Trump Slams Sanctuary Cities During Immigration Talks

On Thursday, some of the top law enforcement officials in the US gathered to hear President Donald Trump slam the so-called ‘sanctuary cities’ that protect undocumented immigrants from federal immigration authorities as he attempts to crack down on such jurisdictions. Trump accused uncooperative cities of putting the country at risk with the release of thousands of criminal immigrants, including predators, murderers, rapists, and gang members, who should be deported from the country.

The new statements from Trump come as Capitol Hill lawmakers continue to try to negotiate a spending bill for the government, which now seems unlikely to include funding for the wall on the border between the US and Mexico that has long been a part of the President’s agenda.

The Justice Department and Trump have ramped up the pressure on jurisdictions that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration laws, trying to deny them access to federal grants. The Justice Department recently sued California in an attempt to overturn some of their immigration laws. The harsh rhetoric comes when hope appears to be fading for finding a compromise to help ‘Dreamers’, the young undocumented immigrants who came to the US as minors.

Trump announced late last year that the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program would end, and Democrats have been pushing for a temporary extension. But, while the government has been forced to continue processing renewals from previous recipients, no new permits are being issued and Democrats have refused to agree to Trump’s terms for such a deal.

Startup Act Senator Wants US Pathway for Immigrant Entrepreneurs

The most challenging aspect of the Startup Act created by Republican Senator, Jerry Moran, is that relating to immigration, the Kansas Senator admits. But, he says that because it is difficult to deal with some immigration policies today, it does not mean that something should not and cannot be done.

Immigrant founders of tech startup companies in Kansas City increasingly believe that their businesses may not survive the interminable wait for the arrival of a long-term solution to a shortage of skilled labor, which could take years to come to fruition. Moran’s bipartisan legislation was first introduced in 2011, but the current version would enable the creation of 75,000 entrepreneur US visas and 50,000 STEM US visas, as well as several provisions intended to reduce barriers for worldwide talent, regulatory relief, seeding money for nationwide commercialization projects, capital formation, and access to commercializing research programs funded by the federal government, according to Moran.

Moran’s recent attempt to get the entrepreneur bill pushed through comes as the two major political parties of the US continue to argue over immigration issues and a media focus on the number of immigrants being deported from the country.

Moran says there has been a decline in the number of startups, according to Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation data, with the number of new entrepreneurs in the US falling to 0.31 percent from 0.33 percent in 2016 and that Congress needs to understand how important the startup community is to the US economy.

Asylum Eligibility to Be Reshaped

Immigration lawyers claim that thousands of immigrants fleeing persecution and violence in their home nations face being turned away as the Trump administration moves to limit the kind of people who are eligible for asylum in the US. The law on qualifications for asylum is being reshaped by Attorney General, Jeff Sessions.

The move comes as the number of asylum applications has risen over the last few years. Sessions says there has been fraud and rampant abuse of the current system in such applications, which he is attempting to stop, while also reducing the enormous backlog in immigration cases. But, immigrant rights advocates are worried that legitimate asylum seekers could be denied sanctuary.

Those outraged by the move are unlikely to sway Sessions, who is convinced that false claims are gumming up the system. In October 2017, Sessions told the Executive Office for Immigration Review in a speech in Virginia that the current system is being gamed, while asking Congress to tighten asylum rules. Now, Sessions is tightening the rules on his own, vacating a previous ruling, which set a precedent of asylum seekers deserving to have a court hearing before their claims could be rejected and now reviewing whether victims of so-called ‘private crime’ such as domestic violence qualify for asylum.

Sessions says that loopholes can be closed and asylum laws clarified to make sure they assist those intended to assist instead of endlessly dealing with false claims.

ICE Use Facebook to Find Immigrant Suspects

The illicit use of data mined from Facebook has generated headlines lately, but now a new report from The Intercept has accused Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) of also using Facebook data to locate and track suspected undocumented immigrants in the US.

