California Immigration Lawyer Blog

Want to help in the Haiti relief effort but don't know how?

2010-01-27T07:44:29Z

Hearing about the earthquake in Haiti, you want to help but you don't know where to go. One of the more creative ways you can help is by volunteering with Crisis Commons. According to their website, Crisis Commons is an international volunteer network of professionals drawn together by a call to service. They create technological tools and resources for responders to use in mitigating disasters and crises around the world. It is essentially a way for computer professionals to use their skills via social networking for a good cause. Volunteers are working on mapping and creating tools that people on the ground can use to find missing people, hospitals, and other services.

I had not heard of Crisis Commons until a colleague of mine, Stephen Wu from the law firm of Cooke, Kobrick, and Wu, told me about it. He was volunteering his expertise on legal issues with Crisis Commons. You do not need to be a techie or a legal expert in order to volunteer. Indeed, Crisis Commons solicits help from everyone and has tasks that anyone can do.

You can volunteer by signing up on their website or by attending a crisis camp. By using brain power, energy, and skills, it is a great way for people not in Haiti to make a needed contribution to the relief effort.

U.S. Army soldier applies for asylum in Canada

2009-11-21T10:07:19Z

As a California immigration lawyer who files many asylum cases, I am used to thinking of a the United States as a place of refuge and to documenting the horrible country conditions of other countries. I have successfully represented applicants for asylum who feared staying in their countries because while serving in their countries' armies, they were harmed on account of their sexual orientation.

It is therefore rather surprising to come across a story of a U.S.soldier who is fleeing to Canada because she fears harm in the U.S. Army on account of her sexual orientation. According to CBC news, U.S. Army Pte. Bethany Smith fled Canada in September 2007 from a U.S. Army base in Fort Campbell, Ky. She applied for refugee status in October 2007, saying that she was harassed and threatened by fellow soldiers over her sexual orientation and feared that her life would be in danger if she were deported and returned to the army. The Canadian authorities initially rejected in her claim in February 2009. However, on appeal, the Federal Court of Canada held that the refugee board must reconsider the case again because the Board made several mistakes in initially reviewing her claim.

The Federal Court's decision noted that the refugee board failed to fully consider the evidence pertaining to the situation of gays and lesbians in the U.S. Army to determine whether Pte. Smith could have availed herself of protection in the United States. The Federal Court also noted that the Board failed to determine whether Pte. Smith would be persecuted on account of her social group - as a lesbian in the U.S. Army if forced to return. There were other errors mentioned in the decision.

It is sad that the U.S. policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," is the basis of an asylum claim in Canada. Pt. Smith was only 19 years old when she fled to Canada. From everything I read, it appears that she wanted to serve in the U.S. Army and no real desire to leave the United States. At a time when we apparently need people to serve in the Armed Forces and in fact give non-citizens a way to immigrate to the United States faster for their service, it seems ridiculous that an American citizen should have to leave. It it is time to eliminate the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Why do I need to register for Selective Service if I am applying for naturalization?

2009-11-06T17:45:17Z

The issue of applying or having applied for Selective Service comes up a lot when applying for naturalization. Recently I have seen a number of clients at my San Francisco office who have not registered for Selective Service. I will write a couple of blog posts on the issue of Selective Service and naturalization.

Applicants for naturalization need to establish good moral character for the five years prior to the filing of the naturalization application (Form N-400) up to the time the oath of allegiance is taken. Although there is no specific law, USCIS (United States and Citizenship Services) interprets a failure to register for Selective Service as an act that reflects negatively on an applicant's ability to establish good moral character.

The Selective Service agency is the agency responsible for maintaining a list of men who are eligible the military draft, if we should have one. All men, even if in the United States illegally, between the ages of 18-25, must register for Selective Service. (If you 26 or older, you are too old to register.) A Social Security number is not required to register. The only exception to the registration requirement is for men who are in the United States in valid non-immigrant status (i.e., students on F-1 visas or professionals on H-1B visas). Women are not required to register.

You may register for Selective Service online on their website or you can use the link at the bottom of this page. You may also register at a post office. In addition, you can register if you are applying for a student loan by completing a Federal Student Financial Aid (FAFSA form). You can check "Register Me" on Box #22 of that form, and the Department of Education will furnish Selective Service with the information to register. Finally, if you are applying for adjustment of status in the United States, you will automatically be registered upon USCIS' acceptance of your Form I-485. (The last page of the form indicates that you agree to have USCIS transmit your information to Selective Service.)

If you are not sure whether or not you have registered with Selective Service or you want proof that you have registered, you may go to their website and click on the link to check registration.

