Evelyne

The proposed Provisional Waiver rule would allow a spouse or child of a U.S. Citizen relative to obtain a provisional waiver in the United States and if approved, go to their home country to pick up their visas, thus reducing the separation time between families.  The provisional waiver applies only for unlawful presence, not for fraud, misrepresentation or criminal issues.

This is a great improvement over the risk of going to the home country, being told by the consular officer that the alien needs a waiver, filing the waiver with USCIS and waiting in the home country up to one year for a decision.  If denied, the alien needs to remain in his or her country for 3-10 years depending upon the length of unlawful presence in the United States.

The new rule may be enacted by the end of 2012.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/07/us/path-to-green-card-for-illegal-immigrant-family-members-of-americans.html?_r=2&hp

Vietnamese couple

IS THE CLIENT ELIGIBLE TO MARRY?

A ”simple” spouse-based adjustment of status case may have its challenges in the eligibility of marriage.

If one of the spouses had previous marriages, it’s important to build a chronology and ensure that there was no bigamy along the way.  Obtaining CERTIFIED copies of the divorce decrees is important.  Mexican divorces are invalid if the person was not a legal resident of Mexico.  If there is an invalid divorce or bigamy, the family law aspect of the case needs to be straightened out before proceeding with a spouse-based adjustment of status immigration application.

Also not a bad idea is to obtain the marriage certificates for the previous marriages.  Sometimes what a client may call “marriage” may have been a common law marriage.

DOES THE CLIENT SPEAK ENGLISH?

If the client does not speak English the parties should not proceed to the interview without an interpreter.  Sometimes a scenario occurs where an interpreter has been retained but simply doesn’t show up or calls at the last minute stating he/she can’t make it.  It’s very tempting to move forward with the interview but it should not be done.  The spouse who does speak English cannot translate for his/her spouse.  The attorney cannot translate for the client.  Simply ask the Deputy Adjudicating Officer to reschedule the interview.

AFFIDAVIT OF SUPPORT AND EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT:

If the U.S. Citizen spouse has income over the poverty guidelines, the case is a no-brainer.  However, if there is no income, then assets must be considered.  When the assets are held in a trust, the case becomes more complicated.

***

Evelyne M. Hart has experience with family law, tax and estate law and is able to bring that experience to her immigration practice.

Demand is growing for visas that help victims of abuse in U.S.

By Paloma Esquival, Los Angeles Times September 27, 2011

A file picture of U.S. flags during a rally for immigration reform, in front of the Washington monument (background).

LOS ANGELES – For years Norma endured her husband’s physical and mental abuse. But the undocumented mother of five finally decided to call police when her 10- and 11-year-old daughters told her that their father had sexually abused them.

“In that moment,” said Norma, who asked that her last name not be used to protect her children, “I felt _ not scared, mostly I just felt angry at myself for hiding so many things, for letting it get to that point.”

She was in deportation proceedings at the time and just days away from a hearing that could have seen her removed from the country.

Lawyers helped get her deportation deferred until the U-visa program, which provides temporary legal status to abuse victims who help police investigate crimes, took effect in 2008. In that time, Norma’s husband was sentenced to six years in prison for a forcible lewd act on a child under 14 and Norma and her children secured the right to stay in the country long term.

The U-visa program got off to a sluggish start, with advocates complaining that immigration officials were slow to approve applications. It grew quickly, however, with the help of outreach efforts, including local visits by officials with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

But with increasing awareness has come increasing demand. In the three years that the program has been in place, more than 30,000 applications have been filed and more than 25,600 approved. Soon after a visit to Los Angeles this month to promote the program, immigration officials announced that all 10,000 available U-visas had been issued for the fiscal year, which ends Friday.

“We can see the volume already. At some point it’s going to be an issue,” said Betty Song, an attorney with the Asian Pacific American Legal Center in L.A. “I don’t know what purpose the cap serves, because if people are eligible, they are eligible.”

Since last year, U.S. Senator Robert Menendez, D-N.J., and California Democratic Reps. George Miller and Judy Chu have pushed the Power Act, which would expand U-visas to include victims of labor exploitation and increase the number of such visas to 30,000 annually. But the legislation has gained little traction in Congress. Others hope an increase will be included in separate legislation to benefit crime victims.

Proponents of immigration restriction, such as the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) and the Center for Immigration Studies, said visas for crime victims should be further limited to the most extreme cases.

