harivenkat
05-05 12:16 PM
Immigration bill would bring Arizona-style law to Pa. - Salt Lake Tribune (http://www.sltrib.com/ci_15017379)
Rep. Scott Perry supports a proposal that would give police the power the check immigration status. An immigration lawyer said its overly simple.
By JEFF FRANTZ
Daily Record/Sunday News
Updated: 05/04/2010 10:43:28 PM MDT
A state representative proposed legislation Tuesday -- backed by several local lawmakers -- that was inspired by a controversial law passed last week in Arizona to combat illegal immigration.
If passed, the bill by Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Butler, would charge local law enforcement with checking immigration status, investigating businesses suspected of knowingly employing illegal immigrants and requiring businesses to verify a potential employee's legal status.
The proposal came a day after state Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, introduced a bill in direct opposition to Arizona's law.
Rep. Scott Perry, R-Carroll Township, supports Metcalfe's effort and said he will likely join as bill co-sponsor.
The federal government has failed to enforce the nation's immigration laws, Perry said, which is now forcing states to act because illegal immigration fosters crime, lowers wages and puts an added burden on taxpayers.
"What do we gain having cheaper tomatoes in the short term to sell out our security and sovereignty in the long term?" Perry said.
Both Perry and Metcalfe said the proposal doesn't target any one ethnic or immigrant group.
Jos� Colon, president of the board for the Centro Hispano Jos� Hern�ndez, said much of York's Hispanic community agrees too many illegal immigrants abuse the system. He said he supports people stopped for violating the law having to prove who they are, saying it only makes sense in an age of terror.
But Colon said the necessary immigration laws already exist, and the federal government needs to better enforce them. The federal government is more equipped to properly deal with the issue than states or municipalities, he said.
Colon was also bothered by the rhetoric Metcalfe used introducing his proposal, when he spoke of murders and rapists. The vast majority of people here illegally came to work, Colon said, and it makes it harder to have the serious, necessary discussion of the issue with such inflamed rhetoric. And, he added, such talk could create friction between the Hispanic community and others.
Craig Trebilcock, a local immigration attorney, said the federal government has failed to create a working immigration policy.
But Metcalfe's policy is "still ridiculous," Trebilcock said. "The people pressing these laws don't understand how complex it is to determine the immigration status of someone."
There are 42 types of visas, Trebilcock said, and that's before counting those granted asylum and others. Local law enforcement, no matter how well meaning, are not trained or equipped to become primary immigration enforcement officers, Trebilcock said.
"You'll end up with a bunch of lawsuits," Trebilcock said. "A bunch of municipalities getting sued because of the thousands of people getting stopped, there's going to be a couple problems."
Instead, he said, the law will discourage legal immigrants -- doctors, scientists, laborers, students -- that the country needs from every coming here.
About the bill
If passed, House Bill 2479, would:
# Require an employer to verify a prospective employee's immigration status. Lying about immigration status would be a second-degree misdemeanor.
# Require a law enforcement officer to verify a person's immigration status if the officer reasonably suspects that a person legally stopped, detained or arrested is in the country illegally. An officer could not inquire about people's immigration status if they were not first stopped for another offense.
# Require county district attorneys to investigate companies suspected of employing illegal immigrants. Companies caught knowingly doing so could lose access to state grants and their licenses to operate.
# Create a third-degree felony for intentionally smuggling illegal aliens into Pennsylvania. Police would be able to impound smugglers' vehicles.
According to the office of the bill's sponsor, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, Ron Miller , R-Jacobus; Will Tallman, R-Reading Township, Adams County; and Seth Grove , R-Dover Township, are co-sponsors. Rep. Scott Perry has said he will likely also be a co-sponsor.
Click here to read the full proposal.
Political outlook
In 2007, state Reps. Daryl Metcalfe and Scott Perry were part of a group that introduced a series of bills that would have changed some of Pennsylvania's immigration laws. Those never made it out of committee.
Metcalfe said Tuesday his proposal has bipartisan support but is not likely to receive much support from House Democratic leadership or Gov. Ed Rendell. However, he said, with a budget fight looming and representatives up for election in November, there could be an opportunity to muster the political will necessary for passage.
But Metcalfe's bill isn't the only piece of immigration legislation now in Harrisburg.
State Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, introduced a proposal that would reinforce current laws and, in the event of future changes to federal law, stop local law enforcement to serve as immigration officers.
"It is very important that we make it clear that Pennsylvania does not support racial profiling," Leach said.
Rep. Scott Perry supports a proposal that would give police the power the check immigration status. An immigration lawyer said its overly simple.