The report cites a case in which backend Facebook data was used by ICE to determine whether a suspect’s account had been accessed, and the IP addresses that corresponded to those logins. This data was allegedly combined with other records that are routinely used by agents, including the likes of telephone records, to determine the immigrant’s location. The Intercept story joins the Cambridge Analytica scandal in raising serious questions about data privacy on Facebook, but ICE using such data is not against the law.

According to The Intercept, the Stored Communications Act allows law enforcement to request information be given to them by third-party record holders, such as Facebook. This point was corroborated by Facebook, which told The Intercept that valid legal process was sent to them by Immigration and Customs Enforcement as part of an investigation allegedly involving a child predator and that that request was responded to with the use of data that was consistent with their data disclosure records, which are publically available.

But, Facebook refutes the claim that the data was used to spot an immigration law violation, claiming that special data access designed to help with immigration enforcement is not given to ICE or any agency connected with law enforcement.

H-1B Tips for Employers

 

Getting selected in the H-1B lottery does not necessarily mean a petition will be approved. USCIS issued 45% more requests for additional evidence on H-1B petitions in 2017 than the previous year. There was also a higher percentage of denials, longer processing times, and tougher standards on filing requirements. We foresee even more scrutiny of H-1B petitions this year, as well as longer processing times.

We recommend the following potential ways for employers to maximize their H-1B chances:

•     Apply based on a master’s degree from a U.S. nonprofit university as long as all degree requirements are completed before April 1
•     Ensure close match between course of study and job duties
•     Apply concurrently for optional practical training (OPT) or STEM OPT and H-1B
•     Apply for “consular notification,” not change of status, to preserve OPT if OPT lasts beyond October 1
•     Apply for “change of status” if OPT expires before October 1 to preserve work eligibility under “cap gap” policy, but avoid travel
•     Choose O*NET code and wage level carefully
•     If more than one field of study could qualify a person for the position, explain task by task how the position requires the education
•     Be careful of Level 1 wages. Instead, obtain an acceptable prevailing wage from a legitimate source other than the Labor Department, offer to pay a higher wage from the outset, or explain why this particular job is both entry level and qualifies as a “specialty occupation”
•     Consider other visa options if your employees is not selected in the H-1B lottery
•     Check USCIS website for changes to form, fee, filing location

On April 2, employers can start filing H-1B temporary visa petitions for foreign professionals for work starting October 1, 2018. The law limits new H-1B visa numbers to 85,000 a year. Because many more employers than that are likely to file petitions, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will receive applications for one week and then conduct a lottery to determine which applications will actually be processed. Applications that receive a receipt will then be adjudicated for approval or denial.

Federal judge in Seattle opens door for thousands to apply for asylum

A federal judge in Seattle opened the door Thursday for thousands of immigrants to apply for asylum, finding that the Department of Homeland Security has routinely failed to notify them of a deadline for filing their applications. U.S. District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez issued the ruling in a class-action lawsuit brought by immigrant rights groups on behalf of those who fear persecution if returned to their home country. In many cases, those asylum seekers are released from custody after officials have interviewed them and determined their fears to be credible. They’re told that they’ll need to appear in immigration court, but they typically aren’t personally told that they only have a year to apply for asylum, the lawsuit argued.

Due to a backlog in immigration cases, the asylum seekers are often not given a hearing within a year, and thus, by the time they show up in court and learn about the deadline, it’s already passed, Martinez found.

“This means many asylum seekers who were previously going to have a door slammed in their face are now able to say, ‘No, a federal court has said that I am timely filing my application and you need to accept it,'” said Matt Adams, legal director of the Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and an attorney for the plaintiffs. The judge ordered the department to begin providing notice about the one-year deadline within 90 days any time an immigrant seeking asylum is released from custody pending deportation proceedings. He also said the department must give those who missed the deadline another year to file their applications. Further, Martinez told the department it must fix another catch-22 in its system: that while asylum-seekers must file their asylum applications within a year, the government refuses to accept the applications unless the applicant has been given a formal notice to appear in immigration court.

