Stewart Rabinowitz, of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, offers informed commentary about the estimates of the 2008 U.S. legal permanent resident population.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) recently released information regarding the legal permanent resident (LPR) population living in the United States as of January 1, 2008, and has estimated that 12.6 million LPRs lived in the United States on that date. The LPR population includes persons granted lawful permanent residence, but not those who have become U.S. citizens. One-half obtained LPR status in 2000 or later; one-quarter became LPRs during 2005-07.
Data on the size and characteristics of the foreign-born population are needed to assess the impact of immigration and integration of immigrants into U.S. society. Stewart Rabinowitz, an immigration lawyer from the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz, explains how the estimates are compiled. “The decennial census and monthly household surveys of the Census Bureau include questions on place of birth, citizenship, and year of entry into the United States. This data provides information on the total foreign-born population, naturalized citizens, and non-citizens. National population data on the major subcategories of non-citizens, including LPRs, students, temporary workers, and unauthorized immigrants, however, are not readily available from any source and must be estimated.”In 1981, Congress discontinued an alien registration program which required all legal resident aliens to report their status annually to the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service making direct calculations since then more difficult.Immigration data collected by DHS measures administrative events such as the number of aliens granted lawful permanent residence or the number approved for asylum, but not the population of legal permanent residents or the population as of asylees living in the United States at a point in time. Estimates of the LPR population have been derived primarily from Census and DHS data by estimating a base population as of a certain date and adding subsequent components of population change. Adds Rabinowitz, “A variant of this approach has been used by DHS to estimate the resident LPR population since 2002.”
Separate population estimates were developed for LPRs who entered the United States before 1980 and during the interval between 1980 and 2007. Two sets of estimates were added together to obtain the overall estimated population as of January 1, 2008.
Stewart Rabinowitz, of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz, weighs in on the recent ICE decision to educate the public about modern day victims of human trafficking.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has issued a media initiative to inform the public about the horrors and prevalence of human trafficking, which is modern-day slavery.
A public service announcement campaign, “Hidden in Plain Sight,” is intended to draw the American public’s attention to the plight of human-trafficking victims in the United States. Victims of human trafficking are often sexually exploited and forced to work against their will.
“Hidden in Plain Sight” was rolled out last month on posters, billboards and transit shelter signs in major metropolitan areas such as Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Detroit, Los Angeles, Miami, Philadelphia, Newark, New Orleans, New York, St. Paul, San Antonio, San Francisco, and Tampa. Asserts Stewart Rabinowitz of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz, “The goal is to raise public awareness about the existence of human trafficking in communities nationwide and ask members of the public to take action if they encounter possible victims. ICE is hoping that by going directly to the American public they can root out the criminals associated with human trafficking. “
“It would shock the majority of Americans,” states Rabinowitz, “that slavery still exists today in communities throughout our country. This heinous crime is well hidden, which means that the public has to be educated about human trafficking and encouraged to stay alert for possible victims.”
Current estimates are that 800,000 men, women and children are trafficked around the world every year. These victims are trafficked into the commercial sex trade and into forced-labor situations. Many of these victims are lured from their homes with false promises of well-paying jobs; instead, they are coerced into prostitution, domestic servitude, farm or factory labor, or other types of forced labor.
The greatest challenge in combating human trafficking is victim identification. These victims end up in a foreign country, often unable to speak the language and without anyone to advocate for them.
“Traffickers often take the victims’ travel and identity documents. They tell their victims that if they attempt to escape, their families back home will be either physically or financially harmed,” concludes Rabinowitz.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) recently clarified that a foreign national’s receipt of certain public benefits does not necessarily make that foreign national ineligible to become a lawful permanent resident.
The bar to residency in the U.S. based upon the foreign national being a public charge has been part of U.S. immigration law for more than 100 years. An individual who is likely to become a public charge is inadmissible to the United States and ineligible to become a legal permanent resident. Receiving public benefits, however, does not automatically make an individual a public charge.
Immigration laws have generated some concern about whether a foreign national may face adverse immigration consequences for having received federal, state, or local public benefits. Some foreign nationals and their families are eligible for public benefits – including disaster relief, treatment of communicable diseases, immunization, and children’s nutrition and health care programs – without being found to be a public charge.