By JEFF FRANTZ
Daily Record/Sunday News
Updated: 05/04/2010 10:43:28 PM MDT
A state representative proposed legislation Tuesday -- backed by several local lawmakers -- that was inspired by a controversial law passed last week in Arizona to combat illegal immigration.
If passed, the bill by Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, R-Butler, would charge local law enforcement with checking immigration status, investigating businesses suspected of knowingly employing illegal immigrants and requiring businesses to verify a potential employee's legal status.
The proposal came a day after state Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, introduced a bill in direct opposition to Arizona's law.
Rep. Scott Perry, R-Carroll Township, supports Metcalfe's effort and said he will likely join as bill co-sponsor.
The federal government has failed to enforce the nation's immigration laws, Perry said, which is now forcing states to act because illegal immigration fosters crime, lowers wages and puts an added burden on taxpayers.
"What do we gain having cheaper tomatoes in the short term to sell out our security and sovereignty in the long term?" Perry said.
Both Perry and Metcalfe said the proposal doesn't target any one ethnic or immigrant group.
Jos� Colon, president of the board for the Centro Hispano Jos� Hern�ndez, said much of York's Hispanic community agrees too many illegal immigrants abuse the system. He said he supports people stopped for violating the law having to prove who they are, saying it only makes sense in an age of terror.
But Colon said the necessary immigration laws already exist, and the federal government needs to better enforce them. The federal government is more equipped to properly deal with the issue than states or municipalities, he said.
Colon was also bothered by the rhetoric Metcalfe used introducing his proposal, when he spoke of murders and rapists. The vast majority of people here illegally came to work, Colon said, and it makes it harder to have the serious, necessary discussion of the issue with such inflamed rhetoric. And, he added, such talk could create friction between the Hispanic community and others.
Craig Trebilcock, a local immigration attorney, said the federal government has failed to create a working immigration policy.
But Metcalfe's policy is "still ridiculous," Trebilcock said. "The people pressing these laws don't understand how complex it is to determine the immigration status of someone."
There are 42 types of visas, Trebilcock said, and that's before counting those granted asylum and others. Local law enforcement, no matter how well meaning, are not trained or equipped to become primary immigration enforcement officers, Trebilcock said.
"You'll end up with a bunch of lawsuits," Trebilcock said. "A bunch of municipalities getting sued because of the thousands of people getting stopped, there's going to be a couple problems."
Instead, he said, the law will discourage legal immigrants -- doctors, scientists, laborers, students -- that the country needs from every coming here.
About the bill
If passed, House Bill 2479, would:
# Require an employer to verify a prospective employee's immigration status. Lying about immigration status would be a second-degree misdemeanor.
# Require a law enforcement officer to verify a person's immigration status if the officer reasonably suspects that a person legally stopped, detained or arrested is in the country illegally. An officer could not inquire about people's immigration status if they were not first stopped for another offense.
# Require county district attorneys to investigate companies suspected of employing illegal immigrants. Companies caught knowingly doing so could lose access to state grants and their licenses to operate.
# Create a third-degree felony for intentionally smuggling illegal aliens into Pennsylvania. Police would be able to impound smugglers' vehicles.
According to the office of the bill's sponsor, Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, Ron Miller , R-Jacobus; Will Tallman, R-Reading Township, Adams County; and Seth Grove , R-Dover Township, are co-sponsors. Rep. Scott Perry has said he will likely also be a co-sponsor.
Click here to read the full proposal.
Political outlook
In 2007, state Reps. Daryl Metcalfe and Scott Perry were part of a group that introduced a series of bills that would have changed some of Pennsylvania's immigration laws. Those never made it out of committee.
Metcalfe said Tuesday his proposal has bipartisan support but is not likely to receive much support from House Democratic leadership or Gov. Ed Rendell. However, he said, with a budget fight looming and representatives up for election in November, there could be an opportunity to muster the political will necessary for passage.
But Metcalfe's bill isn't the only piece of immigration legislation now in Harrisburg.
State Sen. Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, introduced a proposal that would reinforce current laws and, in the event of future changes to federal law, stop local law enforcement to serve as immigration officers.
"It is very important that we make it clear that Pennsylvania does not support racial profiling," Leach said.
pranju
08-03 10:11 PM
lin0722554234
LIN -> Nebraska
07 -> Year in 2 digits
225 -> Number of working days since October 1 2006
5 -> Default for all electronic data
4234 -> Serial number for the receipts issued on that day starting with 0001.
There you go...)