Extreme vetting: State Department to demand tourists’ social media history

The State Department will publish new rules this week to require most visitors and immigrants to the U.S. to divulge their recent social media histories, carrying out one of the key security enhancements from President Trump’s extreme vetting executive order. Travelers would also be asked to list phone numbers, email addresses and international travel during the previous five years, and to detail any immigration problems they have had, whether with the U.S. or elsewhere. They also will be asked about potential family connections to terrorism.

The Homeland Security Department had floated plans to track social media of immigrant applicants, but the State Department’s proposal would apply to tourists and others coming on temporary visas. Some 14 million people would be affected by the request for information tied to visitors’ visas, and about 700,000 others would be affected in the immigration system, the department said in the documents.

Don Crocetti, a former senior fraud investigator for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, said it makes sense to collect the information but that officers need to stay within privacy rules too. He said in the immigration context, looking at social media can help an adjudicator assess whether the story the applicant is telling in applying for a benefit rings true — such as in the case of a marriage petition. But Mr. Crocetti said someone’s refusal to turn over the passwords or other nonpublic social media information can’t be used on its own to deny approval.

“The use of social media is a wrench in their toolbox. It’s not that you use that same wrench for everything you do, but it’s a wrench, it’s a different-sized tool, and you have use that selectively,” he said. The State Department said it already collects limited information about travel history and family relations. The new information will go beyond that to include prior passport numbers, information about family members and a longer history of travel, employment and contact information.

“Collecting this additional information from visa applicants will strengthen our process for vetting these applicants and confirming their identity,” the department said. Ms. Vaughan said she wished the State Department had also requested information on the visitor application about whether female travelers are intending to enter the U.S. for the purpose of having a child. She said that could cut down on “birth tourism,” in which women in the late stages of pregnancy visit the U.S. in order to give birth on American soil, securing citizenship for the child.

Immigration Under Trump: By the Numbers

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP made immigration a hallmark issue of his campaign, and in the first week of his presidency, he signed executive orders suspending immigration from seven majority-Muslim countries, bolstering border patrol and deportation efforts and starting the funding process for the promised border wall between the U.S. and Mexico.

Immigrants appeared to have responded, with U.S. Customs and Border Protection reportingrecord-low apprehensions at the southwest border in 2017. Yet, despite his hard-line rhetoric, Trump has still deported fewer immigrants than President Barack Obama did in each of the early years of his term.

In 2017, the number of people apprehended or otherwise deemed inadmissible while trying to gain admission at a port of entry at the U.S.-Mexico border fell dramatically. Assuming apprehension tactics remained the same, the numbers suggest fewer people are attempting to cross the border illegally.

The number of apprehensions alone for fiscal 2017 hit its lowest total since 1971, according to data from the U.S. Border Patrol.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement's annual report describes this trend as "possibly reflecting an increased deterrent effect from ICE's stronger interior enforcement efforts."

Trump signed an executive order five days into his presidency that called for a host of enhanced border protection efforts, including more border patrol agents and an end to the "catch-and-release" policy for handling immigrants apprehended while illegally crossing.

The number of people apprehended or otherwise deemed inadmissible each month fell most sharply between Trump's election and inauguration, suggesting a correlation with the incoming president's policy plans.

Those border apprehensions have rebounded somewhat in recent months.

The overall lower numbers of people apprehended at the border means the U.S. government also clocks fewer deportations at the border. Accordingly, border deportations have decreased under Trump.

But that drop has been coupled with more aggressive deportation policies for "interior deportations," or those immigrants already inside the country. Increased interior deportations mostly offset the decline in border deportations, so total deportations dropped by just 6 percent, or 14,136 people, from fiscal 2016 to 2017.

Yet these deportation totals pale in comparison to the removal numbers of the early Obama administration. ICE deportations under Obama peaked at 409,849 in fiscal 2012 – nearly double the agency's deportations during fiscal 2017, which included the final four months of Obama's term and the first eight months of Trump's presidency.

