Silent Raids

This morning we had the opportunity to speak out on a controversial topic simmering from last week. The issue is the Obama Administration's use of silent raids to rout out employers with undocumented workers on their payrolls.

The idea is that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency goes to inspect employers for I-9 violations rather than raid workplace sites. A silent raid requires little manpower and does not even have to occur at the work site. A local well-known radio personality surmised that this was "good policy". That this kind of raid attacked the heart of the nation's immigration woes, chief among them, kill the lure of jobs and you begin to draw down the lure of why many cross our borders. Speaking with the host during this segment of the show, we took issue with the idea that this is good policy.

While making sure businesses do not employ undocumented workers is good policy, the onus of that responsibility lies with the U.S. Government. Leaving it to employers to wade through the murky and confusing swamp of acceptable documents amounts to passing the buck and a lack of responsibility. While the host correctly pointed out that given the limited powers of the President without congressional action this was a small piece of the larger reform pie, it is an acknowledgement that lacks a deep understanding of the issue and a lacks compassion for all of the mom and pop operations floating the U.S. economy right now. With somewhere around 25+ different documents that an employer must accept as proof of legal work authorization, learning how and which documents qualify under differing circumstances is a minefield making very honest hardworking American companies susceptible to being duped by their own government into thinking they are doing the right thing. As Immigration attorneys with over 12 years of combined experience in the field, we have, ourselves, yet to come across some of the documents that are acceptable.

American business now more than ever needs to focus on business, and the U.S. needs to take this administrative nightmare off of their shoulders and enact a comprehensive solution including a workable employment verification process. The Government cannot have its cake and eat it too. On the one hand, they are suing a State claiming U.S. Immigration Policy is solely in the purview of the Government and on the other hand they are suing private businesses for not enforcing immigration laws.

While we acknowledge there are unscrupulous employers who will take advantage of the broken system to line their pockets, there is too much confusion in the hiring process as it relates to verifying work authorization, for it to be "good policy" of the current administration to attack all employers with "silent raids". The president can do more, the agency's can do more, and congress can stop hiding behind the political curtain.

Federal Lawsuit Challenging Arizona's Discriminatory Immigration Law

According to the Associated Press, the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit challenging the State of Arizona's recently enacted immigration law. The law, scheduled to take effect in late July, has been widely criticized as a discriminatory unconstitutional law that infringes on the rights of citizens and ignores the supremacy clause of the United States Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution adeptly allows Federal laws to usurp State laws in areas that require the United States to act as one rather than a multitude patchwork. In the area of Immigration, the United states must defend it's right to speak with one voice in order to maintain a rational and sensible enforcement policy and to promote the general welfare and interstate commerce of the union.

Without a challenge to Arizona's law, there would be a multitude of different state crimes, making it near impossible for a person or entity to understand when they may or may not be in violation of a law. Immigration is a topic that demands one voice. Regardless of whether you believe we should build a bubble around the U.S. or are for a more relaxed system, the legal arena in which Immigration operates, must understand the terms by which a violation does or does not occur.

While we welcome this lawsuit, we do so not as immigration advocates, but as bearers of the flame. Upholding the U.S. Constitution is a priority that advocates and restrictionists alike can celebrate.

E Pluribus Unum

The President's remarks were appreciated and eloquent, yet left the impression that they had been said before and there was no tackling of the issues. There was no clarion call to Democrats, while he did call the republicans out and asked them to put aside politics, it was a meek request. This was not a President using the weight and force of his office to deal with the most challenging social and moral issue of the last 30 years. This was a rundown of politics to this point. While as an advocate, we had hoped for more force and action, we were pleased with the passion and eloquence making the issue part of the "fabric of our national identity".

While the President pulled at the heartstrings of our national pride, pointing out the contributions of giants like Einstein, Tesla, Carnegie, and Brin, he also pointed out the simple contributions of a small business owner, and a young woman who joined the military to defend our country. Moving from people, he pointed out the effect of migration on our economy. Describing the U.S. as the engine of the global economy. it was because of migration, that the U.S. enjoys a younger, faster growing workforce than our competitors.

Ultimately the President's remarks focused on how the Politics of who can enter and how is contentious and divisive and we need Bipartisan support to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform. He called on all parts of the machine to be accountable: Government, Business, and Individuals. The Government needed to enforce its laws, Businesses needed an effective tool to verify employees, and individuals needed to admit they had broken laws, pay fines, learn English prior to joining the pathway.

What was new in his call for Comprehensive Immigration Reform was his call to reform the legal immigration system that he acknowledged is also broken. He called on a system that would allow us to draw the best and brightest, unite families, and stop punishing kids (specifically naming the Dream Act).

