The program gives temporary legal status to foreign nationals whose homeland has sustained a crisis, such as civil war or environmental disaster. Haiti sustained massive amounts of damage after a massive earthquake on Jan. 12, 2010.

“In the extended aftermath of the devastating earthquakes in Haiti, the United States has remained fully committed to upholding our responsibility to assist individuals affected by this tragedy by using tools available under the law,” said DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Haitians who came to the U.S. before the quake will also benefit from the 18-month extension. Those seeking an extension have 90 days to apply.  The DHS Secretary also re-designated Haitians as eligible for TPS, permitting a larger class of Haitians who arrived after the earthquake to qualify for TPS.  Haitians who are applying for the first time must do so within six months.

About 48,000 Haitians are currently living in the United States under temporary protected status. It is believed there are many more are in the United States that have not applied because they could not afford the $470 application fee or were afraid of registering because they could be deported after the status ends.

“In light of the sheer level of continuing human misery in the aftermath of the Haitian earthquake of 2010, it is a positive step to see the U.S. assist those Haitians already in the U.S., who qualify for TPS, continue to be able to stay while Haiti all-to-slowly rebuilds. Extension and of TPS and re-designation of that status is a vast improvement over deporting Haitians,” says Dallas immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm of Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C.

The 2010 earthquake killed more than 230,000 people and left many more homeless. A cholera outbreak caused by a lack of potable drinking water has claimed more than 4,800 lives in the 17 months since the quake.

The U.S. had initially resisted granting protected legal status to thousands of Haitians because officials believed it may cause mass migrations of Haitians across the Caribbean, needlessly putting Haitian lives in danger once again.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

Bo Cooper, Esq. and Paul Virtue, Esq., both former INS General Counsels, recently stated that law enforcement authority to use discretion in investigations and prosecutions is not just possible; it is “fundamental to the American legal system.” The legal system permits law enforcement officers and other executive branch members such as the President and the Department of Homeland Security discretion to decide whether to deport illegal immigrants in most cases.

“The executive branch has more authority in immigration matters than its is willing to exercise. It could expand Parole-in-Place and permit persons who merit the favorable exercise of discretion to remain in the U.S., and even be able to adjust their status to that of lawful permanent residence if its chooses. Or it could defer action against persons meriting such discretion to remain in the U.S. by a formal application process,” says Dallas immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm of Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C.

The executive branch often grants a case “deferred action” and chooses not to prosecute certain illegal immigrants, even though they are otherwise deportable. The DHS secretary has previously granted this to widows of U.S. citizens who could not adjust their status due to their spouse’s death. Over 12,000 individuals who were applicants for the Violence Against Women Act were also granted deferred action in 2010.

The President can take action to change immigration law with a “signing statement.” Presidents George H.W. Bush, Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama have all issued signing statements in the past, many of them relating to immigration, and President Obama could choose to enact further changes if he chooses.

“For a significant minority of cases, it is tragic that the executive branch chooses exercise its power so stingily, and looks only to Congressional action as a means to implement any significant change,” Rabinowitz says.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

The data shows that naturalization has declined by approximately 426,000 since 2008. The total number of persons naturalized has also consistently declined since 2008 from every region of the world except for Africa. USCIS opines that the declining rates do not suggest a historical trend, but that the 2008 rates were caused by a surge due to an impending filing fee increase for naturalization applications, and the current figures reflect that year’s surge.

“USCIS recognizes that there are year to year fluctuations in the number of people naturalizing and cautions against drawing conclusions based on data over the short three year period covered in the report,” said Dallas immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm of Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C. “One explanation in the decline in naturalization numbers may be attributed to the high USCIS naturalization filing fee of $680 at a time of high unemployment during the current recession.”

The data also shows continued trends seen over the past several decades. Prior to the 1970s, most of those naturalizing were of European descent. Since 1976, persons from Asia have led persons from other regions in U.S. naturalization rates. This change occurred largely because of the increased immigration from Asian countries, from Vietnamese refugees during the Vietnam war, and because persons from Asian are more likely to seek U.S. naturalization than those from European, according to the report. Forty-one percent of those naturalized in 2010 were Asians.

