California Immigration Lawyer Blog

The Immigration Policy Project of the National Conference of State Legislatures ("NCSL") has recently published its report of State laws related to immigrants and immigration in 2008 passed by state legislatures across the United States in 2008. Last year, 1305 pieces of legislation were introduced. In 41 states, at least one law or resolution was enacted, with a total of 206 laws and resolutions enacted nationwide.

The California State Legislature in Sacramento passed five pieces of legislation:

• Assembly Bill (AB) 499 (Signed 09/27/2008) This Act, the Sexually Exploited Minors Pilot Project, authorizes the District Attorney of Alameda County to create a pilot project addressing the needs and effective treatment of commercially sexually exploited minors.
• AB 2448 (Signed 09/27/2008) This bill, waiver of court fees and costs, allows an applicant beginning on July 1, 2009, to proceed without paying court fees and costs due to the applicant's financial situation if he or she is receiving public benefits under the Cash Assistance Program for the Aged, Blind and Disabled Legal Immigrants (CAPI).
• AB 88 (Signed 9/23/2008) This law, contained in the Budget Act of 2008, provides $8.8 million of reimbursements to CALWORKS participants. Providers of adult basic education, English as a Second Language, and English as a Second Language-Citizenship for legal permanent residents, shall grant priority for services to immigrants facing the loss of federal benefits under the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-193). The law also provides for citizenship and naturalization preparation services.
• AB 1781 (signed 9/23/2008) This bill also contained in the Budget Act of 2008, provides funding for various migrant related services, including housing. The Act allocates ten percent of the Community Services Block Grant to migrant and seasonal farm worker programs; $600,000 for a three-year program evaluation to meet federal Title I Migrant Education Program requirements; and funds migrant day and child care.
• AB 2405 (Signed 8/1/2008)
  The Act, relating to domestic violence, permits a county to authorize an additional fee to be imposed upon a conviction for specified crimes of domestic violence, to be deposited into a fund in each county to be used for domestic violence prevention programs that focus on assisting women who are immigrants, refugees, or persons who live in rural communities.

In addition to these laws, the legislature passed 10 resolutions honoring various immigrant communities.

A few days ago I read a blog post in the New York Times City Room blog about a man was was arrested after masquerading as an immigration attorney. He apparently told his clients that he was a member of the California and New York bars. As it turns out, he was a member of neither bar. This is a familiar sounding story. People from other countries may not understand our legal system. They go to someone who speaks their language because they think they can trust that person. They do not take the next step and actually check to see if the person is a licensed attorney.

I am going to give you a few tips on how to find and check out your attorney.

1. If you have already found an attorney, check if the attorney is licensed. If you are in removal proceedings, you may only be represented by an attorney in the Immigration Court. Because immigration law is federal law, the attorney may be licensed in any state of the United States. You should ask your attorney what state he or she is licensed in and ask for his or her bar number. You then may then verify with the state bar whether or not the attorney is licensed. For instance, in California, you may go to the State Bar of California's website and perform a search on the attorney by name.

2. If you are looking for an attorney, most county bar associations have a lawyer referral service. The bar association will screen the lawyer ahead of time by performing a state bar license check and ensuring that the attorney carries a minimum coverage of malpractice insurance. Here is a list of the lawyer referral services in the Bay area.

San Francisco Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service

Solano County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service

Alameda County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service

Contra Costa County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service

Marin County Bar Association Lawyer Referral Service

Continue reading " How to find an immigration attorney in the San Francisco bay area " »

On Thursday January 16, 2009, the city of San Francisco began issuing municipal identification cards. Any resident of San Francisco may apply for a card, regardless of immigration status. The purpose of the card is to allow residents to show identification when seeking city services such as using a library or accessing health care.

The issuance of these cards has come under a lot of criticism. The city was sued last year in a lawsuit that claimed the issuance of cards would cause illegal immigration. The suit was dismissed in November.

Supporters of the cards claim that the cards are not just for illegal immigrants. For example, people who are homeless do not have a fixed address and so are unable to obtain identification cards.

In order to obtain a card, you may make an appointment up to 30 days in advance at the County Clerk's office, room 168, in City Hall, from 8:00-4:00 p.m., or you may call 3-1-1 (in San Francisco). You also may email the County Clerk at sf.city.id@sfgov.org. If you do email, you should include your name, phone number and preferred dates/times for an appointment in the email.

At the appointment you will need to fill out an application, show proof of identity (such as a foreign passport), and proof of city residency (such as a utility bill), pay the fee (it ranges from $5.00 to $15.00 depending on your age), and get a picture taken. You will then be issued your identification card. The ID card will be valid for two years or until the card holder turns 14 so long as the card holder remains a resident of San Francisco.

The City makes it clear on their website that the card is not a license to drive, not intended to be used as proof of legal age to buy alcohol or tobacco and not intended to be accepted by federal agencies for federal identification or other official purposes.