Benefits not subject to public charge consideration are those that involve non-cash benefits and that are not intended for income maintenance. Additional benefits include:
Medicaid and other health insurance and health services (including public assistance for immunizations, and for testing and treatment of symptoms of communicable diseases), use of health clinics, short term rehabilitation services, prenatal care, and emergency medical services other than support for long-term institutional care
Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)
Nutrition programs
Housing benefits
Child care services
Energy assistance programs
Emergency disaster relief
Foster care and adoptive assistance
Educational assistance (such as attending public school)
Job training programs
In-kind, community-based programs, services or assistance
Subsidized child care or transit subsidies
Title II Social Security benefits, government pensions, and veterans’ benefits
Unemployment compensation is also not considered for public charge purposes
While some of the above programs might provide cash benefits, the purpose of such benefits is not for income maintenance, but rather to avoid the need for ongoing cash assistance for income maintenance, and do not adversely impact foreign nationals’ admissibility on the issue of public charge.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services removes HIV as a disease of public health significance affecting foreign nationals seeking admission to the United States.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), has removed Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection from its definition of communicable disease of public health significance. Prior to this final rule, aliens with HIV infection were considered to have a communicable disease of public health significance and were thus inadmissible to the United States. While HIV infection is a serious health condition, the CDC has determined that it is not a communicable disease that is a significant public health risk for introduction, transmission, and spread to the U.S. population through casual contact.
As background, beginning in 1952, the language of the immigration statutes mandated that aliens “who are afflicted with any dangerous contagious disease” are ineligible to receive a visa and therefore are excluded from admission into the United States. In April 1986, prior to the recent developments in medicine and epidemiologic principles concerning HIV infection, HHS published a proposed rule to include acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) as a dangerous contagious disease. Also during this time, HHS separately published a proposed rule to substitute HIV infection for AIDS on the list of dangerous contagious diseases. While this proposed rule was pending public comment, Congress added HIV infection to the list of dangerous contagious diseases. Accordingly and immediately, aliens infected with HIV became ineligible to receive visas and were excluded from admission into the United States.
In recognition of both medical advances and CDC’s re-evaluation of HIV’s health impact on the U.S. population, in the summer of 2008, Congress amended the immigration statutes on HIV infection returning to the Secretary of HHS the discretion for determining whether HIV infection should remain in the definition of communicable disease of public health significance, discretion which the Secretary recently exercised by removing HIV infection from the definition of communicable disease of public health significance.
Stewart Rabinowitz of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz praises Mayor Bloomberg’s plan Immigrants: The Lifeblood of New York City.
Mayor Bloomberg understands the critical role that immigrants play in our economy and communities. In 2006, he urged a comprehensive and pragmatic policy for immigration reform, which would point the undocumented to the path of U.S. Citizenship. As a leader in welcoming and integrating immigrants into the tapestry of American communities, Mayor Bloomberg has established a uniform policy and standards for translation or interpretation services for agencies that have direct contact with New Yorkers. Each agency provides language assistance in the six major languages spoken in New York. He also signed an Executive Order that prohibits city workers from inquiring about the legal status of immigrants unless they are suspected of criminal activity.
“From establishing Immigrant Heritage Week to teaming up with immigrant advocacy groups to ensure a true count of New York City residents in the 2010 Census, Mayor Bloomberg has proven himself a leader, when it comes to immigrant concerns and priorities,” asserts Stewart Rabinowitz, of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz. One of the initiatives that Mayor Bloomberg is implementing is called Immigrants: The Lifeblood of New York City. Rabinowitz finds this praiseworthy. “This will maximize the contributions that immigrants provide to our economy while helping to facilitate their integration into our communities,” he explains.
Part of Mayor Bloomberg’s initiative is to ensure that every New York immigrant who has the desire to learn the English language will be given the opportunity to do so. Limited English skills prevent immigrants from being able to access the most trustworthy options to get out of poverty. With immigrant children in mind, Mayor Bloomberg also has plans that focus on helping them to achieve goals of employment for students still learning English, pursuing higher education and to identify strategies for eliminating the achievement gap. Concludes Rabinowitz, “Mayor Bloomberg recognizes how crucial it is to make sure that immigrant children have the necessary resources needed to succeed.” Immigrants: The Lifeblood of New York City is a way to impart a significant portion of Mayor Bloomberg’s vision for his third term as well as continuing his record of supporting New York’s diverse immigrant community.
Immigration lawyer Stewart Rabinowitz of the law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz offers some ideas for travelers in conjunction with Canadian Thanksgiving.