LIN -> Nebraska
07 -> Year in 2 digits
225 -> Number of working days since October 1 2006
5 -> Default for all electronic data
4234 -> Serial number for the receipts issued on that day starting with 0001.
There you go...)
abheja
08-25 03:40 PM
Thanks so much for your quick response. Yes, I am planning to start EB2 from scratch since there is no relief in EB3. So, I will have to convince the company to bear the cost :(
insbaby
09-02 11:17 PM
I will be taking up a new job and I have been told by the new employer that, benifits will start after 30 days.
I presently have insurence through my employer. My understnading is that, insurence stops the day I leave the present employer. Now how do i handle the stop gap in insurence to be on safer side...??
Any help is appreciated...
You can choose to continue the insurance, the employer should provide this option. It looks expensive, but it is just for a month time, on the safe side, you can take this.
I presently have insurence through my employer. My understnading is that, insurence stops the day I leave the present employer. Now how do i handle the stop gap in insurence to be on safer side...??
Any help is appreciated...
You can choose to continue the insurance, the employer should provide this option. It looks expensive, but it is just for a month time, on the safe side, you can take this.
more...
cygent
04-01 07:43 PM
Thanks,
Ok, let me put it this way.
Is the any advantage (or not), filing 140 1st, and lets say your PD is already current, file AOS later. I.E. file them Separately, not in the same packet.
So in this scenario, is the any difference vs. filing concurrently or not?
Ok, let me put it this way.
Is the any advantage (or not), filing 140 1st, and lets say your PD is already current, file AOS later. I.E. file them Separately, not in the same packet.
So in this scenario, is the any difference vs. filing concurrently or not?
![golden globes 2011 justin bieber. Justin Drew Bieber [7]](http://www.whoswhosocial.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/justin_bieber_golden_globes_2011_red_carpet_01-e1305090302769.jpg "Justin Drew Bieber [7]")
logiclife
02-24 04:34 PM
Welcome back pdakwala, you went kind of underground for a while :):)
Glad to see you back in action.
--logiclife.
Glad to see you back in action.
--logiclife.
more...
guy03062
07-17 12:42 AM
kudos to ImmigrationVoice's core team and its members, especially flower campaign and San Jose rally. Apart from Congresswoman Lofgren, IV is the one who really added immense pressure on Govt by their root level activites.
eb3_nepa
03-16 09:42 AM
Is filing for 485 to get EAD etc really fraud? I mean it is their JOB to weed out the priority dates that are not current :). Besides if anyone is at fault it is the immigration lawyers.
more...
new_horizon
08-03 04:27 PM
I received the same reply from Sen Debbie Stabenaw's office. I agree that they have a standard reply to all such questions. Really bad.
HRPRO
02-10 09:31 AM
Do you have a legal reference for the > 50 miles rule ? In my case it is just 10 miles (moved from one town to next town). So I guess I am fine ?
Krish,
it is not all black and white, if your previous LCA covers the new work location, you should be fine, else a new LCA is required.
HRPRO
Krish,
it is not all black and white, if your previous LCA covers the new work location, you should be fine, else a new LCA is required.
HRPRO
more...
venkat9
03-10 02:34 PM
Thanks gckalafda,
Mine was from NSC.
Mine was from NSC.
smiledentist
06-21 12:37 AM
I am a dentist in state of CA,and filed for EB2 green card.In April
2006 applied for my
PERM from MD Dental, a dental group with 5 offices and about 30
employs and owned by 2
partners.Also in April 2006 they applied for my H1b visa.Further PERM and H1b
both were approved
and in may 2006 I filed for I-140 from the same company.I-140 had a
RFE but was approved
in Feb 2007.Meanwhile in Oct 2006 both partners had a misunderstanding
and they split the
company into 2 companies with one partner getting 2 offices and the
other partner getting
3 offices.Originally my perm was filed from the MD dental Van-Nuys
office, which was
given to partner A who then told me to file for a new H1b as tax ID
number for the
employer has changed but my job location would not change.I filed for
a new H1 visa from
partner A which was also approved and started to work for him till Feb
2007.In feb 2007 I
found a new job again as a dentist with a different company and moved
to that company.I
am still in good contact with both partner A and partner B of the old
company.
My question is if I could file for I485 from MD dental which is
already split with
approved I140, or I could file it from partner A or partner B`s new
company showing
either of them as succesor of interest.Also can I invoke AC21 in 6 months and move to my current employer..
Please advice.