The report attributes the growth of naturalization of those from Africa to the elimination of the annual limit of 10,000 asylum status adjustments that occurred in 2005. One in six originally from Africa who naturalized in the U.S. had held held asylum status.

Mexico led other countries in the number of persons naturalized with 67,062. India ranked second with 61,142, and the Philippines and China rank third and fourth with around 35,000 persons naturalized each. Women accounted for about one-third of all persons naturalized, and more than half of all persons naturalized were between 25 and 44 years old. Two-thirds were married.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

Clinton said that the State Department was “particularly disturbed” by three growing trends in 2010, which included crackdowns on civil society activists; violations against the fundamental freedoms of expression, association and assembly through limited Internet freedoms; and the repression of vulnerable minorities.

She expressed disappointment that Venezuela and Russia were censoring journalists and activists, and that intellectuals and other outspoken people in China were being arrested and detained. She also spoke against the repression of minorities throughout the world, speaking specifically about blasphemy in Pakistan and how it carries a death penalty.

Clinton paid particular interest in the recent uprisings in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, and other Middle Eastern countries. “We have been particularly inspired by the courage and determination of the activists in the Middle East and North Africa and in other repressive societies who have demanded peaceful democratic change and respect for their universal human rights. The United States will stand with those who seek to advance the causes of democracy and human rights wherever they may live, and we will stand with those who exercise their fundamental freedoms of expression and assembly in a peaceful way,” she said.

Clinton expressed hope that this year’s Human Rights Report would bring increased attention to those countries, and help them to transition to more democratic nations.

“It is refreshing to see the Department of State acknowledge activists’ efforts in the Middle East demand peaceful, democratic change, in their exercise of universal human rights,” says Dallas immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm of Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C. “Equally so, it is significant that United States considers human rights a core element of its foreign policy.”

Clinton also announced the launch of humanrights.gov, a government website that will provide a searchable database of reports, statements and news from around the world. “We hope this will make it easier for citizens, scholars, NGOs, and international organizations to find the information they need to hold governments accountable,” she said, about the site.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

The border between the U.S. and Canada stretches out for roughly 4,000 miles through farmland, mountains and lakes, leaving large areas unwatched that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security calls a “higher” terrorist threat, according to the report. The report said that due to the limited law enforcement coverage in “vast stretches” of the northern border, these areas are better poised to be exploited by terrorists.

Canada also has active Islamist extremist groups that are not commonly found in Mexico, the report found, adding to the danger of an unsecured northern border. In addition, Canada is a major throughway for many illicit drugs, with Homeland Security confiscating over 40,000 pounds of illegal drugs and making 6,000 drug-related arrests at the northern border in 2010.

The GAO found that only 32 miles of the border – approximately 1 percent – had reached an “acceptable level of control.” The report concluded that Border Patrol agents could detect illegal activity on about 1,000 more miles of the border, but does not have the resources to respond.

The GAO found that this weakness could be mitigated with increased interagency cooperation. Border Patrol already has a partnership in place with Canadian law enforcement agencies and other partners through the Integrated Border Enforcement Teams. But the report found that information sharing between the agencies involved “needs additional work.”

“While some interagency cooperation improved, GAO found a familiar theme: problems in sharing information, resources, and inadequate management to effectively implement meaningful collaboration between agencies,” said Dallas-based immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz. “While interagency forums exist, DHS must engage in meaningful oversight of agency participants and require compliance with the agreements between agencies. To date, some field agents have had to coordinate for themselves.”

The GAO recommended that Homeland Security should take the lead in improving communications between Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Border Patrol – the U.S. agencies responsible for keeping the northern border secure – as well as Canadian agencies.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

An applicant will receive this card, which looks much like the current Employment Authorization Document, when he or she applies for the ancillary benefits of employment authorization and travel permission, benefits available to most adjustment of status applicants while thier case is pending.

