Skip to Content

Programs:

Legalization

14th Amendment faces challenge from immigration hardliners

Published on Sun, Sep 12, 2010

Michele Waslin, a senior policy analyst with the Washington, D.C.-based Immigration Policy Center, said changing the birthright citizenship laws will not solve the problem of illegal immigration.

"It actually increases the number of illegal immigrants because children would be born in the U.S. with no legal status," she said.

 

Published in the Arizona Central

Visa Programs for High-Skilled Workers

Businesses depend on highly skilled foreign professionals to remain competitive in today’s global market. In recent years, however, arbitrary decision making by the immigration agencies has often prevented U.S. employers from hiring the best and the brightest. Inconsistent outcomes in cases with similar facts, inexplicably restrictive interpretations of legal requirements, and the proliferation of Requests for Evidence are among the many obstacles that unjustifiably prevent highly skilled professionals from obtaining visas to work in the United States. Moreover, the agencies’ frequent reliance on obscure guidance and unwritten policies complicates the task of challenging bad decisions through litigation. 

The LAC is working to tackle these problems by using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to increase transparency and accountability, undertaking litigation where appropriate, and providing practice resources to help lawyers challenge unlawful agency action in court.

CASES l ADVOCACY l RESOURCES

CASES

H-1B Validity Period Litigation

Valorem Consulting Group, LLC v. USCIS, Case No. 4:13-cv-1209-ODS (W.D. Mo.). Valorem, an IT consulting company, petitioned to employ a software developer for three years in H-1B status as part of a project development team at its office. Initially, USCIS denied the petition, but later – after Valorem, represented by AILA member Susan Bond, filed suit – approved it for one year. Read more...

Our Alumni

Image: 
Tab Headline: 
Our Alumni

Get involved in our network of past participants. Grow and develop professionally, expand your network, and attend events in your home country.

 

Faith-Based Groups Differ in Approach to Immigration Reform

Published on Sun, Nov 07, 2010

According to the Immigration Policy Center the U.S. employment-based immigration rules are not in line with U.S. labor needs. Only 5,000 green cards per year are given to less skilled workers such as landscapers, hotel staff, and construction workers. This inadequate number of available green cards is “the crux of the unauthorized immigration problem in the U.S.,” according to an October 2010 Fact Sheet by the center.

Published in the Epoch Times

Birthright Citizenship’s Unlikely Road to Supreme Court

Published on Mon, Jan 10, 2011

“Those children can’t petition for their parents to become U.S. citizens until they are 21 years old and it most cases, the parents would be barred from getting a visa to the United States for 10 years,” said Michelle Waslin, senior policy analyst at the American Immigration Council’s Immigration Policy Center in Washington, D.C. “So that’s a 31-year plan. It doesn’t seem like it’s a very good plan to legalize your status here in the U.S. It doesn’t protect them from deportation.”

Waslin argues that such a change in the law will affect all citizens, creating a complicated bureaucracy.

“My birth certificate will no longer be proof of my U.S. citizenship, so how would anybody prove their citizenship?” she asked.

Published in the Immigrant Magazine

Litigation Clearinghouse Newsletter Vol. 1, No. 9

This issue covers the Supreme Court's decision Gonzales v. Thomas and Possible Legal Challenge over DOL "45-Day Letters."

Published On: Sunday, April 23, 2006 | Download File

Chinese Tradition meets New England Character

August, 2009
Yongwei Ding

The Exchange Visitor Program is proud to announce Yongwei Ding as this issue's Exchange Visitor of the Month. Each month, we select an exchange visitor who has made an effort to get involved in his/her community and explore American Culture. Read more...

Birthright of illegal residents' children is under attack

Published on Fri, Mar 04, 2011

Twelve years ago, Lizbeth Ramos and her common-law husband, Juan, left their hometown near Puebla, Mexico, and set out on foot across the desert for the Arizona border, to slip into new lives as illegal immigrants.

He found work in a produce market in the Philadelphia area, she in a boutique. They saved up to start a family.

Now 30, she lies on an examination table in Pennsylvania Hospital, at a weekly obstetrics clinic for immigrant women, no status questions asked. As a doctor slides an ultrasound wand over her bulging belly, her eyes are transfixed by the monitor. She is carrying twins.

The moment they enter the world, they will be what their parents are not: U.S. citizens.

Such is their birthright, granted by the 14th Amendment to an estimated 340,000 babies born annually to undocumented immigrants.

But in the marathon fight over immigration control, that 143-year-old constitutional guarantee has become the latest target and the delivery room the new front. The pejorative anchor babies already is in the lexicon.

"Once a child is born here, the parents make the argument that they should be allowed to stay as that child's guardian. They are using that child as an anchor [to] play on our heartstrings," said Pennsylvania Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, a Butler County Republican who has built a national reputation as a crusader against what he calls "illegal alien invaders."

Immigrant advocates dismiss his contention as myth, and point to a recent study that found that undocumented immigrants generally "come for work and to join family members." The Washington-based nonprofit Immigration Policy Center concluded that "they do not come specifically to give birth" and game the immigration system.

Such assertions have not tempered efforts by immigration-control proponents to effectively do away with "birthright citizenship" for illegal immigrants' children.Read more...

Published in the Philadelphia Inquirer

Employment Authorization Verification

ARCHIVED ISSUE PAGE (LAST UPDATED OCTOBER 2010)

This Litigation Issue Page highlights lawsuits challenging government initiatives related to employment verification, including the Internet based E-Verify system and "no-match" letters issued by the Social Security Administration.

Several states and local governments have enacted laws regulating employment verification. These laws have prompted litigation, typically challenging whether they are preempted by federal law. The following cases are on our State and Local Law Enforcement Issue Page

  • Arizona Contractors Assoc., Inc. v. Napolitano, 526 F. Supp. 2d 968 (D. Ariz. 2007), aff'd sub nom. Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc. v. Napolitano, 558 F.3d 856 (9th Cir. 2009), petition for cert. filed sub nom. Chamber of Commerce v. Candelaria, (July 24, 2009) (No. 09-115)
  • United States v. Illinois, No. 07-3261, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19533 (C.D. Ill. 2009)
  • Gray et al. v. City of Valley Park, No. 07-00881 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 31, 2008) appeal docketed, No. 08-1681 (8th Cir. argued Dec. 10, 2008)
  • Chamber of Commerce v. Henry, No. 08-109 (W.D. Okla. filed Feb. 1, 2008), appeal docketed, No. 08-6128 (10th Cir. argued May 4, 2009)

Latest Developments|Additional Resources

Latest Developments

E-Verify Litigation

Business Groups Challenge Rule Mandating Participation in E-Verify

Chamber of Commerce v. Chertoff, No. 08-03444 (D. Md. summary judgment granted Aug. 26, 2009) appeal docketed, No. 09-2006 (4th Cir. Sept. 3, 2009)Read more...