immigrationvoice1
01-14 12:01 PM
Need to travel via British airways. H1b visa is expired and need to get UK transit visa.
Any experiences on the quickest way to get this?
thx
I recently returned from India on 01/09/09 via Heathrow on British Airways. Applied for Direct Airside Transit Visa (DATV) at the Brish Consulate at LA before leaving. Sent my paperwork on a Monday by FedEx overnight and received passport back with the visa by Thursday of the same week.
Any experiences on the quickest way to get this?
thx
I recently returned from India on 01/09/09 via Heathrow on British Airways. Applied for Direct Airside Transit Visa (DATV) at the Brish Consulate at LA before leaving. Sent my paperwork on a Monday by FedEx overnight and received passport back with the visa by Thursday of the same week.
wallpaper me and copied some quotes
indyanguy
08-19 11:28 AM
OP - If you have a cooperative employer, I would say go for it. Given the rate at which EB2-I is progressing, you will get GC much sooner although the PERM process for EB2 may take a long time. Assuming you get an audit on your PERM, even if the entire process takes 1.5 years, you can get your 140 in PP and once your PD is ported, you are current. Even if the entire process takes 2 years (worst case), it's worth the effort. EB3-I will move at a very slow pace. As others suggested, you wont see significant movement till EB2-I is current.
Financially, the porting would make a lot of sense too. Assuming a family of 2, you are spending close to $1000 (or even more) per year on the AP and EAD renewals, not to mention the employer's cost of renewing the H1. When you go to your HR for starting the EB2 process, you want to put it in terms of how it's financially viable for the company. When you do the math, it's a win win for both the employer and the employee in the long run if you get the GC earlier.
I'd say go for it. Good luck!
Financially, the porting would make a lot of sense too. Assuming a family of 2, you are spending close to $1000 (or even more) per year on the AP and EAD renewals, not to mention the employer's cost of renewing the H1. When you go to your HR for starting the EB2 process, you want to put it in terms of how it's financially viable for the company. When you do the math, it's a win win for both the employer and the employee in the long run if you get the GC earlier.
I'd say go for it. Good luck!
solaris27
04-17 05:58 PM
enjoy
2011 quotes about me. about me
ivgclive
04-18 06:43 PM
Good work, at least you want to show them what you feel.
Address him as "Mr.President" in future and avoid using names most of the time.
Address him as "Mr.President" in future and avoid using names most of the time.
more...
lusuresh
08-27 01:11 PM
I live in the West suburbs (Des plaines)
optimystic
04-01 06:44 PM
Before Nebraska service center retrogressed their processing dates I was able to speak with an IO. I asked her a few questions relevant to this.
There maybe a public USCIS rule / procedures that would confirm what she told me.
Q) When is the name check typically initiated
A> Soon after receipt
Q> Is my name check cleared.
A> wait a moment..... yes
I've also explained why Nebraska processing dates moved back...
1) Transfers from Texas
2) VB moving forward coupled with no pre-adjudication. Therefore they have to go back to older receipt dates.
3) 180 day name check rule taking effect -- clean up old cases.
4) Public processing date was internally known to be too far ahead of reality (and therefore causing service requests).
Now could USCIS hide behind name check now?
Probably not for more than 180 days, because you could file a WOM and win.
Can they stagnate processing dates --- yes, and there is a risk that they will around 2nd July 2007 date (last year's fiasco -- if I need remind anyone). That would make me barking mad since my receipt date is about 59 days before that.
A WOM will likely succeed when an individual is arbitrarily processed more slowly, and now name check is not an excuse. However, a WOM is much less likely to succeed when a whole group is processed slowly, since USCIS can always claim resource constraints. The happened with labor cert and BECs, the case(s) that I read the judge basically said to speed up one application would slow down another. So you need to show that you are behind the reasonable processing times with respect to others, then you can force USCIS's hand.