Total deportations by ICE hovered around 400,000 annually in each of the first four years of Obama's presidency. Interior deportations alone exceeded 150,000 annually from fiscal 2009 to 2012 – far greater than Trump's 81,603 during fiscal 2017.

Deportations fell throughout Obama's term, driven largely by declining numbers of interior deportations. Apprehensions at the border also dropped during this period, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data, further contributing to the eventual deportation drop.

How Trump changed the rules to arrest more non-criminal immigrants

It's left many wondering why the US government is arresting and deporting a number of individuals who have often lived in the country for decades, checked in regularly with immigration officials and posed no danger to their community. Many have family members who are American citizens, including school-aged children.

President Donald Trump famously said in a presidential debate that his focus is getting the "bad hombres" and the "bad, bad people" out first to secure the border, but one of his first actions after taking office was an executive order that effectively granted immigration agents the authority to arrest and detain any undocumented immigrant they wanted.

Where the Obama administration focused deportation efforts almost exclusively on criminals and national security threats, as well as immigrants who recently arrived illegally, the Trump administration has also targeted immigrants with what are called final orders of removal -- an order from a judge that a person can be deported and has no more appeals left.

In Trump's first year, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 109,000 criminals and 46,000 people without criminal records -- a 171% increase in the number of non-criminal individuals arrested over 2016.

The Trump administration regularly says its focus is criminals and safety threats, but has also repeatedly made clear that no one in the country illegally will be exempted from enforcement.

"We target criminal aliens, but we're not going to exempt an entire class of (non)citizens," Department of Homeland Security spokesman Tyler Houlton told reporters Wednesday.

"All of those in violation of immigration laws may be subject to immigration arrest, detention and, if found removable by final order, removal from the United States," ICE spokeswoman Sarah Rodriguez added in a statement.

Critics say including people with decades-old final orders of removal as priorities is more about boosting numbers by targeting easily catchable individuals than about public safety threats.

"A final order of removal is absolutely not indicative of a person's threat to public safety," said former Obama administration ICE chief and DHS counsel John Sandweg. "You cannot equate convicted criminals with final orders of removal."

Sandweg said that people with final orders, especially those who are checking in regularly with ICE, are easy to locate and can be immediately deported without much legal recourse. Identifying and locating criminals and gang members takes more investigative work.

There are more than 90,000 people on so-called orders of supervision who check in regularly with ICE officials, according to the agency. And there are more than 1 million who have removal proceedings pending or who have been ordered to leave the country but have not.

As a result of the change in ICE policy, headlines about heart-wrenching cases of deportation separating children from parents or caregivers have been a regular occurrence.

The story of Amer Adi, an Ohio businessman who lived in the US nearly 40 years, and has a wife and four daughters who are all American citizens, drew national media coverage last month. Through a complicated dispute about his first marriage, Adi lost his status and was ordered deported in 2009, but ICE never opted to remove him from the country. His congressman even introduced a bill to protect Adi, saying he was a "pillar" of the community, but last fall, ICE told Adi to prepare to be deported.

At a check-in on January 15, he was taken into custody and not allowed to see his family before being put on a plane back to his home country of Jordan on January 30.

ICE has combined "ICE fugitives" -- people who have been ordered to leave the country but haven't yet -- with convicted criminals who have pending criminal charges and reinstated final orders of removal, allowing the agency to say 92% of those arrested under Trump had criminal convictions or one of the other factors -- when the number with criminal records is closer to 70%.

With an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US, ICE has typically had resources to arrest and deport only roughly 150,000-250,000 individuals per year -- requiring the agency to make choices about who to prioritize to proactively seek out for arrest.

ICE says its mission is carrying out the law and that it "must" deport these individuals.

State of California is Sued by Dept. of Justice for ‘Sanctuary’ Laws

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a lawsuit on March 6, 2018, against the state of California, Governor Jerry Brown, and the state’s attorney general, Xavier Becerra, over several “sanctuary” laws passed by the state. DOJ argues in its complaint that these laws “have the purpose and effect of making it more difficult for federal immigration officers to carry out their responsibilities in California. The Supremacy Clause does not allow California to obstruct the United States’ ability to enforce laws that Congress has enacted or to take actions entrusted to it by the Constitution. Accordingly, the provisions at issue here are invalid.”