“The historic pattern with these special interest visa set-asides is that once they become popular and the use expands to the limits set by Congress, then you get a backlog,” said Bob Dane, a FAIR spokesman. “Then that pressure begins to be applied to Congress to deal with the backlog by increasing the ceiling.”

Attorneys who work with U-visa applicants said they have yet to face much trouble with the limit because applications are put on hold until the next fiscal year, which begins in October.

By contrast, a cap of 5,000 visas available to human trafficking victims has never been reached. Last year only 574 applications were received.

In part, experts said, victims of human trafficking have a difficult time coming forward because of the nature of the crime _ and when they are tracked down, it can be difficult to get them to talk about their experiences.

U-visas, on the other hand, are available to the widest group of crime victims, including victims of assault, domestic violence and other crimes.

For those who manage to learn about and obtain the benefit, the program has a lasting effect.

After she was granted a visa, Norma went back to school to become a dental technician. In May she became a legal permanent resident and, she said, she hopes to become a citizen as soon as she is eligible. Her daughters too were granted legal permission to stay in the country.

Elisa, an Orange County woman who received a U-visa after reporting her husband’s physical abuse, became a citizen in May. She asked that her real name not be used to protect her family.

“I feel very grateful to this country,” she said. “I’ve gone to school, I’ve taken English, I’ve learned about self-esteem. I’ve been allowed to be independent, to work and to look for a better future.”

The Washington Post – By Emily Langer, Published: September 22, 2011

Oscar Handlin, a Harvard professor whose classic writings on American immigration made him a leading intellectual force behind legislation that eliminated the immigration quota system in the United States, died Sept. 20 at his home in Cambridge, Mass., after a heart attack. He was 95.

His death was confirmed by his son, David Handlin.

The son of Jewish immigrants, Dr. Handlin was considered the father of modern immigration studies. In his panoramic books, he chronicled the stories of Europeans, Jews, Puerto Ricans and African Americans and other populations that shaped the United States. His sweeping work “The Uprooted: The Epic Story of the Great Migrations That Made the American People” won the 1952 Pulitzer Prize in history.

“Once I thought to write a history of the immigrants in America,” he wrote in perhaps the most noted passage of that book. “Then, I discovered that the immigrants were American history.”

Dr. Handlin’s credentials as a historian, the Harvard imprimatur and his frequent writings — in publications including the Atlantic Monthly and Commentary — made him an influential public intellectual in his time. Historians cite him as a crucial behind-the-scenes player in the landmark 1965 legislation that abolished the country-based quota systems that had regulated immigration since the 1920s.

He was “absolutely central to it,” said Hasia Diner, a professor of immigration history at New York University.

Dr. Handlin found the quota systems, which favored Northern and Western European immigrants, racially discriminatory.

He considered it “something that not only discriminated against prospective immigrants,” said Columbia University professor Mae Ngai, but also “a kind of stigma against those ethnic groups in the United States.”

In his writings, Dr. Handlin never treated American immigration in dry, statistical terms. Critics described “The Uprooted,” his most noted work, as a riveting and moving account of the entire immigration experience.

“The Uprooted concerns the personal human side of the flood of immigration,” wrote a New York Herald Tribune reviewer. “Mr. Handlin wrote of the European settlements from which the immigrants came, then followed through the hardships of their crossing, in steerage, and life that followed in the United States.”

Oscar Handlin was born Sept. 29, 1915, in Brooklyn in a household where education was highly valued. When Dr. Handlin’s son was born, his father, a Russian immigrant, suggested the name “Plato.” Dr. Handlin and his wife decided against it.

Dr. Handlin grew up working as a delivery boy in his family’s grocery store and often rested a book on top of his pushcart, reading as his made his way through the streets of Brooklyn.

He graduated from Brooklyn College in 1934 and then studied at Harvard, where he earned a master’s degree in 1935 and a doctorate in history in 1940.

Among his mentors was Arthur M. Schlesinger Sr., who suggested the topic of his dissertation: 18th- and early 19th-century immigrants to Boston. The work was subsequently published under the title “Boston’s Immigrants.”

Dr. Handlin was himself the target of discrimination while at Harvard. His classmate John Hope Franklin, who became a revered scholar of African American history, wrote in a memoir that Dr. Handlin was turned away as an officer in the Henry Adams Club because he was Jewish.