You may obtain more information by visiting San Francisco County Clerk's website at:http://www.sfgov.org/sfcityidcard

I previously wrote a post on the e-verify program and the mandatory rule for employers hiring federal contractors to use this program beginning on January 15, 2009.

Fortunately, the deadline for mandatory verification has been extended until February 20, 2009. The reason for the extension is because the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and four other associations have sued the government and litigation is pending. The name of the lawsuit is Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. Chertoff, et al (You will need an account on PACER, the federal court filing electronic system to view the whole case.) The lawsuit requests that the rule be declared invalid and that the court permanently enjoin it from going into effect on the grounds that neither the President nor the Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") had the authority to mandate the use of e-verify for federal contractors. The litigation also challenges e-verify on the grounds that it is an unfair burden to employers and that the database used by DHS is inaccurate.

USCIS has published a notice on their website announcing the delayed implementation. They also have published a good set of frequently asked questions about e-verify.

The General Accounting Office (“GAO”) has recently issued a report, "Actions needed to address vulnerabilities in process for granting permanent residency." It is interesting because while it acknowledges improvement in the adjudication of security background checks, it also strongly criticizes United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (“USCIS”) adjudication of permanent residence applications in a few key areas.

Here is the good news first. USCIS has been working diligently with the FBI in trying to reduce the security check backlog. The report notes that the number of pending name checks has decreased 90 percent, from 329,000 in May 2007 to 32,000 as of September 30, 2008. The FBI plans on being able to complete all name checks within 90 days of receipt by June 2009.

The GAO found though that USCIS has failed to address vulnerabilities that they were directed to resolve in 2006 and 2007. USCIS has a unit that investigates fraud called the “Office of Fraud Detection and National Security (“FDNS”). (It is ironic that USCIS places fraud and national security in the same office.) They apparently have identified several areas of fraud in the adjudication of applications for permanent residence. These areas are with 1) religious worker petitions; 2) petitions for skilled and unskilled workers; 3) petitions for spouses; 4) petitions for relatives from Yemen, and 5) applications for political asylum. (This report did not discuss how those areas were identified.) The GAO noted that aside from some movement in regulations for religious workers, USCIS has not taken any action in the other areas where USCIS itself found fraud.

The GAO also found evidence that USCIS’ own adjudication procedures were vulnerable to fraud by employees of USCIS and they gave an example of where this happened.

The GAO strongly urged USCIS to take action on the areas they have identified, otherwise people not entitled to benefits will receive them while others who have filed legitimate petitions must continue to wait in long backlogs.

Photo by Batbob

Beginning on January 21, 2009, all naturalization ceremonies scheduled by the San Francisco U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS") district office will take place at the Paramount theater in Oakland instead of the Masonic Auditorium in San Francisco. The Paramount theater is located at 2050 Broadway Avenue, Oakland, CA, near the 19th Street BART station and is at the back of the USCIS Oakland Application Support Center.

Kudos to the San Francisco district office for changing the location to a beautiful venue and a location very accessible by public transportation.

It seems everyone is making predictions for the new year so I figure I can as well. My predictions are based on what I see going on around me in the San Francisco Bay area. Unfortunately I do not see a good year ahead for immigrants in the year to come, but not wanting to end on a pessimistic note, my last prediction is not depressing, although somewhat sarcastic. Here are my predictions:

1. There will be no immigration reform in 2009.
Although President-elect Obama has stated in his Plan for Science and Innovation that immigration reform is important to attract talented people to the United States, I do not see it happening in 2009 - at least reform that will benefit immigrants. Unfortunately, I do see immigration restriction as a possibility. Historically, our immigration laws have been tied to the economic situation in the U.S. When work is plentiful, our immigration policies encourage immigration. When work is perceived as scarce, our laws become restrictive. For example, in the 1840s and 1860s, American welcomed large numbers of Chinese immigrants. They primarily worked in mining (during the Gold Rush) and on building the railroads. When mining decreased and jobs were perceived as scarce, our government in 1882 passed the "Chinese Exclusion Act," which prohibited "skilled and unskilled laborers and Chinese employed in mining" from entering the country for ten years under penalty of imprisonment and deportation. It also prohibited Chinese lawful permanent residents who were already in the United States from obtaining citizenship. It had far reaching repercussions and effectively stopped immigrants from China from being able to immigrate. Following another wave of immigrants in the early 1900s, our government restricted immigration in the 1920s with a strict quota enacted in 1924. The quota together with the Depression, effectively curtailed immigration in the United States until after World War II. Given the current economic situation today, I believe history will repeat itself and we will not see any legislation that will expand immigration.

2. There will be no additional H-1B numbers allocated this year.
Based on what I mentioned in the previous paragraph, I do not see an expansion in the H-1B program. The H-1B program (permitting professionals to work for a temporary period in specialty occupations) has come under a lot of criticism in the past year. Employers and advocates will have a hard time explaining why additional numbers are needed when there is high unemployment in the United States.

Continue reading " My predictions for Immigration policy in 2009 " »