The three laws at issue are the Immigrant Worker Protection Act, which regulates the way private employers can respond to federal efforts to investigate workplace immigration law compliance; the California Values Act, which limits communication from state and local law enforcement with federal immigration officials and prevents them from investigating people for immigration enforcement purposes; and A.B. 103, which subjects local detention facilities to twice-yearly inspections by the California Attorney General’s office.

It appeared that the Trump administration’s pushback against California and other states enacting such laws is not confined to lawsuits or ICE raids. Thomas Homan, Acting Director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), reportedly said after one of the laws was enacted that “[w]e’ve got to start charging some of these politicians with crimes.” And Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said the Department of Justice was looking into “what avenues might be available” for potentially charging state and local officials. On March 6, in a speech in California, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions invoked the Civil War, stating, “There is no secession. Federal law is the supreme law of the land. I would invite any doubters to go to Gettysburg or to the tombstones of John C. Calhoun and Abraham Lincoln. This matter has been settled.”

California officials remained defiant in the face of the lawsuit and other threats. Mr. Becerra responded to the lawsuit and related threats that California will not do the federal government’s “bidding on immigration enforcement and deportation.” He said state and federal teams “work together to go after drug dealers and go after gang violence,” but that the state would not “change from being focused on public safety” rather than on deportation.

On January 17, 2018, U.S. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Cal.) and Kamala Harris (D-Cal.) sent a letter to Mr. Homan asking for a full accounting of how ICE raids are being prioritized and conducted, quoting a television interview where Mr. Homan had said “California better hold on tight.” Sens. Feinstein and Harris said they were deeply concerned that ICE was not prioritizing violent criminals. “We firmly believe that law enforcement must prioritize dangerous criminals and not undocumented immigrants who do not pose a threat to public safety. Diverting resources in an effort to punish California and score political points is an abhorrent abuse of power, not to mention a terrible misuse of scarce resources.” Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf recently publicly warned that ICE agents were about to conduct a large operation in her area. “I know that Oakland is a city of law-abiding immigrants and families who deserve to live free from the constant threat of arrest and deportation. I believe it is my duty and moral obligation as mayor to give those families fair warning when that threat appears imminent,” she said. Mr. Homan said that as a result, federal agents subsequently were able to arrest only about 200 people instead of a higher percentage of the 1,000 they had targeted. President Trump threatened to pull all ICE agents out of California.

Subsequently, James Schwab, ICE’s spokesperson in San Francisco, quit his position, stating, “I quit because I didn’t want to perpetuate misleading facts. I asked them to change the information. I told them that the information was wrong, they asked me to deflect, and I didn’t agree with that. Then I took some time and I quit.” He said he “didn’t feel like fabricating the truth to defend ourselves against [Mayor Schaaf’s] actions was the way to go about it. We were never going to pick up that many people. To say that 100 percent are dangerous criminals on the street, or that those people weren’t picked up because of the misguided actions of the mayor, is just wrong.”

U.S. Alert – Coalition of Business Leaders Tells Trump: We Support International Entrepreneur Rule

A coalition of business leaders, investors, and organizations sent a letter on February 8, 2018, to President Donald Trump in support of the International Entrepreneur Rule (IER), which is in effect following a court order. The Trump administration has signaled that the IER is likely on the chopping block. The letter says that killing the IER “would upend the ability of talented immigrant entrepreneurs to launch new enterprises and employ American workers in communities across the United States.”