Dr. Handlin began teaching at Harvard while pursuing his graduate degrees and would remain with the university for more than four decades.

His first wife, Mary Flug Handlin, with whom he often collaborated, died in 1976.

Survivors include his second wife, of 34 years, Lilian Bombach Handlin of Cambridge, also a co-author; three children from his first marriage, David Handlin of Lexington, Mass., Joanna Handlin Smith of Cambridge and Ruth Manley of Guilford, Conn.; one brother; four grandchildren; and one great-grandchild.

WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), marking a significant milestone in its efforts to provide relief to victims of crimes, has for the second straight year approved 10,000 petitions for U nonimmigrant status, also referred to as the U-visa.

On an annual basis, 10,000 U-visas are set aside for victims of crime who have suffered substantial mental or physical abuse and are willing to help law enforcement authorities investigate or prosecute crime.

“Providing immigration protection to victims of crime and their families while aiding law enforcement efforts to bring criminals to justice is of the utmost importance to the Agency and the public we serve,” said USCIS Director Alejandro Mayorkas.

Due in large part to public education and partnerships forged with law enforcement agencies and service providers, USCIS reached the statutory maximum of 10,000 U-visas per fiscal year for the second year in a row since it began approving petitions for them in 2008. It is a significant milestone for the program created by Congress to strengthen law enforcement’s ability to investigate and prosecute cases of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking, and other crimes while at the same time offering protection to victims of such crimes. More than 45,000 victims and their immediate family members have received U-visas since the implementation of this program.

As part of this effort, USCIS adjudications officers have traveled to 30 cities, including Boston, Philadelphia, Seattle and Los Angeles to train federal, state and local law enforcement and immigrant-serving organizations on immigration protections available to immigrants who are victims of human trafficking, domestic violence and other crimes.

USCIS will continue to accept and adjudicate new U-visa petitions, and will resume issuing U-visas on Oct. 1, 2011, the first day of fiscal year 2012.

For more information about the U-visa, please see the Victims of Criminal Activity web page atwww.uscis.gov. From there, you will find a link on the right side of the page to Questions and Answers.

For more information on USCIS and its programs, please visit www.uscis.gov or follow us on Twitter (@uscisExit Disclaimer), YouTube (/uscisExit Disclaimer) and the USCIS blog The Beacon. For more information about DHS efforts to combat human trafficking, visit www.dhs.gov/humantrafficking andwww.uscis.gov/humantrafficking.

 

 

E-Verify was recently upgraded to include a driver’s license verification feature. This is significant because driver’s licenses are presented by more than 80% of new hires to establish their identity during the employment eligibility verification process.
Mississippi is the first state to partner with the Department of Homeland Security to make driver’s license data available to be checked through E-Verify. E-Verify has an extremely high accuracy rate, and this anti-fraud enhancement makes the system even more reliable. In addition, E-Verify has recently added user-focused enhancements, including more help functions and streamlined enrollment.
To learn more, visit the E-Verify Enhancements web pages.

What Happens During the Naturalization Interview?

During the naturalization interview with a USCIS Officer, you will be tested on your knowledge of civics and your ability to speak, understand, read, and write English.
  • Your ability to speak and understand English will be determined by a USCIS Officer from your answers to questions normally asked during the eligibility interview on the Application for Naturalization, Form N-400.
  • For the English portion, you will be given both a reading test and a writing test. You must read 1 out of 3 sentences correctly to demonstrate an ability to read in English. You must write 1 out of 3 sentences correctly to demonstrate an ability to write in English.
  • For the civics portion, you will be asked up to 10 questions from the list of 100 questions. You must answer 6 out of 10 questions correctly to pass the civics portion of the naturalization test.

Certain applicants, because of age and time as a permanent resident; or others because of a disability, have different English and civics requirements; see the “Exceptions & Accommodations” web page for details.

Preparing for the Test

Under the “Study for the Test” section of the Citizenship Resource Center, you can find free study materials for the English and civics portions of the test:

We also offer a variety of educational products to help you prepare for the test, including:
Test Your Knowledge

After reviewing the educational products we offer, try the Naturalization Self Test as a means to test your knowledge. Please note that the actual civics test is NOT a multiple choice test, but an oral test. This “Self Test” was prepared as a learning tool to help you assess your progress.

What Happens if You Don’t Pass?