Canadian Thanksgiving was celebrated simultaneously with the Columbus Day weekend in the U.S., during the second weekend of October. U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a reminder on October 8, 2009, to travelers planning trips across the border into the United States to have their approved travel documents ready for inspection and to brace for heavy traffic during the celebration of the Canadian Thanksgiving on Monday, October 12. Stewart Rabinowitz, of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz and Rabinowitz, provides additional detail concerning the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative (WHTI), which is now applicable to travelers on either side of the United States – Canada border. “The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, implemented on June 1, 2009, requires U.S. and Canadian citizens, age 16 and older, to present a valid acceptable and approved travel document that denotes both identity and citizenship when entering the U.S.by land or sea. Border travelers must have a passport, U.S. passport card, or an enhanced driver’s license. The latter, referred to as an EDL, is available in only four U.S. states – New York, Michigan, Vermont, and Washington, as well as four Canadian Provinces – Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, and British Columbia,” Rabinowitz explains. An alternative document is a Trusted Traveler Program card (NEXUS, SENTRI, & FAST). Canadian Border Patrol (CBP) also reminds U.S. lawful permanent residents that the I-551 form (green card) is acceptable for land and sea travel into the U.S.
Rabinowitz suggests that travelers familiarize themselves with the “Know Before You Go” information available from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (also available on the Canadian Border Patrol website) to avoid fines and penalties. Travelers should prepare for the inspection process prior to arriving at the inspection booth. “Individuals should have their crossing documents available for the inspection and they should be prepared to declare all items acquired abroad,” he explains.
Another issue can be a traveler’s cell phone. “People crossing the border should end cellular phone conversations before arriving at the inspection booth. These can be very distracting,” Rabinowitz concludes.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has proposed amending its regulations by rescinding its safe-harbor procedures for employers who receive a no-match letter.
DHS recently announced that it has rescinded regulations which provided a safe harbor for employers who took specific steps in response to receiving a Social Security Administration (SSA) “employer correction request,” informally referred to as an employer “no-match” letter. The SSA issues a no-match letter when an employer’s W-2 information fails to match SSA records. Employers annually send the SSA millions of earnings reports (W-2 forms) in which the combination of an employee’s name and social security number (SSN) does not match SSA records.
As background, various persons sued DHS and the court hearing the suit granted an injunction against implementation of these provisions. The regulations provided an expanded definition of circumstances leading to “constructive knowledge” under which an employer could legally be charged with “knowing” that an employee was an “unauthorized alien.” An employer who would follow the “safe harbor” procedures set forth in the no-match regulations avoids only the risk of being found to have “constructive knowledge” that an employee is not authorized to work in the United States based on receipt of a no-match letter. This does not prevent DHS from finding that an employer had constructive knowledge in other ways, or that an employer had actual knowledge that an employee was an unauthorized alien. Note that there are many causes for a “no-match.” These may be clerical errors and name changes even for work authorized employees, apart from the submission of information for an alien who is not authorized to be employed in the United States. In the latter case, an employee may be using a false SSN or a SSN assigned to another person. The now rescinded rule provided that employers who took specified steps were sheltered from a charge of “constructive knowledge” of an employee’s non-work authorized status should that employee turn out to have been authorized to work, documents notwithstanding.
DHS has concluded that the electronic employment verification system (E-verify), in concert with other DHS programs, such as ICE’s IMAGE, will provide better tools for employers to reduce incidences of unauthorized employment and to more accurately detect and deter the use of fraudulent identity documents by employees.
Over 900,000 entries for the Annual Diversity Immigrant Visa Program have already been submitted for 2011. This was just during the initial week – a 63% increase over last year.
The U.S. Department of State initiated the registration period for DV-2011 on October 2, 2009. The Diversity Visa Program – this year referred to as DV-2011 –is congressionally mandated visa category which selects individuals through a random drawing and makes available 55,000 immigrant visas every year, drawn from all entries and issued to persons who meet strict eligibility requirements and who are from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States. Successful applicants receive notification of their selection via mail between May and July 2010, and will be permitted to begin the Immigrant Visa application process in October of 2010. DV-2011 immigrant visa must be issued by September 30, 2011.
During the first week of eligible submissions, the Department of State received more than 900,000 entries for the Annual Diversity Immigrant Visa Program. In DV-2011, the Department of State anticipates more than 13,000,000 entries by November 30, 2009, the day when registration for DV-2011 closes.
There is no fee to enter DV-2011. Successful entrants will be required to pay applicable application fees and costs including those for medical examinations, for themselves and for immediate relatives who also qualify. Entries must be submitted online. All successful entrants will be notified by mail, but entrants who retain their online confirmation page will be able to check their entry status via the Internet.
Nationals from countries which have sent more than 50,000 immigrants to the United States over a five-year-period are not eligible. Thus, individuals whose birthplace is Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Jamaica, Mexico, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, South Korea, United Kingdom (except Northern Ireland) and its dependent territories, and Vietnam are not allowed to enter. Additionally, the law requires that every immigrant must possess (at minimum) a high school education or equivalent work experience.
