualified on my own. 

Now there are circumstances, case by case basis, where joint sponsors should be allowed and it would be up to the CO or the IO to make that decision.  I didn't say NEVER allow a joint sponsor (which is the case with the UK for instance), I said it should be more circumstantial than it is currently. 

Taking one sentence out of a paragraph or post is exactly what causes issues on forums, the news, etc.  The larger picture is important. 

[jasonlzak 173]

"If you're denied for public charge, then there shouldn't be a "reapply" option either. " 

 

Um Did you say that? Assuming one is subjected to public charge at the moment, so it does not matter if they work their way out and become successful in the future and re-apply? According to your statement, everyone is only given one chance, such vision you got.

[NikLR 13,227]

1 hour ago, jasonlzak said:

"If you're denied for public charge, then there shouldn't be a "reapply" option either. " 

 

Um Did you say that? Assuming one is subjected to public charge at the moment, so it does not matter if they work their way out and become successful in the future and re-apply? According to your statement, everyone is only given one chance, such vision you got.

For AOS no.  You can go home and apply for a visa.  Theres more than one way for family reunification.  You could also live in the foreign spouse's country or live in a 3rd country if possible.  There are options. Such a narrow mind have you. 

Edited January 30, 2020 by NikLR
Spelling

[NikLR 13,227]

I did say no joint sponsor for AoS and i amend that wouldnt be fair, again case by case circumstances may cause this to be appropriate. 

[Penguin_ie 5,993]

******  One personal attack post and one quoting removed.  Post civilly and constructively discuss the Op or do not post ******

[HRQX 4,145]

On 1/27/2020 at 11:15 AM, missileman said:

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/480114-supreme-court-allows-trump-administration-to-move-forward-with

More info in following link: https://cliniclegal.org/resources/ground-inadmissibility-and-deportability/public-charge/current-status-public-charge "DHS Final Rule on Public Charge" section

Important note: "At the present time, the injunction on a statewide basis issued by the district court in Illinois remains in place. Therefore, USCIS must continue using the old definition of public charge in adjudicating applications for adjustment of status in Illinois."

[Scandi 4,166]

"USCIS will post updated forms, submission instructions, and Policy Manual guidance on the USCIS website during the week of Feb. 3, 2020, to give applicants, petitioners, and others ample time to review updated procedures and adjust filing methods. After Feb. 24, 2020, everywhere except in the State of Illinois, USCIS will reject prior editions of forms if the form is postmarked on or after Feb. 24, 2020. "

 

https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-announces-public-charge-rule-implementation-following-supreme-court-stay-nationwide-injunctions

Edited January 31, 2020 by Scandi

[KOLCHI barri 7]

Release Date: Jan. 30, 2020 

 

WASHINGTON—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will implement the Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds final rule (“Final Rule”) on Feb. 24, 2020, except for in the State of Illinois where the rule remains enjoined by a federal court as of Jan. 30, 2020. Under the Final Rule, USCIS will look at the factors required under the law by Congress, like an alien’s age, health, income, education and skills, among others, in order to determine whether the alien is likely at any time to become a public charge. 

The Final Rule, issued in August and originally scheduled to be effective in October, prescribes how DHS would determine whether an alien is inadmissible to the United States based on the alien’s likelihood of becoming a public charge at any time in the future, as set forth in the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Final Rule also addresses USCIS’ authority to issue public charge bonds in the context of applications for adjustment of status. Finally, the Final Rule includes a requirement that aliens seeking an extension or stay of change of status demonstrate that they have not received public benefits over the designated threshold since obtaining the nonimmigrant status they seek to extend or change.

 

 

[Crazy Cat 41,845]

There is an existing thread here:  

 

[Sweetdreaming 397]

"The final rule will apply only to applications and petitions postmarked (or if applicable, submitted electronically) on or after Feb. 24, 2020. For applications and petitions sent by commercial courier (such as UPS, FedEx, and DHL), the postmark date is the date reflected on the courier receipt"

[Fe.Ta 874]

Hello!  We are sorry if this has been asked before on here, but does anyone know if this will affect bringing parents over?  The little that I was able to glance at it, it seems that bringing my in-laws 5 years from now (for example) would prove impossible if they are looking at their ages, not being able to work, health, etc.  Thoughts or input?  Thanks!

 

Additionally, what about tourist visas?  My husband and I are going through the AOS process and this does not apply to us.  But, we would like my in-laws to come for Christmas (they are not wanting to move yet because of their own elderly parents, etc.).

[Sweetdreaming 397]

1 minute ago, Fe.Ta said:

The little that I was able to glance at it, it seems that bringing my in-laws 5 years from now (for example) would prove impossible if they are looking at their ages, not being able to work, health, etc.  Thoughts or input?  Thanks!

Impossible ? no, extremely expensive ? yes

[Crazy Cat 41,845]

14 minutes ago, Fe.Ta said:

Hello!  We are sorry if this has been asked before on here, but does anyone know if this will affect bringing parents over?  The little that I was able to glance at it, it seems that bringing my in-laws 5 years from now (for example) would prove impossible if they are looking at their ages, not being able to work, health, etc.  Thoughts or input?  Thanks!

 

Additionally, what about tourist visas?  My husband and I are going through the AOS process and this does not apply to us.  But, we would like my in-laws to come for Christmas (they are not wanting to move yet because of their own elderly parents, etc.).

This public charge rule expansion does not affect the issuing of immigrant visas.  It does, however, affect those applying for adjustment of status.  This is a USCIS rule.

 

Check table 2 and table 3 in the following document:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2019-17142.pdf

Edited January 31, 2020 by missileman

[Fe.Ta 874]

2 minutes ago, missileman said:

This public charge rule expansion does not affect the issuing of immigrant visas.  It does, however, affect those applying for adjustment of status.  This is a USCIS rule.

Thank you for your response. Right, I know it affects AOS, but we filed in September 2019 before any of these deadlines. So, if I am correct (please correct me if I am not), it does not apply to our case but others to follow. 

[Crazy Cat 41,845]

2 minutes ago, Fe.Ta said:

Thank you for your response. Right, I know it affects AOS, but we filed in September 2019 before any of these deadlines. So, if I am correct (please correct me if I am not), it does not apply to our case but others to follow. 

That is my understanding.