“Finally, a sensible policy in which USCIS will now issue one document to adjustment of status applicants that authorizes either travel, employment or both, saving USCIS time and money,” said Dallas-based immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz.

The new card is different from the previous EAD card in that it is more durable, as it is not paper-based, and reads “Serves as I-512 Advance Parole” on the bottom of the card, to show that it serves as an Advance Parole document in addition to authorizing employment.

The combined employment authorization document and Advance Parole document allows adjustment of status applicants to travel abroad and come back to the U.S. without giving up his or her pending adjustment application. The holder must present the card at the port of entry.

The new combined card is a step in the right direction, according to Rabinowitz, but USCIS can do more to streamline the process for adjustment of status applicants.

“Now, if USCIS could only issue a single fee receipt document for an adjustment of status application,” Rabinowitz said. “Presently, USCIS issues a separate adjustment of status fee receipt for the application itself, another for employment authorization, and a third for travel permission even though the adjustment application filing fee covers all three. Each time we file, we watch USCIS send three separate fee receipt documents each one arriving in a separate, postage paid envelope, and watch the government’s postage meter unnecessarily jingle.”

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry stated in early January that he believes immigration enforcement is a duty of both state officials and federal authority, mirroring Arizona’s controversial stance on the issue.

Meanwhile, the city of El Paso, Tex. – which sits right on the Texas border with Mexico – ranks as the safest large city in the United States due to the mutual trust between the law enforcement community there and the largely Mexican immigrant community.

That trust, however, may soon be diminished, as Perry has asked the state’s Republican-led state legislature to enact a law similar to Arizona’s controversial SB 1070, requiring police and sheriffs to ask the immigration status of the people they encounter while at work.

“Isn’t it ironic that in the face of a $25 billion budget shortfall, Gov. Perry insists that a crackdown on illegal immigration is an emergency item for the state to consider?” asked Dallas-based immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz. “The immigration issue appears to be a convenient diversion. Requiring state and local immigration-related action will cost state and local resources, and actually lessen public safety.”

State Republicans plan to bring approximately 40 bills targeting illegal immigration to the floor of Texas legislature this session. One would require local law enforcement to ask those pulled over at a traffic stop if they are in the country illegally if they are not carrying identification. Another requires schools to identify children who are illegal immigrants.

Sheriff Richard Wiles of El Paso County has stated that he believes the laws would do more harm than good. He said that it should not be the job of local police to do a federal duty, and many officers are ill prepared to handle the judgment calls that they may be required to make.

“What is the incentive to report crimes or even to testify for persons illegally in the U.S. if the result of police contact is removal from the U.S.? Law enforcement in many cities, including El Paso, have worked hard to develop a trusted and close relationship, which state imposed immigration status checks will undermine,” Rabinowitz said.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit Rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

The H-1B program allows U.S. employers to temporarily hire foreign workers in specialty occupations. Congress asked the GAO to examine the employer demand for H-1B workers and how the cap of 65,000 H-1B visas per fiscal year affects employers’ bottom lines and their ability to maintain their business in the U.S., rather than shuttering and relocating to foreign countries. Congress also asked the GAO to study H-1B worker characteristics, the potential impact of raising the 65,000-visa cap and how well the H-1B requirements protect U.S. workers.

The study found that demand for H-1B workers exceeded the 65,000-visa cap. A small group of employers made up a large percent of businesses applying for H-1B visas, with 1 percent of businesses requesting over one quarter of H-1B allotment.

The report also found that H-1B employees generally earn favorable salaries.

“When comparing reported U.S. worker salaries to H-1B workers in the same fields and age groups, the GAO reported that the H-1B workers earned either the same or more than similarly employed U.S. workers,” said Dallas-based immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz. “This finding undercuts H-1B opponents’ contention that US employers hire H-1B workers because such workers will and do work for lower wages than U.S. workers.”

Some employers reported to the GAO that the cap resulted in increased costs. When the cap was hit, small firms reported that they had to fill their positions with different candidates, costing them delays and some economic losses. Some employers also reported that the H-1B lottery process that goes into effect when the cap is reached was unfavorable, as it did not allow them to prioritize candidates if they submitted more than one position.