My next few blog posts will discuss how to obtain a status letter from Selective Service and what to do if you have not registered with Selective Service.

President Obama announces the elimination of the HIV inadmissibility ban

2009-11-03T20:04:30Z

Yesterday President Obama announced the elimination of the HIV inadmissibility ban at the signing of the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act of 2009. Currently individuals with HIV are inadmissible to the United States. As part of the new legislation, individuals with HIV will be admissible and individuals seeking permanent residence will no longer have to be tested for HIV as part of the medical exam that is given to all new immigrants.

The final rule was published yesterday and goes into effect on January 4, 2010.

USCIS issues new guidance on "public charge"

2009-10-27T07:03:59Z

I recently wrote a post on whether the receipt of health insurance through San Francisco Healthy Families made that person a public charge. I concluded that it did not.

Soon after I wrote that post, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS") issued some new guidance on the definition of public charge. It is helpful because it lists many programs and specifies what does and not support a public charge definition. For instance, it clarifies that the receipt of unemployment compensation, Title II Social Security benefits and Veteran's benefits do not make an individual a public charge.

USCIS issued guidance on public charge determinations on October 20, 2009.

Conference on Practicing Law in a Virtual World

2009-10-24T05:32:51Z

As readers of this blog know, I am a big fan of the internet virtual reality world, Second Life®. I plan to write many more posts about Second Life over the next year as I will be the incoming president of the Second Life Bar Association with my term beginning in February 2010.

For now, I would like to highlight an upcoming conference that will be held on Second Life that is being sponsored by the Second Life Bar Association and the Young Lawyers Division of the American Bar Association. The conference will be about practicing law in a virtual world. It will take place on November 14, 2009 from 12:00-3:00 p.m., (pacific standard time). There will be two sessions divided into broad topic areas led by lawyers who are members of our association and experienced in issues relating to virtual law:

Session 1: Practice Issues Unique to the Virtual World Setting

Daniel Perry – ‘DanielPerry Laa’
Virtual Law Teams

James Bryce Clark -'JamieBryce Infinity'
Privacy and Security

Stephen Davies – ‘Little Gray’
Dispute Resolution, Civil Rights

and

Session 2: Substantive Issues in a Virtual World

Craig Abrahamson – ‘Lexis Looming’ Contracts and Business Transactions

Stephen Wu – ‘Legal Writer’ Intellectual Property Rights

The conference is free but you do need to RSVP ahead of time. For more details about the conference and how to register, you may check the "Practicing Law in a Virtual World" conference page of the SL Bar Association's NIng website. Hope to see you there.

Oakland city ID card moving toward implementation

2009-10-18T18:33:21Z

I previously wrote a post about the implementation of a San Francisco city identification card. Now Oakland is moving toward implementation of a similar plan.

On October 20, the Oakland City council will be considering a staff plan on how to implement the municipal identification card

The Oakland City council meeting will take place at 7:00 p.m., at Oakland City Hall, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza. You can find out more information about the Oakland municipal identification card on a website called Oakland City ID Card. (The website is sponsored by a coalition of organizations in support of the identification card and is not an official city website.) It has links to all articles about the identification card and reports on developments on this issue.

2011 Diversity Visa program receives 900,000 applications in the first week

2009-10-14T06:31:44Z

On October 2, 2009, The U.S. State Department launched the 2011 Diversity Visa Program. Between October 2 to November 30, 2009, applicants from countries around the world may register for a chance at winning one of the 55,000 immigrant visas that are drawn randomly from all eligible applicants. The State Department will notify all successful applicants between May - July 2010 of their selection. Applicants will then be able to start the visa application process in October 2010.

The State Department has announced that during the first week of registration, they have received over 900,000 entries. This reflects a 63% increase in applications over the same period last year.

For information and instructions on how to register for the lottery, go to the State Department's lottery website: http://www.dvlottery.state.gov/

Solano County Board of Supervisors leaves funding intact for La Clinica De La Raza

2009-10-07T23:51:15Z

I previously wrote about how the health care and immigration debate has hit Vallejo. Specifically the Solano County Grand jury had recommended that funding by the Solano County Board of Supervisors to La Clinica De La Raza be limited to only those residents of the county who could prove legal residence or citizenship. (See also my previous post on Update on proposal to limit funding to La Clinic De La Raza.) On October 6, 2009, the Board submitted their response to the Grand Jury's report. I am happy to write that the Board has chosen not to follow the Grand Jury's recomendation and will leave all funding to the clinic intact. I commend the Board for making this decision. The health of all residents of Solano County should be a priority for all of us.