Among other things, the letter notes that “Rescission of the International Entrepreneur Rule” has been pending review with the Office of Management and Budget since November 17, 2017. “This potential new rule places a dark cloud over IER, as immigrant entrepreneurs are uncertain of how long IER will be in place,” the letter notes:

The rescission rule stifles investment into new companies with foreign-born founders, which ultimately costs the U.S. economy. It also exacerbates an alarming trend of elite entrepreneurs launching successful startups outside the United States. Twenty years ago our country’s share of global venture investment was 90%, but that number has dropped precipitously to 81% in 2006 and to 53% in 2017. In 2016, China was home to six of the ten largest venture capital investments in the world. If we continue to push entrepreneurs overseas, our share of global investment will continue to decrease.

As background, on January 17, 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published the International Entrepreneur final rule with an original effective date of July 17, 2017. On July 11, 2017, DHS published a final rule delaying the effective date until March 14, 2018, to allow for a full review of the rule. The Trump administration proposed in late 2017 to rescind the final rule. In December 2017, a federal court ruled in National Venture Capital Association v. Duke that the rule should go into effect because the government had not provided sufficient notice-and-comment for the delay rule under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Defendants Allegedly Provided Armenian Nationals with Fake Dance Certificates and Staged Photos in Traditional Costumes to Qualify for P-3 Visa Program for Entertainers

Three individuals were indicted in the Eastern District of New York for their alleged roles in a multi-year visa fraud scheme that brought Armenian citizens into the United States for profit.

Acting Assistant Attorney General John P. Cronan of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division; U.S. Attorney Richard P. Donoghue of the Eastern District of New York and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Christian J. Schurman for U.S. Department of State Diplomatic Security and Director for Diplomatic Security Service (DSS), made the announcement.

Stella Boyadjian, 47, of Rego Park, New York; Hrachya Atoyan, 30, of Glendale, California; and Diana Grigoryan aka “Dina Akopovna,” 41, of the Republic of Armenia, were charged in a 15-count indictment unsealed yesterday in federal court in Brooklyn with multiple counts of visa fraud and with conspiracy to defraud the United States, commit visa fraud, and illegally bring aliens into the United States.  Boyadjian and Grigoryan are also charged with related money laundering charges, and Boyadjian is charged with aggravated identity theft. Boyadjian was arraigned yesterday before U.S. Magistrate Judge James Orenstein.  Atoyan’s initial appearance for removal proceedings to the Eastern District of New York is scheduled for later today, in the Central District of California.

“Fraudsters who undermine our immigration system threaten our public safety and our national security,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General John P. Cronan. “The Justice Department will not tolerate abuses of our nation’s immigration laws like those alleged in the indictment unsealed today.  We will root out immigration fraud and bring those responsible to justice.”

“As alleged in the indictment, the defendants choreographed their fraud scheme by dressing visa applicants in traditional dance costumes and creating fake concert flyers in order to deceive a government program that allows foreign nationals to temporarily enter the United States as artistic performers,” said U.S. Attorney Donoghue. “As a result of outstanding investigative work and commitment to protecting the integrity of the immigration process by this Office and our law enforcement partners, the defendants will now face the music for their alleged crimes.”

“The Diplomatic Security Service is firmly committed to protecting the integrity of all U.S. visas and travel documents -- especially those, like the P-3 visa, which allow for entertainers to visit the United States to perform in culturally unique events and deepen our understanding of different cultures,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Schurman. “This case is the result of a strong partnership among federal law enforcement agencies and DSS’ global network of special agents working together to stop visa and passport crimes and stop criminals from earning illegal income by exploiting U.S. visas, passports, and foreign workers.”

According to the indictment, unsealed today upon the arrest of Boyadjian and Atoyan, Boyadjian led a transnational network of co-conspirators who engaged in a widespread visa fraud scheme to bring Armenian citizens into the United States by fraudulently claiming to the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that the Armenians were members of folk performance groups, and thus qualified for P-3 “Culturally Unique Artist” visas. The P-3 nonimmigrant visa classification allows foreign nationals to temporarily travel to the United States to perform, teach or coach as artists or entertainers, under a program that is culturally unique. A U.S. employer or sponsoring organization is required to submit a USCIS Form I-129 Petition for a Non-Immigrant Worker, along with supporting documentation, attesting that the performances in the United States are culturally unique.