Categories
Global Pinoy

Economic Aid is Not Reward for Honorable Service

Share this:

The 90 year old war veteran who died on his way to getting his just reward is crying for justice from his grave. Mr. Fortunato Pacatang’s surviving children were denied the ability to inherit his lump sum benefit.

When President Barack Obama approved the $198 million appropriation last year for Filipino World War II veterans, many were elated and finally sighed “justice.” This amount was incorporated in the budget as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Package. It was part of the fund that was designed to “stimulate” the US economy.

For many advocates of Filipino veterans, this Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation fund of $198 million is a reward for the hard work and courage of our elderly veterans during the war.

If this is a “reward” for services rendered, why is it that not all veterans qualify for the benefit. How come Mr. Pacatang’s surviving heirs are not entitled to the ‘reward’ of the lump sum benefit?

Equity Bills Declined

When the Rescission Act of 1946 was enacted, the Filipino veterans who fought side by side with the American forces were divested of their status as a US war veteran. According to this 1946 legislation, the services of the Filipino World War II veterans during the war were not considered as “service for purposes of US VA benefits.”  Hundreds of thousands of Filipino veterans were adversely affected by this legislation. Despite the fact that they fought under the same war against a common enemy in defense of democracy, the Filipino veterans were considered as “second class veterans.”

In 1990 when Immigration and Nationality Act was amended to allow Filipino World War II veterans to become US citizens, their veterans’ benefits did not follow despite the fact that they were US citizens.

A legislation was needed to correct the injustice of the Rescission Act of 1946. Hence, beginning in 1993 bills were introduced in the US Congress to repeal the unjust provision of the 1946 Rescission Act. Various bills were introduced to classify the Filipinos as US veterans for purposes of VA benefits. The campaign to pass the Equity Bill was an uphill battle. Different legislators in Capitol Hill had different views about our greatest generation. Those who lived through World War II, like Senator Daniel Akaka and Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, were supportive of the Filipino veterans cause. These supportive legislators maintain that Filipino veterans deserve to be treated equally as far as their US veterans. However, with a budget deficit resulting from the Bush Administration’s political and economic policy, an equity bill at the US Congress lost its chance to pass into law. Had this equity bill been passed into law, the Filipino veterans would have had their equal and just reward for their services.

As the administration changed, legislators supportive of the veterans cause came out with the proposition that instead of giving a monthly pension to the veterans, there would just be a one-time ”lump sum” payment to the Filipino veterans. This $198 million fund is known as the lump sum benefit or the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation.

Lump Sum is Definitely a Compromise

A significant number of veterans benefited from this lump sum benefit. Approximately $150 million of the $198 million have already been disbursed to more than 12,000 Filipino veterans.  There are still pending approximately 14,585 veterans applications that are awaiting adjudication of their claims.

While this lump sum has already favored more than 12,000 veterans, the 8,713 that were denied and the remaining 14,585 awaiting their claims are now anxious on whether the will ever be able to receive their benefit under this FVEC.

It must be understood that since this is not an Equity legislation that attempted to correct the injustice emanating from the 1946 Rescission Act, this lump sum benefit has limited applicability and created further injustices especially to those brave veterans who passed away prior to the passage of the lump sum benefit.

Weeping Widows

Widows of Filipino veterans were the first group that cried “unfair” when they were told that they are not included in the lump sum benefits. These surviving spouses were married to true and legitimate veterans but were singled out to not receive any lump sum benefit.

Those who became widows after February 17, 2009 are still able to file for the lump sum benefit will still receive their husband’s lump sum check.

The difference between weeping widows and widows after the fact is that the latter’s veteran spouses survived the lump sum benefit. Death of the veteran before the enactment of the lump sum benefit became a ‘penalty’ for the weeping widows.

Surviving Children

One of the specific limitation in the provision of the legislation is that “only the surviving spouse” of the veteran may receive the lump sum check if the veteran passes away after filing the application. Children of the veterans are explicitly excluded from receiving the lump sum check.

This was what happened to the surviving children of the 90 year old veteran Mr. Fortunato Pacatang. His children are unable to claim any lump sum benefit from the deceased veteran who passed away while his claim was pending.

