Dear Readers:
As we head in to Thanksgiving, a truly American holiday, we ought to remember that the holiday is, at its essence, about immigration. The Pilgrims were fleeing religious persecution in England and were some of the first asylees in America. The difficult experience in their early years in the U.S. is not really so different than what has been faced by immigrants in the many generations since. The feast at which Native Americans and Pilgrims celebrated together is also the original example of our country welcoming the immigrant. The holiday marks a tension in this country between viewing ourselves as an immigrant nation and in generation after generation discriminating against immigrants and passing immigration laws designed to discourage people from coming.
Today, we are in a period of flux. Public opinion polls show most Americans in favor of reforming our immigration laws and creating pathways for people out of status to come out of the shadows. And Americans generally support programs that bring in workers in short supply. But we also have the front-running Republican presidential candidate that has embraced an anti-immigration set of principles and a Congress that hasn’t passed a pro-immigration bill of any consequence in more than a decade.
Whether the next few years are a period of welcoming or a period of exclusion is still not clear. But the direction we go is clearly going to be a major topic of conversation in this presidential campaign.
***
Over the next few weeks and months, the White House is expected to roll out important new policies and proposed regulations reflecting the President’s Executive Action announcements from a year ago. We expect to see major news on AC21, rights for those with approved I-140s, provisional waivers and more.
One of the President’s major initiatives was the DAPA program for parents of US citizens and permanent residents. That program was set to go into effect months ago, but has been stopped by a lawsuit filed by immigration opponents. The opponents just scored a victory in the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. But it wasn’t a clear victory because the decision came down early enough for the White House to appeal the case to the Supreme Court which has a recent history of ruling against states trying to implement restrictionist policies. The case hasn’t been accepted yet by the Supreme Court, but a lot of pundits believe the high court seek to settle this matter. If they do hear the case, expect a decision in June.
***
With this issue we bid farewell to Rose Baker, our editor for the last two years who is off to pursue an advanced degree in her field and we welcome Sarah Schrag to the team. Sarah received her bachelor’s in international relations from Boston University and has held positions where she gained experience in refugee and human rights issues. Sarah is already making a positive impact and is bringing a lot of energy to her new position.
***
As always, we invite you to contact our firm if you would like to schedule a consultation with one of our lawyers. Just go to www.visalaw.com/consultation. Thanks.
Regards,
Greg Siskind
Disclaimer: This newsletter is provided as a public service and not intended to establish an attorney client relationship. Any reliance on information contained herein is taken at your own risk.