The Trump administration’s no-blanks policy is the latest Kafkaesque plan designed to curb immigration

[theflyhigh 63]

Gosh Trump administration is going mad: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-trump-administration-imposes-yet-another-arbitrary-absurd-modification-to-the-immigration-system/2020/08/06/42de75ca-d811-11ea-930e-d88518c57dcc_story.html

[Crazy Cat 41,601]

***Moved to US Immigration News and Discussion****

[cyclone27 710]

Always been the case not a new Trump tactic.  Never ever leave any blanks - assumption is you forgot to add something.  If you add N/A then you  have no issues. 
 

BTW this applies to pretty much most govt forms. 

[Just Paul 4,595]

LOL  nothing new . . . never leave a blank. N/A for you have seen and read the question and it doesn´t apply.

[millefleur 5,046]

This is old news. I'm OK with it being posted here as a reminded to everyone not to leave blanks and always put either N/A or ---.

[HRQX 4,145]

12 minutes ago, millefleur said:

This is old news. I'm OK with it being posted here as a reminded to everyone not to leave blanks and always put either N/A or ---.

It does have an update regarding I-693 report and I-918, Supplement B: "by requiring unsuspecting third parties to clear the same hurdle."

 

For the I-693 Civil Surgeon exam, some doctors don't show or give the applicant a copy of the completed exam, so the applicant in that case doesn't know if every field was filled out. Applicants can't open the sealed envelope.

Edited August 8, 2020 by HRQX

[millefleur 5,046]

12 minutes ago, HRQX said:

It does have an update regarding I-693 report and I-918, Supplement B: "by requiring unsuspecting third parties to clear the same hurdle."

 

For the I-693 Civil Surgeon exam, some doctors don't show or give the applicant a copy of the completed exam, so the applicant in that case doesn't know if every field was filled out. Applicants can't open the sealed envelope.

The article also has a paywall. It would be helpful for someone to post this update separately without linking to a paywalled article that has a vague headline.

 

Has this update been published anywhere on USCIS's site yet?

[HRQX 4,145]

15 minutes ago, millefleur said:

The article also has a paywall.

Don't know why I currently can see the whole opinion article. I'm not a WaPo subscriber.

15 minutes ago, millefleur said:

Has this update been published anywhere on USCIS's site yet?

Unlike with the law enforcement certifications, USCIS has not publicly confirmed whether it is systemically applying its no-blanks policy to medical forms, or if those denials were perhaps the action of a rogue official. Alerts on USCIS’s website flag the no-blanks policy only for asylum, crime-victim and trafficking-victim visas, despite rejections lawyers have received for blanks on other types of applications. The agency did not respond to questions about how or when it was deciding to enforce the policy.

Edited August 8, 2020 by HRQX

[millefleur 5,046]

44 minutes ago, HRQX said:

Don't know why I currently can see the whole opinion article. I'm not a WaPo subscriber.

Unlike with the law enforcement certifications, USCIS has not publicly confirmed whether it is systemically applying its no-blanks policy to medical forms, or if those denials were perhaps the action of a rogue official. Alerts on USCIS’s website flag the no-blanks policy only for asylum, crime-victim and trafficking-victim visas, despite rejections lawyers have received for blanks on other types of applications. The agency did not respond to questions about how or when it was deciding to enforce the policy.

Can you post the link on USCIS where you found this?

[HRQX 4,145]

6 minutes ago, millefleur said:

Can you post the link on USCIS where you found this?

It's an excerpt from the opinion article. It shares links to USCIS.gov but notes those policies are for asylum, U, and T visas. Yet I-693 reports have also been rejected without an announced official policy.

[DaveAndAnastasia 2,086]

Unless they've actually gone through all the PDFs and updated the validation to allow n/a to be typed (without doing things most people wouldn't know how to do, like disabling the script or putting another element on top of them), I'll bet actual enforcement of the "put N/A or none in all fields" policy won't actually happen.

[HRQX 4,145]

18 minutes ago, DaveAndAnastasia said:

I'll bet actual enforcement of the "put N/A or none in all fields" policy won't actually happen.

Enforcement has already occurred. Per opinion article:

After an initial flood of confusing rejection letters, immigration attorneys wised up. Lawyers spent additional hours combing through every field, meticulously typing “N/A” or “none” in all blanks even when doing so seemed superfluous.

In certain fields, it’s not possible to digitally type in the magic words “none” or “N/A,” because USCIS coded the PDF to allow entries of numbers only. So, attorneys began handwriting “N/A” across forms. Some scrounged up typewriters. Others special-ordered “N/A” rubber stamps.

[cyclone27 710]

Type NA no need for slash or manually write in.

[HRQX 4,145]

3 hours ago, cyclone27 said:

Type NA no need for slash or manually write in.

For some fields NA not accepted:

[ultrasoul 51]

I wonder how this would affect online filed forms