Blog

With the raging of the pandemic, cancelled flights, and travel restrictions, thousands of visitors have been stranded in the United States. While some legal relief has been provided for delayed departures for those who entered without visas under the Visa Waiver Program, very little has been discussed about those who entered the US with visas and have been unable to leave within the allotted time frame. As a reminder, holders of B-1 and B-2 visas are usually granted 6 months of authorized stay when they arrive in the US. If a person overstays this authorized time frame, the visa becomes void under Section 222(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. What this means is that even if the visa itself has validity time remaining, it nevertheless becomes null and cannot be used. For example, if in June 2019 a B visa was issued for 10 years through June 2029, and…

The consequences of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) investigation of the US companies Findream, Sinocontech, AzTech, Integra Technologies, Wireclass, and Aandwill are now becoming evident. Thousands of students and young professionals, primarily Chinese and Indian, have had their visas revoked because of their past association with these companies. Worse, it appears that the US Government has presumed that these individuals were aware of the fraudulent nature of the offers of training to comply with the Optional Practical Training program requirements and is entering decisions to permanently bar them from the United States under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (“6C”). For many of these individuals, it does not have to be this way. A US government official can only make this determination based on an individualized review. Everyone’s circumstances were different. What was his or her specific intent at the time of accepting the training offer? Was…

For visa applicants, the cards seem to be stacked against you. Among the hurdles a visa applicant must face: The law places the burden on the visa applicant to prove eligibility for the visa and that he or she is not inadmissible to the United States. There are inadequate consular resources; at busy posts, consular officers can only allot a few minutes to a visa adjudication. There is no formal administrative appeals process of a visa denial (no Administrative Appeals Office, Board of Immigration Appeals, Board of Alien Labor Certification Appeals). With limited exception, there is no judicial review of visa decisions because of the doctrine of consular reviewability. There is limited public accountability: no Department of State (DOS) Visa Ombudsman, no formal Complaint Procedure, and no formal recusal process. Section 428 of the Homeland Security Act grants the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) a vital role in the visa…

Today we are publishing an updated article on Humanitarian Parole on this site. Many people are under the mis-impression that humanitarian parole only applies to medical emergencies. In fact, there are numerous situations that an application for humanitarian parole may be appropriate. For example, sometimes there are imperfections in US law which do not provide a legal solution for a situation which cries out for one. Trying to fit a “square peg in a round hole” just will not work. Well, sometimes, humanitarian parole can be the “round peg” that fits. For example, minor children who remain stuck in the home country after parents successfully adjusted status in the United States under the Diversity Lottery program. The law requires that the child receive a Diversity Visa by September 30. If he does not, then his parent would have to file an I-130 family immigration petition for him, which could take…

Today we are publishing an article on the site about Section 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. This is the decision of a Customs and Border Protection official at airports and other ports of entry not to allow an individual into the United States because he/she does not have the proper visa. For visa holders, the CBP inspector revokes the visa with the inscription “22 CFR 41.122(e)(3)”. While CBP does not provide a breakdown on the number of times it actually invokes this Section, it is clear that this number has escalated substantially under the Trump Administration. In 2017, the number of inadmissibility findings by CBP totaled 216,470. In 2019, that number increased to 288,523, a 33% jump. This number only relates to those who tried to enter the US legally — as a Visa Waiver Program participant or visa holder. When invoking 212(a)(7)(A)(i)(I), CBP sends these individuals back…