You will be given two opportunities to take the English and civics tests and to answer all questions related to your naturalization application in English. If you fail any of the tests during your initial interview, you will be retested on the portion of the test that you failed (English or civics) between 60 and 90 days from the date of your initial interview.

What is the Pass Rate?

For those applicants taking both the English and civics tests, the overall national pass rate as of June 2011 is 92 percent. To view scoring guidelines and background data, and other information, visit the “Applicant Performance on the Naturalization Test” page.

First Deportation Cases To Benefit From New Immigration Policy

Cristina Costantini – The Huffington Post

First Posted: 8/26/11 08:16 AM ET Updated: 8/26/11 02:24 PM ET

One week after its announcement by Homeland Security, two young men in Georgia were two of the first apparent beneficiaries of a new policy aimed at making undocumented immigrants with no criminal record, a low-priority for deportation.

The new official policy –revealed August 18th in a letter by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano to a group of Senators–echoed the so-called Morton memo, an ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) statement from June 17th which outlined new guidelines for use of prosecutorial discretion in deportation cases. That document was signed by John Morton, ICE Director.

Luis Enrique Hernandez, 18, and Pedro Morales, 19, can breathe a sigh of relief after their lawyer, Lino R. Rodriguez Jr. successfully filed a petition to halt their removal proceedings. Rodriguez said in a phone interview with The Huffington Post that past cases like Hernandez’ and Morales’ “would have ended in deportation”.

“We haven’t had this argument [the Morton Memo] before, we didn’t have the tool to use. I think there would have been a very good chance that this would have ended in voluntary departure for both of them,” said Rodriguez.

While regular deportation generally bars individuals from entering the US, “voluntary departure” allows for undocumented immigrants to leave the country on their own and to be admissible for reentry under certain circumstances.

The new policy could potentially lead to the suspension of removal procedures for up to 300,000 undocumented immigrants. Thousands of them were brought as children to the United States.

Pedro Morales is one of them. He has lived in the country from the age of seven, graduated from Gordon Central high school in Calhoun, and says he will be attending the Georgia Northwestern Technical College in the coming months.

“I feel great being able to stay here, I grew up in this country. I don’t know anything about Mexico. This is my home,” he said in a phone interview with The Huffington Post. Pulled over at a traffic stop, Morales was apprehended for driving without a driver’s license and brought to a detention center, where he awaited trial for two months. According to Morales, a few of his friends have been since deported. “Their cases were exactly like mine, they were at a traffic stop. But they were deported,” he said.

During his incarceration, Morales met the other beneficiary of the new federal policy, Luis Enrique Hernandez. Hernandez was brought to the United States by his parents when he was two years old, and is currently a high school student and two-sport athlete. Like Morales, Hernandez was stopped while driving, and waited trial for over two months in the Stewart detention center. During this time, his coaches and teachers wrote letters to the authorities describing Hernandez’s moral character and benefit to the community and pleading for his release.

The Stewart detention center is a private correctional facility operated by CCA in Lumpkin, Georgia.

Sean McKenzie, who has been Hernandez’s soccer coach and his US History and Government teacher, described him as “a good ole’ Southern boy” with a “good Southern accent.”

“We had this program called ‘Steps to College’…he went with me, and he was the only kid from our school who went. He’d ride with me thirty minutes every day. We’d talk social studies, geography, whatever… He’s always got a smile on his face, one of the kids you get into to teaching to deal with,” McKenzie told The Huffington Post in a phone interview.

Hernandez and Morales are “hands-down winners” because they are students with community support and without a criminal record, said Aggie Hoffman, an immigration attorney based Los Angeles. She believes the young men’s trials are indicative of what’s to come in pending deportation cases, but expressed frustration that the Los Angeles ICE in particular has been slow to act on the June 17th Morton Memo.

“I was at a lawyer’s meeting with ICE in Los Angeles only last night and it seems like their message was totally opposite of what happened there in Georgia. What are they waiting for? I’m puzzled — this memo was released in June, and it’s already the end of August,” Hoffman said in a phone interview.

While many undocumented immigrants still await trial, Morales says he is thankful for how his case concluded.

“I feel very fortunate and relieved that I don’t have to go through this anymore,” he said.