Issuance of immigrant visas (green cards) is part of this so-called “green card lottery” or “dvlottery,” due to the fact that the winners are selected through a random drawing.
The U.S. border with Canada has been subject to increasing scrutiny in recent years, especially since September 11, 2001, when security concerns have overshadowed economic ones, despite the fact of Canada remaining our foremost trading partner. Stewart Rabinowitz, an immigration lawyer with the Dallas-based firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, believes that a crucial balance can be achieved along with improved functioning of border crossings.
The international border between Canada and the United States has inherited a different kind of priority since the attacks of September 11, 2001. Four geographically distinct corridors or “gateways” exist along the 3,000+ mile U.S. – Canada border: the Cascadian gateway in the Pacific Northwest, the Great Lakes gateway in the Midwest, the extensive Rural gateway in unpopulated areas, and the Continent spanning Perimeter gateway. “Each needs a different mix of infrastructure and technology to respond to unique regional conditions,” says Rabinowitz.
What’s just as important to consider are the different types of U.S. Canadian users. “Five types of users predominate,” Rabinowitz explains, “Commercial shippers, energy shippers, regular commuters, tourists, and perhaps most crucially, illicit border crossers. The prevalence of these five types of people in varying degrees of concentration says a great deal about the surprising heterogeneity of our northern border.” What Rabinowitz objects to is that the post-2001 border strategy stresses uniformity while downplaying this diversity. “We employ one-size-fits-all rules that ignore this diversity, and sometimes conflate conditions at the U.S. – Canadian border with those at the more difficult U.S. – Mexican border,” he argues.
One contentious issue is that borderland communities have little or no channel for regular input on key policy issues. Regional differences are often minimized or even overlooked by “one border” rules and programs. “Some categories of U.S. border users have seen their needs addressed, but overall the picture is less positive, and a balance between security and prosperity is lacking,” Rabinowitz says. All too frequently, “one border” rules falsely equate U.S-Canadian border conditions with those of the more challenging U.S – Mexican border.
A complicating factor is the current recession. The auto industry has been struck with particular force and this industry remains critical to U.S. – Canada trade. “Without a bi-national integration of North American manufacturing, the economy of not only these two countries but the global economy continues to suffer,” Rabinowitz explains.
Rabinowitz advocates several initiatives that may prove conducive to achieving the necessary balance. “It’s important to publicly adopt a two-speed approach to the Canadian and Mexican borders,” he stresses, “while emulating the 30-point U.S. – Canada Smart Border Action Plan on a local level.”
Immigration lawyer Stewart Rabinowitz of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz touts a new USCIS program that helps foreign widowed spouses.
U.S. Attorney General Janet Napolitano announced a new policy to assist widowed citizen immigrants to remain in the United States, despite the loss of their citizen partner.
“If a foreign national marries a United States citizen and the citizen partner dies, the widowed foreign national spouse can still remain eligible to gain permanent resident status, provided he or she was the spouse of a United States citizen for at least 2 years at the time of the citizen’s death and was not legally separated from the citizen at the time the citizen spouse died,” says immigration lawyer Stewart Rabinowitz of the Dallas-based law firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz. Such persons must file with USCIS within 2 years after the citizen spouse’s death to remain eligible to gain an immigration benefit from the marriage, provided the widowed foreign national spouse has not remarried. For widowed foreign national spouses whose marriages were not yet two years old at the time of the citizen spouses’ death, USCIS takes the position that a petition based on that marriage and a corresponding adjustment application must be denied. “This circumstance has been labeled the widow penalty,” Rabinowitz adds.
To alleviate the dual impact that currently exists, the new policy permits a widowed foreign national spouse to file for “deferred action status.” Deferred Action is a form of prosecutorial discretion whereby the Department of Homeland Security agrees not to remove the widowed foreign national spouse for a 2 year period and permits the widowed foreign national spouse and unmarried children younger than 21 and currently residing in the United States to also remain here. Foreign national spouses granted deferred action status can also apply for employment authorization and travel permission.
The widow penalty issues have been the subject of ongoing litigation. Several U.S. Courts of Appeal decisions have interpreted the underlying federal statute far differently than USCIS. For widowed foreign national spouses residing in the 1st, 6th or 9th Circuits, under the law of those circuits, such persons remain eligible to gain permanent residence based on marriage to the deceased U.S. citizen, despite the death of the citizen spouse within 2 years of marriage.
Deferred action status is an interim, administrative remedy. Only a legislative change can provide long term relief for this group of widowed foreign national spouses.