Looks like you may have gotten lucky with the IO that you encountered over the phone. I just tried reaching a level 2 officer. Unfortunately Nebraska center is closed at this time, so I got transferred to the national service center and possibly to a level 1 case handler. She seemed very polite and even sounded quite young ( intern !? ) . Here's transcript
She ran me thru several questions, default status update thats already on the online case status and finally I steered towards more specific questions
1) I wanted to check the status of my case, the online status has shown no updates since 7 or 8 months. Specifically was a namecheck initiated in my case?
A) Sorry sir, you have to make an Infopass appt for that, I have no access to that info.
2) Usually it should be initiated soon after receipt date, and completed within 180 days, right?
A) Yes sir, as per the new 180 day rule (seems to be aware of the new rule :) ), it should be done, but I can't tell you whether it has been initiated yet or not, or if it has been cleared. But if you doubt that it has been initiated and its been more than 180 days, then there's the new provision in law that your cards should be ordered immdtly, if everything else checks out (like PD etc). You have to make an InfoPass appt to get this info.
3) Can I place a Service request over the phone instead?
A) Your case is outside of our current processing date limits. You have to be atleast 30 days older than the current processing date at your case service center to initiate a service request.
4) When do you think the Processing dates will catch up with my receipt date?
A) The computer shows me that it will currently take 53 days (w.t.f !!) to get to your case !
I will probably give another try tomorrow during normal working times of NSC. Hopefully get to an IO who can tell the namecheck status.
But if its been cleared, then what next?? Just wait to see the PRD get stuck at July 2, 2007 eternally ???
I mean what cases are they processing ??? My PD is EB3 May 2001 !! Probably very near to front of queue. How many potential approvable *current* cases could there be that need to be processed before mine? How to get this information? Will an Infopass help to get such information?
If not then, whats the point of taking an InfoPass?
There maybe a public USCIS rule / procedures that would confirm what she told me.
Q) When is the name check typically initiated
A> Soon after receipt
Q> Is my name check cleared.
A> wait a moment..... yes
I've also explained why Nebraska processing dates moved back...
1) Transfers from Texas
2) VB moving forward coupled with no pre-adjudication. Therefore they have to go back to older receipt dates.
3) 180 day name check rule taking effect -- clean up old cases.
4) Public processing date was internally known to be too far ahead of reality (and therefore causing service requests).
Now could USCIS hide behind name check now?
Probably not for more than 180 days, because you could file a WOM and win.
Can they stagnate processing dates --- yes, and there is a risk that they will around 2nd July 2007 date (last year's fiasco -- if I need remind anyone). That would make me barking mad since my receipt date is about 59 days before that.
A WOM will likely succeed when an individual is arbitrarily processed more slowly, and now name check is not an excuse. However, a WOM is much less likely to succeed when a whole group is processed slowly, since USCIS can always claim resource constraints. The happened with labor cert and BECs, the case(s) that I read the judge basically said to speed up one application would slow down another. So you need to show that you are behind the reasonable processing times with respect to others, then you can force USCIS's hand.
Looks like you may have gotten lucky with the IO that you encountered over the phone. I just tried reaching a level 2 officer. Unfortunately Nebraska center is closed at this time, so I got transferred to the national service center and possibly to a level 1 case handler. She seemed very polite and even sounded quite young ( intern !? ) . Here's transcript
She ran me thru several questions, default status update thats already on the online case status and finally I steered towards more specific questions
1) I wanted to check the status of my case, the online status has shown no updates since 7 or 8 months. Specifically was a namecheck initiated in my case?
A) Sorry sir, you have to make an Infopass appt for that, I have no access to that info.
2) Usually it should be initiated soon after receipt date, and completed within 180 days, right?
A) Yes sir, as per the new 180 day rule (seems to be aware of the new rule :) ), it should be done, but I can't tell you whether it has been initiated yet or not, or if it has been cleared. But if you doubt that it has been initiated and its been more than 180 days, then there's the new provision in law that your cards should be ordered immdtly, if everything else checks out (like PD etc). You have to make an InfoPass appt to get this info.