Who May Qualify to Remain in U.S. Under New Obama Immigration Policy (Source: ILRC)

The president [on August 18, 2011] made a major shift in immigration policy, announcing that the administration might allow many of the 300,000 illegally immigrants currently facing deportation to remain in the country.
The White House announced that it would use more discretion and review deportation cases on an individual basis, possibly sparing those who aren’t deemed a true threat to public safety. Here’s an article from WSJ’s Miriam Jordan announcing the policy shift.
So, under the president’s  new case-by-case approach to deportation, what type of folks stand an improved chance of remaining in the U.S. ? The administration fortunately has provided some guidance.
We start with a statement posted to the White House blog from Cecilia Munoz, the White House Director of Intergovernmental Affairs.
“There are more than 10 million people who are in the U.S. illegally; it’s clear that we can’t deport such a large number,” she writes. “So the Administration has developed a strategy to make sure we use those resources in a way that puts public safety and national security first.”
In deciding who to deport, Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department will apply “common sense guidelines,” Munoz writes. She links to a June 17, 2011 memo written by John Morton, director of U.S. Custom and Immigration Enforcement, which spells out the sort guidelines that will be used.

In deciding whether to prosecute an individual, Morton writes, immigration officials should consider such factors as:
• the person’s length of presence in the United States;
• the circumstances of the person’s arrival in the United States, particularly if the alien came to the United States as a young child;
• the person’s pursuit of education in the United States, with particular consideration given to those who have graduated from a U.S. high school or have successfully pursued or are pursuing a college or advanced degrees at a legitimate institution;
• whether the person, or the person’s immediate relative, has served in the U.S. military, reserves, or national guard;
• the person’s criminal history, including arrests, prior convictions, or outstanding arrest warrants;
• the person’s ties and contributions to the community, including family relationships;
• the person’s age, with particular consideration given to minors and the elderly;
• whether the person has a U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouse, child, or parent;
• whether the person is the primary caretaker of a person with a mental or physical disability, minor, or seriously ill relative;
• whether the person or the person’s spouse is pregnant or nursing.

Morton cautions that the list of factors he provides is not exhaustive and that no one factor is determinative of whether a person will stay or go.

A senior administration official told WSJ that the new immigration policy is designed to make better use of limited immigration-enforcement resources and to help ease overburdened immigration courts. But a natural question that arises is whether immigration authorities, with their limited resources, will have the bandwidth to make the sort of case-by-case deportation determinations called for by the new policy.

Thanks to Victor Nieblas for providing the information above.
**

ADVICE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT IN DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS (OR HAVE A PENDING DEPORTATION ORDER)

1.   undocumented immigrants who are not in deportation proceedings can NOT get a work permit
2.   undocumented immigrants, who are not in deportation proceedings or have a deportation order, should NOT pay even one dollar to an attorney or consultant to try to benefit from this policy.  ALERTA!  NO HAGA CASO A LOS QUE LE PROMETEN UN PERMISO DE TRABAJO O LEGALIZACION SI UD. LE PAGA DINERO.  ESTO NO ES UNA AMNISTIA O LEGALIZACION!!

ADVICE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE IN DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS (BUT DO NOT HAVE AN ADMINISTRATIVELY FINAL DEPORTATION ORDER

1. DHS/ICE, principally through the who represent ICE in deportation cases, will review the 300,000 cases of people currently in deportation (removal) proceedings to determine which cases should be administratively closed.
2. There is a possibility (but not a guarantee) that persons whose cases are closed will be able to apply for a work permit.
3. There are no ICE guidelines or procedures written specifically for the implementation of this new policy.
4. One group which was specifically mentioned as worthy of favorable prosecutorial discretion and the closing of their cases are young people who meet the requirements for the DREAM Act.  See the part in bold above.
5. DHS said that it wanted to focus deportation proceedings on those who have committed crimes which represent a danger to the community.   We don’t know yet if ICE is likely to close cases of immigrants in deportation proceedings who have an arrest or conviction for driving without a license.
6. If a person is in deportation proceedings and does not have a lawyer, she should obtain one soon.
7. If the person is in deportation proceedings and has a lawyer, she does not need to contact the lawyer in most cases before November 1st….
8. …unless the person has an immigration court hearing before January 1, 2012 or…
9. ..unless there is something the lawyer and client are supposed to file soon (such as a notice of appeal or an application).