2006 applied for my
PERM from MD Dental, a dental group with 5 offices and about 30
employs and owned by 2
partners.Also in April 2006 they applied for my H1b visa.Further PERM and H1b
both were approved
and in may 2006 I filed for I-140 from the same company.I-140 had a
RFE but was approved
in Feb 2007.Meanwhile in Oct 2006 both partners had a misunderstanding
and they split the
company into 2 companies with one partner getting 2 offices and the
other partner getting
3 offices.Originally my perm was filed from the MD dental Van-Nuys
office, which was
given to partner A who then told me to file for a new H1b as tax ID
number for the
employer has changed but my job location would not change.I filed for
a new H1 visa from
partner A which was also approved and started to work for him till Feb
2007.In feb 2007 I
found a new job again as a dentist with a different company and moved
to that company.I
am still in good contact with both partner A and partner B of the old
company.
My question is if I could file for I485 from MD dental which is
already split with
approved I140, or I could file it from partner A or partner B`s new
company showing
either of them as succesor of interest.Also can I invoke AC21 in 6 months and move to my current employer..
Please advice.
more...
pmpforgc
12-28 11:06 PM
Hi
In this line Can H-1 B or H-4 can Invest in Shares and Mutual funds DIRECTLY? not through ORP or other company institutions as there is no direct involvment of H-1 B employee.
In this line Can H-1 B or H-4 can Invest in Shares and Mutual funds DIRECTLY? not through ORP or other company institutions as there is no direct involvment of H-1 B employee.
ronhira
12-31 09:13 AM
You don't need a "path to citizenship" to family reunification. Please do not link A-B and so C-D. They are totally two different issues.
agree 100%..... aila tries to project that it represents immigrants..... aila actually doesn't represent immigrants..... it works for the benefit of its members ..... i.e. immigration lawyers...... most immigration benefit if more people like us are stuck in the system..... if there r more applicants..... & more people stuck in the system.... then more immigration lawyers will make more money...... so family unification which has nothing to do with path to citizenship..... somehow become related...... or even synonymous.... 3 cheers for representatives of "immigrations"........
agree 100%..... aila tries to project that it represents immigrants..... aila actually doesn't represent immigrants..... it works for the benefit of its members ..... i.e. immigration lawyers...... most immigration benefit if more people like us are stuck in the system..... if there r more applicants..... & more people stuck in the system.... then more immigration lawyers will make more money...... so family unification which has nothing to do with path to citizenship..... somehow become related...... or even synonymous.... 3 cheers for representatives of "immigrations"........
more...
saketkapur
04-13 09:27 PM
Well I checked with my old employer's legal dept and the lawyer and they won't be revoking my 140........also since its a soft LUD so it should not be so far related to my layoff....
However since my employer will be informing USCIS of my H1B termination in 30 to 45 days I guess I will have to be on a lookout for an RFE by mid may....
In the mean time I have filed a new G28 through my own lawyer and am trying get into a job soon and file AC21........
Lets see who will win the race of paperwork and beurocratic bullshit...... :eek:
Another day in paradise....... :rolleyes:
However since my employer will be informing USCIS of my H1B termination in 30 to 45 days I guess I will have to be on a lookout for an RFE by mid may....
In the mean time I have filed a new G28 through my own lawyer and am trying get into a job soon and file AC21........
Lets see who will win the race of paperwork and beurocratic bullshit...... :eek:
Another day in paradise....... :rolleyes:
whattodo21
07-09 03:08 PM
i have sent him about three emails. The response is the same - word for word. If they see any immigration related email from a constituent, all they get is this canned response. Sen. Conryn is anti-immgrant for all I know and care.
Could be true...
However, it is better to get a letter that actually relates to our problem instead of a standard letter talking about amnesty
Could be true...
However, it is better to get a letter that actually relates to our problem instead of a standard letter talking about amnesty
more...
readblack
10-25 01:57 PM
Hi,
I am in similar boat and have some additional comments/questions.
My Labor PERM filed July08, I140 Approved Aug09. PD for EB2 not available. H1B 6yr expire in sep2010.
1. If H1B is transferred to another employer before March2010, does it mean my current exployer holdmy destiny, as he can revoke my I140 and I cannot apply for 3 year renewal? I can get copy of I140 approval.
2. What exactly 'revoke I140' means? does it mean current employer calls USCIS and asks to do something to my petition?
3. Incase current employer doesnot revoke I140,Is it possible that my PD would always be july2008 even if
-a. I switch employers and they file H1B?
-b. I go outside country for 6-11months for job or study and come back and work on H1B extension of 3 yrs?
-c. I am unemployed and on H4 in between for sometime?