As the President said we look forward to the day that his courage and leadership will lead us to a "system that is fair and reflective of our values", but until we in the reform community start to see action, the countless calls begin to lose their weight.

Obama on Immigration then and tomorrow

Below are some clips of Obama and his views on Immigration. Tomorrow we will preview his views on Immigration based on his speech.



and seeing the process move this "first year":

Political Winds Change Adjudications at the California Service Center

In the age of the Global Marketplace, multinational companies are vying for business not just within our borders but around the world. In many instances this means employing personnel from around the world in order to maintain a competitive advantage and keep their products on the cutting edge.

The U.S. Congress in its collective wisdom identified this Global Marketplace and adapted U.S. Immigration laws to allow multinationals the tools and human power to succeed by enacting the intracompany visa. The classification allowed for the transfer of executives and managers (L-1A) and specialized knowledge employees (L-1B) from overseas offices to the United States. A highly useful integration and innovation program, the L-1 visa classification allowed U.S. companies (whether it be based in or subsidiaries of foreign companies) to draw on the collective wisdom of its international workforce and bring those crucial employees to the U.S.

Over the course of the last 3 years, there has been a sea change in the way the immigration service is interpreting qualifications for these visa classifications. With a critical eye and an assumption that U.S. employers are shirking the immigration laws by taking advantage of the L-1 classification, the USCIS has single-handedly put the squeeze on the international marketplace and by extension the ability of the U.S. to compete on an international level.

Petitions that were approved 3 years ago are now being denied authorized extensions because of the misplaced fear and tragic assumptions of the USCIS. Employers are confused and looking for a more efficient way and place in which to conduct their global outreach and sales. Why battle with time, money and uncertainty when you can run to Canada, Ireland, Finland, Australia and be assured of a certainty, promise your clients a certain talent and achieve your goals without a surprise from the USCIS.

The policy shift threatens congresses ability to regulate the immigration laws of the U.S., contradicts years of agency guidance and interpretation, and interferes with the image of the United States as an economic power player on the global stage. All because of a shift in USCIS interpretation of why employers are using this category and the "we will show you mentality" of government bureaucrats left to their own devices. Nationally very little is understood of the economic implications of decisions by an officer at the California Service Center. Internationally, this malaise is well understood. Countries are capitalizing on our inability to hold true and speak with one voice on immigration policy. Companies are slowly realizing that their own government is hindering their ability to compete, and many are taking action.

On a weekly basis, I read of another multinational opening a North American base of operations outside the borders of the United States. This is tragic not just for the company, but hardworking Americans. Americans that would have been employed at these facilities are now seeing jobs forced outside the U.S. not necessarily because of cheap labor but rather a more stable immigration policy. We see companies moving operations to attractive and competitive international hubs with the capability of cornering the U.S. Market from outside our borders.

As we argue and the xenophobes create a political firestorm, those xenophobes may soon find they are begging for visas and jobs in Canada, Europe and Australia. How many more Detroits will come to bear before we realize the economic battle was loft at the California Service Center?

New Visa Issuance Fees at U.S. Embassies

The Department of State (DOS) has updated the fees they are going to be charging for processing visas at U.S. Embassies overseas. Previously the DOS charged a flat $131.00 fee regardless of visa type. These new fees will take effect on July 13, 2010. The new fees will affect all persons applying for a visa to be placed in their passports prior to travel to the United States. The new fees are based on the type of visa and services rendered by the U.S. Consulate.

Please remember these fees are only representative of the visa issuance fees incurred by applicants at a U.S. Embassy, they do not include Department of Homeland Security filing fees which remain unchanged.


For more information on these fees, please see the following link:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2010/06/143724.htm

Arizona's Immigration Laws

The State of Arizona has enacted 2 very disturbing immigration laws aimed at enforcement and threatening the United States ability to speak with one voice on issues that affect all of the sister states. As these types of laws crop up among the various sister states, the United states is placed in a perilous economic and social predicament. Chief among them, is our national identity. We are a country of immigrants and as we rip that stripe from our identity we lose a sense of ourselves, who we are and what our imange means to the huddled masses yearning to be free. Second, our economic competitiveness as a land of opportunity is seriously jeopardized when we create a climate of hostility and make it difficult for multinational companies to operate within our borders. A company faced with a common compliance code in one country would certainly choose to operate in that system, rather than operate in a system that requires 50 different sets of compliance procedures.

The current administration had made efforts to challenge the latest of the Arizona laws and the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case challenging the other. These cases must be addressed and we wait with baited breath for the processes and rule of law to do what is right, restore our national identity and make the United States an attractive economic powerhorse in which to compete in the global marketplace.