ADVICE FOR PEOPLE WHO ALREADY HAVE A DEPORTATION ORDER BUT NEVER LEFT
1. Obtain a consultation with a good immigration attorney, show the attorney as many of the papers in your case that you have, and  definitely bring your “A number”
2. It is less clear how this new policy will apply to people who already have a deportation order.

 

 

Quién Puede Calificar para Permanecer en los E.U. Bajo la Nueva Política de Inmigración de Obama? Por Mark Silverman, Immigrant Legal Resource Center

** LOS UNICOS QUE PODRIAN BENEFICIAR DE ESTA NUEVA POLITICA SON LOS QUE  ESTAN EN PROCESO DE DEPORTACION, PRINCIPALMENTE EN LA CORTE DE INMIGRACION.
LOS QUE NO ESTAN EN UN CASO DE DEPORTACION NO PUEDEN OBTENER UN PERMISO NI  BENEFICIAR EN NINGUNA MANERA DE ESTA NUEVA POLITICA.
EJEMPLO DE DOS AMIGOS:

ERNESTO ENTREGADO YA ESTA EN EL PROCESO DE DEPORTACION PORQUE TIENE UN CASO EN LA CORTE DE INMIGRACION.
• No tiene ORDEN de deportación, pero tiene un caso de deportación en la corte de inmigración en San Francisco.
• ERNESTO PODRIA BENEFICIAR DE ESTA NUEVA POLITICA.  Los abogados de ICE  deben revisar su caso para decidir si van a cerrar el caso.
• Si cierran su caso, Ernesto ya no tendra riesgo de deportación y TAL VEZ puede obtener un permiso de trabajo – aunque esto no es claro todavía.

ISRAEL INCOGNITO NO ESTA EN EL PROCESO DE DEPORTACION.  No tiene un caso en la corte de inmigración,  ISRAEL NO PODRIA BENEFICIAR DE ESTA NUEVA POLITICA.**
El presidente hizo [el 18 de agosto] un cambio en política de inmigración, anunciando que la administración podría permitir que muchos de los 300,000 inmigrantes ilegales que actualmente enfrentan el proceso de deportación permanecer en el país.
La Casa Blanca anunció que usaría más discreción y revisión de los casos de deportación individualmente, preservando posiblemente a aquellos que no son considerados como una verdadera amenaza a la seguridad pública.  Aquí está un artículo de Miriam Jordan del Wall Street Journal anunciando el cambio de política.
Así, bajo la nueva vía de acceso a la deportación caso-por-caso del presidente, qué tipo de gente tiene una mejor oportunidad de permanecer en los E.U.?  Afortunadamente la administración ha proveído cierta guía.
Comenzamos con un comunicado puesto en el blog (vía internet) de la Casa Blanca de parte de Cecilia Muñoz, Directora de Asuntos Intergubernamentales de la Casa Blanca.
“Hay más de 10 millones de gente que están en los E.U. ilegalmente; está claro que no podemos deportar a tan grande número,” escribe ella.  “Por lo tanto, la Administración ha desarrollado una estrategia para asegurar que usemos aquellos recursos de una manera que ponga a la seguridad pública y la seguridad nacional primero.”
En cuanto a decidir a quien deportar, el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional y el Departamento de Justicia aplicarán “directivas de sentido común,” escribe Muñoz.  Ella hace una liga (enlace) con un memo del 17 de junio, 2011 escrito por John Morton, Director de la Implementación de leyes de Aduana e Inmigración de los E.U., el cual deletrea la clase de directivas o principios que serán usados.
Al decidir si se procesa a un individuo, Morton escribe, los oficiales de inmigración deberían de considerar factores tales como:
• el tiempo que la persona ha estado presente en los Estados Unidos;
• las circunstancias de la llegada de la persona a los Estados Unidos, particularmente si el extranjero vino a los Estados Unidos como un niño pequeño;
• la búsqueda de educación de la persona en los Estados Unidos, dándole consideración particular a quienes se hayan graduado de una escuela preparatoria (high school) de los E.U., o que han buscado o están buscando exitosamente un colegio (universidad) o cursos avanzados en una institución legítima;
• si la persona o los parientes cercanos a la persona, han servido en las fuerzas armadas, las reservas, o la guardia nacional de los E.U.;
• la historia criminal de la persona, incluyendo arrestos, sentencias anteriores, u órdenes de arresto pendientes;
• los vínculos y contribuciones de la persona a la comunidad, incluyendo relaciones familiares;
• la edad de la persona, dando consideración particular a menores y a los ancianos;
• si la persona tiene un/a esposa/o, hijo/a, o padre/madre ciudadano/a de los E.U. o residente permanente;
• si la persona es el guarda principal de una persona con una incapacidad mental o física, un menor, o un pariente cercano seriamente enfermo;
• si la persona o la esposa de la persona está embarazada o amamantando.
Morton advierte que la lista de factores que el proporciona no es exhaustiva y que ningún factor es determinante de si una persona permanece o se va.
Un oficial superior de la administración le dijo a WSJ (Wall Street Journal) que la nueva política de inmigración está diseñada para hacer un mejor uso de los limitados recursos que hay para implementar las leyes de inmigración y para ayudar a aligerar las sobrecargadas cortes de inmigración.  Pero una pregunta natural que surge es si las autoridades de inmigración, con sus limitados recursos, tendrán la capacidad para clasificar las determinaciones de deportación caso-por-caso citadas por la nueva política.