Will I be considered a public charge if I have insurance through San Francisco Healthy Families?

2009-10-06T06:13:30Z

I recently had a client inquire as to whether her enrollment in San Francisco's "Healthy Families" health insurance plan would endanger her green card application because she might be considered a "public charge." I originally thought it would be a problem but it turned out not to be.

San Francisco has a health insurance program called "Healthy Families." It is for uninsured children and low income individuals living in San Francisco. Members pay a small monthly fee and the program is partly funded by the government.

Under Section 212(a)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), an individual seeking admission to the United States or seeking to adjust status to that of an individual lawfully admitted for permanent residence (green card) is inadmissible if the individual, "at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge."

An individual becomes a "public charge" when he or she is likely to become primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.

USCIS has a very extensive article on their website that discusses what type of benefits, if received, would and would not be relevant in a determination concerning public charge. Non-cash benefits (other than institutionalization for long-term care) are generally not taken into account for purposes of a public charge determination. Specifically regarding San Francisco Healthy Families, USCIS states that Healthy Families benefits "are not considered for public charge purposes."

USCIS plans to get ready to accommodate the filing of more applications.

2009-10-03T02:48:28Z

In an interview with the New York Times, about comprehensive immigration reform, the director of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Alejandro Mayorkas, indicated that the agency was making plans to accommodate the filing of more visa applications although no new laws have been passed. He stated that the goal was to be able to rapidly process a large increase in applications if some kind of comprehensive immigration reform bill is passed by Congress.

He told the paper that USCIS is currently able to handle applications for about six million applicants a year. Under some legalization proposals, the agency may receive that number of applications in a few weeks.

There are no serious legalization proposals currently pending before Congress. It is heartwarming to me though that USCIS thinks there might be and is actively planning on how to be prepared for it.

Where to find free or low cost assistance with citizenship applications in San Francisco

2009-09-28T16:46:50Z

Applying for citizenship can be a daunting task because your entire immigration history is reviewed at the time you apply for citizenship. It can also be an expensive one because the filing fee with the biometrics is quite expensive at $675.00.

If you are looking for legal assistance with your citizenship application, you are low income and you live in the San Francisco Bay area, you may wish to consider contacting the legal department of Jewish Family and Children's Services ("JFCS"). The agency provides legal assistance with a variety of family based immigration petitions and applications. The staff also assists people with applying for citizenship and disability waivers (Form N-648). They do an outstanding job and as recognition of their work in the community, United States and Citizenship Services ("USCIS") just awarded them a grantfor the purpose of citizenship assistance and education.

For legal immigration assistance, you may check out their citizenship services websiste or call the emigre department of JFCS at (415) 449-2900.

Update on proposal to limit funding to La Clinica De La Raza in Solano County

2009-09-21T22:56:58Z

I recently wrote a post about a proposal pending in front of the Solano County Board of Supervisors that recommends that the Board limit funding to La Clinica de la Raza in Vallejo to only Solano County residents who have proof of citizenship or legal residency. I indicated in my post that the Board was going to vote on the proposal on September 22, 2009. This date has now been changed. The Board is now going to vote on the proposal at their meeting scheduled for October 6, 2009.

I have received a copy of the actual report issued by the "watch dog" group that recommended the cut in funding. It turns out that the recommendation was made by the Solano County Grand Jury. Apparently the Grand Jury received a complaint from a "citizen" (although the report does not indicate how they verified the citizenship of this individual) about Solano County providing funding to the clinic because the clinic provides services to illegal aliens. The Grand Jury decided to investigate the complaint. Based on their investigation, the Grand Jury recommended that the County contributions (of $100,000 each year for three years) be limited to "serving only Solano County residents who have proof of citizenship or legal residency."

In my opinion there is a lot that is wrong with the recommendation morally and socially, but I wish to focus on the immigration aspect of it for this post. Basically it is my opinion that a verification requirement of immigration status will create an unworkable and bureaucratic mess for the following reasons.

]]>

Health care workers are not immigration inspectors. They should not have to be immigration inspectors. They should be focusing their attention on health issues. They are not familiar with the type of documents that people have which show status. They will not know if someone presents a green card that is expired whether or not the person is a "legal resident." (The answer may be different based on how the person obtained their green card. I.e., whether the person is a conditional resident or whether the person is a permanent resident who has not renewed his or her green card.) They do not even know what a green card looks like.

Proof of citizenship or legal residency is vague. I do not know what the grand jury means by "legal residency." Do they mean permanent residents or does it include people with temporary status such as H-1B workers, students, and people with Temporary Protected Status? How does a health care worker verify that someone has "legal residency?" The Grand Jury is asking the Board to approve a recommendation that has not been thought through carefully.