3) Can I place a Service request over the phone instead?
A) Your case is outside of our current processing date limits. You have to be atleast 30 days older than the current processing date at your case service center to initiate a service request.
4) When do you think the Processing dates will catch up with my receipt date?
A) The computer shows me that it will currently take 53 days (w.t.f !!) to get to your case !
I will probably give another try tomorrow during normal working times of NSC. Hopefully get to an IO who can tell the namecheck status.
But if its been cleared, then what next?? Just wait to see the PRD get stuck at July 2, 2007 eternally ???
I mean what cases are they processing ??? My PD is EB3 May 2001 !! Probably very near to front of queue. How many potential approvable *current* cases could there be that need to be processed before mine? How to get this information? Will an Infopass help to get such information?
If not then, whats the point of taking an InfoPass?
more...
ab_tak_chappan
08-13 05:44 PM
Expect no action till the late next year, def. not before elections are over
Count me in. Even though I am in a EB2-India category, I will ensure to render my full support.
Count me in. Even though I am in a EB2-India category, I will ensure to render my full support.
2010 Send this quote to You
140jibjab
10-04 11:28 AM
Please Register me!!
more...
DSLStart
05-25 07:59 PM
Abhinandan! apni-i bijoyee :D
Memorial day became memorial for me.
Woke up late today and the first Email which I checked today says this ;-) :
The last processing action taken on your case
Receipt Number: SRC07******
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On May 23, 2009, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
Memorial day became memorial for me.
Woke up late today and the first Email which I checked today says this ;-) :
The last processing action taken on your case
Receipt Number: SRC07******
Application Type: I485 , APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS
Current Status: Card production ordered.
On May 23, 2009, we ordered production of your new card. Please allow 30 days for your card to be mailed to you. If we need something from you we will contact you. If you move before you receive the card, call customer service. You can also receive automatic e-mail updates as we process your case. Just follow the link below to register.
hair quotes about yourself for
deafTunes123
08-28 09:54 AM
I am also in same situation. Two 140s (eb2 and 3) both have same PD. Have beed trying for interfile from last one year. I do not know if my case is eb2 or still in eb3. I enquired from Congressman and she told me that my case is assigned to a IO on 6th Aug so its in eb2. She is not listening to anything else after telling me this information. I have infopass on 2nd Sep. lets see ...
Good Luck dude. Please update after your info pass appointment.
Good Luck dude. Please update after your info pass appointment.
more...
av2004
05-30 11:30 PM
HateIV,
If you think donations are a requirement to be the members, I have not paid IV a dime so far. Donating is not the only way to help IV. For example there is a call campaign, where you can call and leave a message as a fellow future immigrant. You can help IV that way. Please note that we are all here to have our collective voice heard by the USCIS and the government so that the immigration processes can be expedited. A whole lot of others come here to pose questions for their tricky or troubled situations and get help from the experienced. It seems that all you need to have is a civil tongue to not be banned. Is that tough to do? Even on a public Web site like this? What other choice do you leave to the administrators if that is the case?
So, please be a good samaritan and try to help others if you can OR get help from others. Otherwise, I don't see a point in being a member here.
av2004
If you think donations are a requirement to be the members, I have not paid IV a dime so far. Donating is not the only way to help IV. For example there is a call campaign, where you can call and leave a message as a fellow future immigrant. You can help IV that way. Please note that we are all here to have our collective voice heard by the USCIS and the government so that the immigration processes can be expedited. A whole lot of others come here to pose questions for their tricky or troubled situations and get help from the experienced. It seems that all you need to have is a civil tongue to not be banned. Is that tough to do? Even on a public Web site like this? What other choice do you leave to the administrators if that is the case?
So, please be a good samaritan and try to help others if you can OR get help from others. Otherwise, I don't see a point in being a member here.
av2004
hot Hot Life Myspace Quotes
telekinesis
05-15 04:26 PM
Sure.
more...
house Have a nice quote you want to
ssa
11-13 01:37 PM
^^
tattoo about me. i300.photobucket.com
LostInGCProcess
10-01 01:49 PM
Can you please share through which airlines, that goes thru brussels ?