“Numerical limitations on the H-1B visa classification, according to the GAO, affected certain U.S. employers with research and development centers abroad. Better than 25 percent of U.S. employers responded that the H-1B program in its current confiuration played an important role in setting up those centers abroad, based in part, on the uncertainty of obtaining H-1B visas for needed talent in the U.S.,” Rabinowitz said.

Upon completion of the study, GAO recommended that Congress re-examine provisions of the H-1B program and attempt to improve efficiency, flexibility and monitoring.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit .Rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

Priority dates, each immigrant’s “place in line” for a visa with which to immigrate to the U.S., retrogressed, or moved backwards, meaning that immigrants will face a longer wait until they are eligible to join their relatives to the U.S.

Priority dates had been moving forward in past months, giving some families hope that they would be reunited in the U.S. sooner, but the dates began retrogressing in December. Some of the dates moved back as much as several years.

“A cornerstone of U.S. immigration policy has been reunification of the family,” said Dallas-based immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz. “Seeing visa number availability move backwards means greater hardship for family members seeking reunification, especially spouses and minor children of permanent residents, who must wait years for a visa number to come current.”

The priority date for the First Preference Category, known as F1 (unmarried sons and daughters of US citizens, over 21 years of age) is set to Jan. 1, 2005 for applicants from most countries, except for Mexico and the Philippines, whose dates go back to the early 1990s. As an example, this represents a two year and 10 month retrogression for immigrants from the Philippines.

There was a similar pattern among other categories. The family-sponsored preference 2A category (the spouse and children of lawful permanent residents) for most countries retrogressed approximately 20 months from Aug. 1, 2010 to Jan. 1, 2008. The family-sponsored 2B category (adult, unmarried sons and daughters of lawful permanent residents) for most countries retrogressed from June 1, 2005 to April 15, 2003, approximately 26 months.

The State Department said that these numbers will likely not decrease for some time, as demand for family-sponsored immigration shows no signs of subsiding.

There have been no changes to employment-based priority dates. All EB-1 (priority worker) priority dates remain current. EB-2  (advanced degree holders) priority dates are current for most foreign nationals, except for immigrants from China and India.

The State Department releases monthly Visa Bulletins that summarize the availability of immigrant numbers.

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit Rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.

“Finally, as a result of this Ninth Circuit’s holding, aliens in removal proceedings in the Ninth Circuit will be able to see a copy of their A-file in advance of a hearing,” said Dallas-based immigration attorney Stewart Rabinowitz of the firm Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz.

In Dent v. Holder, Sazar Dent, a Honduran who moved to the United States as a child, was placed in removal proceedings as a result of a felony conviction. Dent had lived in the U.S. since 1981 and claimed to have been adopted by a U.S. woman, but could not produce any evidence on his behalf. Proof of the adoption could have offered him relief from removal. Additionally, the government contested that Dent’s adoptive mother was even a citizen herself.

Throughout the process, the government refused to provide Dent with his complete A-file, a government file which contains immigration documents about foreign nationals who are or have been in the United States.  When Dent appealed the case after the judge found that he was removable, the government located additional documents about Dent’s immigration status – naturalization applications for both him and his mother dating back to the 1980s. The government had never officially acted upon the applications.

Upon this realization, the court found that all immigrants in the Ninth Circuit have the right to view their A-file. The Court found a violation of due process to withhold access to a foreign national’s A-file in advance of a hearing, while the government can use that same file against a foreign national. The Court held that an alien involved in removal proceedings should have access to any document not considered to be confidential by the attorney general that pertains to the alien’s admission or presence in the U.S.

“This is fundamental,” Rabinowitz said. “We now look to other circuit’s courts of appeal to take a similar due process approach. Best would be a revised DHS policy that uniformly makes an A-file available to a respondent as a basic right, but that may be some time in coming.”

To learn more about Rabinowitz & Rabinowitz, P.C., call 1.972.233.6200 or visit http://www.rabinowitzrabinowitz.com.