A requirement to verify immigration status will discriminate against U.S. citizens. Most people going to a clinic are going because they are sick. The last thing they think about is trying to find their birth certificate before they go. Most citizens do not carry their birth certificate or U.S. passport with them. They may show up at the clinic only to get turned away because they do not have proof. Or, if they cannot find the document at home, they may decide not to go to the clinic at all. Later, when they are in extreme pain they will show up at the emergency room. Solano county taxpayers are paying more (in taxes and health care costs) for people who show up at the emergency room when those people could have been treated at the clinic.

Is $100,000 a lot of money? Yes it is but it is nothing compared to nightmare the clinic is going to face in trying to distinguish and keep track of who is who and making sure that the money does not go to help the "wrong person" when they are not in any kind of position to do so. Unfortunately the flu, pneumonia and other easily spread diseases cross borders and infect citizens and non-citizens alike. It is ridiculous to think that Solano county documented residents will be saving any money by not spending money to provide basic health care services when each one of us is equally at risk.

Today was a good day

2009-09-18T03:57:09Z

Today was a day where everything worked out the way it should have. I represented two individuals at their naturalization interviews at the San Francisco district office. My clients, husband and wife, are both severely disabled. They could not learn history and English because of their disabilities. We filed their applications for naturalization (Form N-400) along with waivers of the English and history requirements (officially called Medical Certification for Disability Exceptions, Form N-648),

I have had my share of battles with USCIS officers over N-648s so I expected today to be no different. I was pleasantly surprised today. In both situations, the officers had read the N-648s and approved them without incident. Just as importantly, the USCIS officers treated my clients in a respectful and understanding manner. Today the officers seemed to understand that my clients were disabled and were willing to work with them to adjudicate their applications.

And for the best part, USCIS agreed to administer administrative oaths to my clients today so that they would not have to travel to the oath ceremony.

I am very pleased at how the day worked out. I had represented my clients in their very first applications with USCIS and now I have seen them all the way through the immigration process. It is has been a rewarding experience.

If your experience with the N-648 process has not been good or you are concerned about the adjudications of N-648s in general, you may be interested in an upcoming meeting/teleconference sponsored by the USCIS on the N-648. On October 8, USCIS will be soliciting views from the public about the adjudication of Form N-648 and will be seeking suggestions on how to improve the process.

Immigration and health care debate hits Vallejo

2009-09-11T18:33:31Z

I am a member of the Legislative Affairs Committee of the Benicia Chamber of Commerce. We periodically invite federal and Solano County legislators and their aides to our committee meetings to update us on local issues that impact business owners and residents of Benicia. I enjoy being on the committee because I get a real feel for what is happening in the city.

On Wednesday, September 9, the legislative aides for Congressman George Miller and Solano County Supervisor Linda Seifert spoke at our meeting. One of the issues they spoke about was the existence of La Clinica North Vallejo. The health clinic was established in November 2008 to provide urgent and primary care to the community's low income and uninsured population. The clinic is situated across the street from Sutter Solano Hospital and is funded in part by Sutter Solano, Kaiser Vallejo and Solano County. The idea behind the establishment of the clinic and the location of the clinic was to provide care for patients who were going to the emergency room in the hospitals. It is more cost effective for people to go to a clinic and receive preventive care than to show up at an emergency room for something that could have been prevented. Some of the clients who I see in my Benicia Social Security practice have been receiving care at La Clinica Vallejo so I was excited to hear about it.

After the meeting I returned to my office and decided to read more about La Clinica North Vallejo. What I learned, surprised me. I did not know that it has become the focus of a debate about illegal immigration. As the Wall Street Journal recently reported, the clinic has been criticized for providing care to undocumented residents. A "watchdog group" (unidentified in the article) has released a report advising the county that the clinic should only serve residents who have proof of citizenship or legal residency. According to the article, the County board of supervisors and the County health director have 90 days to respond to their report.

]]> My personal view is that the clinic is not in a position and should not be in a position to determine the immigration status of potential patients. Preventive care benefits us all. If all of the hype is true about the seriousness of the H1N1 flu virus, we will not be healthier if someone is denied a flu shot or care because he or she is undocumented.

I called Linda Seifert's office this morning and learned that this issue will be heard by the Solano County Board of Supervisors at their meeting scheduled for 9:00 a.m. on September 22, 2009. The Board meets at 675 Texas Street, Fairfield, California. I will be there! I hope that Solano County residents concerned about the issue will be there as well.