Jet Airways, Continental...
Jet Airways, Continental...
more...
pictures You and me. about me, quotes
MYGCBY2010
10-16 10:33 AM
Hi ,
I received RFE on my I-131 application asking for all the I-94's that is being issued to me.
I had been in and out of US many times and there's lot if I-94's involved and I don't anything with me except the latest. What options do I have?... Also couple of times during my earlier trip (initial visits in US), the AIR Line didn't even take the I-94 from my Passport which ultimately I lost.
My Passport has all the entries indicating my Date in and Date out...
Gurus - What do you advise on my case...
Anybody's input are highly appreciated and I know we could somehow get the I-94 copies by requesting USCIS. (That is time consuming)... I have to respond in next five to ten days...
What options do I have?...
Thanks.
I received RFE on my I-131 application asking for all the I-94's that is being issued to me.
I had been in and out of US many times and there's lot if I-94's involved and I don't anything with me except the latest. What options do I have?... Also couple of times during my earlier trip (initial visits in US), the AIR Line didn't even take the I-94 from my Passport which ultimately I lost.
My Passport has all the entries indicating my Date in and Date out...
Gurus - What do you advise on my case...
Anybody's input are highly appreciated and I know we could somehow get the I-94 copies by requesting USCIS. (That is time consuming)... I have to respond in next five to ten days...
What options do I have?...
Thanks.
dresses myspace quotes about me. i luv
cheg
07-13 04:18 AM
It's only 1:46 am here so i'm still waiting. Nothing new yet.:rolleyes:
more...
makeup time someone quotes me the
validIV
03-18 10:48 AM
One can work on current H-1B (irrespective on basis it was approved), until the H-1B petition is revoked or canceled or expired. However, beneficiary is not eligible for new/extension of H-1B after I-485 denial.
We can quote memos and statutes all day and it would go nowhere. This is simply a matter of interpretation by USCIS and how it applies to the situtation.
Best advice? Talk to more than 1 immigration lawyer.
We can quote memos and statutes all day and it would go nowhere. This is simply a matter of interpretation by USCIS and how it applies to the situtation.
Best advice? Talk to more than 1 immigration lawyer.
girlfriend funny running quotes. love
indyanguy
06-13 06:01 PM
If my EB3 140 is pending and if when I apply for EB2 140, I dont have the approval, can the interfile be done at the later date?
I am seriously considering porting my date. Any idea how much approx it would cost for the PERM + 140 process (lawyer and USCIS fee)?
Also, if both EB3 and EB2 are with the same company, is it required that the EB3 position is different from the EB2 position? Do I have to get promoted?
I am seriously considering porting my date. Any idea how much approx it would cost for the PERM + 140 process (lawyer and USCIS fee)?
Also, if both EB3 and EB2 are with the same company, is it required that the EB3 position is different from the EB2 position? Do I have to get promoted?
hairstyles Quote Me SCREENSHOTS
IVMovies
11-20 04:56 PM
No. It is not from IV Core again. Once Core team makes their decision on this they will post it separately.
arnab221
04-14 05:55 PM
Immigration: 'Birth Tourism' Industry Markets U.S. Citizenship Abroad - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/birth-tourism-industry-markets-us-citizenship-abroad/story?id=10359956&partner=yahoo)
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
yabadaba
10-19 08:07 AM
India stats
Perm 03/28/2005 and 1/1/2006 - 7290
China stats
Perm 03/28/2005 and 1/1/2006 - 2627
ROW stats
Perm 03/28/2005 and 1/1/2006 - 19063
Perm 03/28/2005 and 1/1/2006 - 7290
China stats
Perm 03/28/2005 and 1/1/2006 - 2627
ROW stats
Perm 03/28/2005 and 1/1/2006 - 19063
No comments:
Post a Comment