CONSEJO PARA LA GENTE QUE NO ESTA EN PROCESO DE DEPORTACION

ALERTA!  NO HAGA CASO A LOS QUE LE PROMETEN UN PERMISO DE TRABAJO O LEGALIZACION SI UD. LES PAGA DINERO.  ESTO NO ES UNA AMNISTIA O LEGALIZACION!!

1.   No pueden solicitar un permiso de trabajo ni beneficiar de esta nueva politica en ninguna manera.
2.  No deben de pagar ni un sólo dólar a un abogado o consultor para tratar de beneficiarse de ésta política.

LO QUE PUEDEN HACER AHORA PARA PREPARAR EN CASO DE QUE ICE COMIENZA UN CASO DE DEPORTACION CONTRA USTED EN EL FUTURO

1. Ahorrar dinero para pagar una fianza.
2. Poner sus documentos en orden  desde que entro a los Estados Unidos para mostrar su estancia aqui, como por ejemplo:
a. como todos sus documentos de rentas
b. cuentas bancarias
c. documentos de la escuela de usted o sus hijos,
d. pasaportes de usted y sus hijos
e. talones que cheques
f. archivos médicos,
g. partidas de nacimiento de sus hijos,
h. certificados de matrimonio
i. y cualquier otra prueba que verifique su entrada y presencia en los Estados Unidos.

CONSEJO PARA GENTE QUE ESTA EN PROCESO DE DEPORTACION
1. DHS/ICE, principalmente a través de quienes representan a ICE en casos de deportación, revisarán los 300,000 casos de la gente que actualmente está en proceso de (supresión) deportación para determinar cuales casos deberían de ser cerrados administrativamente.
2. Hay una posibilidad (pero no una garantía) de que personas cuyos casos están cerrados, podrán solicitar un permiso de trabajo.
3. No hay directivas o procedimientos de ICE escritos específicamente para la implementación de ésta nueva póliza o política.
4. Un grupo, el cual fué mencionado específicamente como merecedor de discreción favorable en el procesamiento y la conclusión o cierre de sus casos, son gente joven quienes reúnen los requerimientos para el DREAM Act o Acta del SUEÑO.  Vea la parte en letra más obscura o remarcada arriba.
5. DHS (el Departamento de Seguridad Nacional) dijo que quería enfocar el proceso de deportación en aquellos que han cometido crímenes, los cuales representan un peligro para la comunidad.  Aún no sabemos si es probable que ICE cierre casos de inmigrantes en proceso de deportación que tengan un arresto o sentencia por conducir sin licencia.
6. Si una persona está en proceso de deportación y no tiene un abogado, el/ella debería de obtener uno pronto.

CONSEJO PARA LA GENTE QUE YA TIENE UNA ORDEN DE DEPORTACION PERO QUE NUNCA SE FUE
1. Obtenga una consulta con un buen abogado de inmigración, muestre al abogado todos los papeles y documentos que tenga sobre su caso, y definitivamente traiga su “A number” (Número con USCIS, empieza con la letra A).
2. Está menos claro cómo ésta nueva política será aplicada a la gente que ya tiene una orden de deportación.
Gracias a Victor Nieblas por proveernos con parte de la información de arriba.

© 2011 Hart Immigration Legal Services Los Angeles Website Design & Development
Able Interactive