Thanks in advance.
I am in similar boat and have some additional comments/questions.
My Labor PERM filed July08, I140 Approved Aug09. PD for EB2 not available. H1B 6yr expire in sep2010.
1. If H1B is transferred to another employer before March2010, does it mean my current exployer holdmy destiny, as he can revoke my I140 and I cannot apply for 3 year renewal? I can get copy of I140 approval.
2. What exactly 'revoke I140' means? does it mean current employer calls USCIS and asks to do something to my petition?
3. Incase current employer doesnot revoke I140,Is it possible that my PD would always be july2008 even if
-a. I switch employers and they file H1B?
-b. I go outside country for 6-11months for job or study and come back and work on H1B extension of 3 yrs?
-c. I am unemployed and on H4 in between for sometime?
Thanks in advance.
pappu
02-11 10:23 AM
On the contrary I think IV forum can be stress relievers. One can share their pain, anxiety, news and questions with other people in the same boat.
desi3933
07-09 08:06 AM
LCA at 485 level should not be considered and that could be the reason u never heard of one .....
There was one case where in appeal his claim for AC-21 was upheld, but his job location was different from LCA location, so he was termed out of status on H1 and since his out of status > 180 days, his I-485 was denied.
This happened in early 2007.
______________________
Not a legal advice
There was one case where in appeal his claim for AC-21 was upheld, but his job location was different from LCA location, so he was termed out of status on H1 and since his out of status > 180 days, his I-485 was denied.
This happened in early 2007.
______________________
Not a legal advice
pappu
04-30 12:17 PM
I was also taken aback initially when I read this. The 8 year wait doesnt apply to title 5. Title 5 already is designed to clear the backlog of EB immigration from 6 years to 0/at best minimum since quota is increased and there are exemptions. The 8 year backlog refers to family based.
rvr_jcop
02-15 01:30 AM
Hello All
I have a question concerning my EAD.Company A applied for my H-1B After an year I have trfd my H-1 to company B and I have been working with company B for the past 2yrs 10 months.My H-1 b is due to expire in feb 2009.Company B Applied for my green card also. I-140 approved in November 2007.I got EAD in oct 2007 and has a valid EAD up to aug 2010.technically I am on EAD since I entered the country on advance parole.Now my company is going to renew my H-1 B .In light of the bill that has been passed which doesnot allow forfresh H-1 B as well as H-1 B renewals,what happens to my EAD if my H-1 renewal petetion gets denied?Does denial of non immigrant petetion leads to denial of immigrant visa (i.e pending adjustment of status).What happens to my EAD.I am worried a lot.Pls advice?Should I request my company to stop the renewal process so that I can stay on EAD only.
Before asking n number of questions, it will be helpful for others(even to answer the questions) if you fill up your profile.
--Its doesnt mean that you are technically on EAD just for the reason of you entered on AP. You could choose to working on H1-B if you want to (by not sending your I-9)
--Is company B you mentioned a TARP company?
--Denial of non-imm petition does not automatically lead to denial of other immi petitions provided all else is good
Chill out and stop worrying. Talk to your attorney and make wise decision that is good for you.
This is just my opinion/understanding and others could correct me if I was wrong..
I have a question concerning my EAD.Company A applied for my H-1B After an year I have trfd my H-1 to company B and I have been working with company B for the past 2yrs 10 months.My H-1 b is due to expire in feb 2009.Company B Applied for my green card also. I-140 approved in November 2007.I got EAD in oct 2007 and has a valid EAD up to aug 2010.technically I am on EAD since I entered the country on advance parole.Now my company is going to renew my H-1 B .In light of the bill that has been passed which doesnot allow forfresh H-1 B as well as H-1 B renewals,what happens to my EAD if my H-1 renewal petetion gets denied?Does denial of non immigrant petetion leads to denial of immigrant visa (i.e pending adjustment of status).What happens to my EAD.I am worried a lot.Pls advice?Should I request my company to stop the renewal process so that I can stay on EAD only.
Before asking n number of questions, it will be helpful for others(even to answer the questions) if you fill up your profile.
--Its doesnt mean that you are technically on EAD just for the reason of you entered on AP. You could choose to working on H1-B if you want to (by not sending your I-9)
--Is company B you mentioned a TARP company?
--Denial of non-imm petition does not automatically lead to denial of other immi petitions provided all else is good
Chill out and stop worrying. Talk to your attorney and make wise decision that is good for you.
This is just my opinion/understanding and others could correct me if I was wrong..
No comments:
Post a Comment