Survival of the Fittest

The case of Mr. Pacatang is reflective of the many cases of Filipino veterans and their families. The series of unfortunate event after his demise is a bitter disappointment for their surviving children who are forced to face their lamentable realities.

Last year, when the lump sum benefit was passed into law, we classified it as a “qualified” victory considering that it benefits certain veterans but does not have equal applicability to all who courageously served during World War II.  One year after its implementation, it has now become more obvious that this lump sum is not a reward for services but simply a financial aid only for “some” who are lucky to have lived the day of the passage of this law. Those veterans who did not survive the passage of the law were excluded.

The lump sum should not have been categorized as a veteran benefit but rather a contest for the “survival of the fittest”. The one who lives the longest with the spouse gets the prize. This lump sum is not about justice but simply an aid that is part of the stimulus package. The veterans deserve better.

(Tancinco may be reached at law@tancinco.com or at 887 7177)

Categories
Updates

USCIS Changes Filing Location for Form I-131, the Application for Travel Document

Share this:

USCIS recently announced revised filing instructions and addresses for
Form I-131, the Application for Travel Document. As of March 19, 2010,
applicants wishing to file Form I-131 should file their application
either at the USCIS Vermont Service Center or at one of the USCIS
Lockbox facilities. Detailed information about which location to choose
is included in the revised Form I-131 instructions.

USCIS Service Centers will forward all incorrectly filed Form I-131
applications for 30 days. After April 19, 2010, all applications sent
to the incorrect location will be returned to the applicant with a note
guiding them to send the application to the correct location.

Individuals currently in removal proceedings (or those who have
previously been removed from the U.S.) should submit their application
to the following address:

Department of Homeland Security / Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Office of International Affairs
Attn: Section Chief, Law Enforcement Parole Branch
800 N. Capitol Street
Washington, DC 20536

Please note that applicants filing this form at a USCIS Lockbox
facility may request to receive an email or text message letting them
know that USCIS has accepted their application. Applicants interested
in receiving this message should additionally complete Form G-1145, the
E-Notification of Application/Petition Acceptance, and attach it to the
first page of their application.

Categories
Global Pinoy

No Need of Forcible Deportation for Some TNTs

Share this:

Increase in Deportation Cases Give TNTs Opportunity to Reflect on their Options

Many years ago, a visit to the district office of the Citizenship and Immigration Services in San Francisco CA required one to fall in a long line before being able to enter. As soon as one gets in the immigration office for their green card or naturalization application, the applicant will have to wait many more hours inside a room full of applicants.

In recent months applicants for US citizenship, permanent resident status and other benefits are no longer as numerous as before.  However, the other office called the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), commonly called the Immigration Court, is full of foreign nationals who are appearing for their deportation or removal proceedings. A significant number of respondents from the Philippines are noticeable in the courtrooms.

One of those waiting to be called for his Master Hearing before the Immigration Court was Eduardo. After living in the United States for more than fifteen years, he received a Notice to Appear and to show cause why he should not be deported.

Eduardo worked as an engineer for a reputable company in the San Francisco bay area. In the early 90s, he entered the US on a visitor visa. Before the expiration of his status, he applied for political asylum.  For the last ten years, Eduardo was able to work but eventually his asylum request was denied.

When the judge asked Eduardo if he had any relief for staying in the US, he responded in the negative. He told the court that he was ready to go back to Manila and will not fight his case. He has not seen his wife and children for fifteen years. Eduardo opted for voluntary departure. He is not resentful. In fact, he was very excited to leave.

With the surge in deportation cases in the US, it is hard to determine whether all these deportees will be successfully removed to return to their homeland. But amazingly, there are a number of Filipinos who are just like Eduardo. They are ready to return to the homeland. For those who have been separated from their families, the economic crisis in the US had not given them further motivation to stay.

Increase in Deportation Cases

Enforcement of immigration law is at its all time high. Families are being separated forcibly because of the enforcement activities of the Department of Homeland Security.  Those who are without valid legal documents to stay and work are being put in deportation proceedings. Even applicants for naturalization who have prior immigration issues are not exempt from becoming a respondent in deportation cases especially if there are fraud and misrepresentation issues.

With the increase in immigration cases, the US immigration courts are experiencing a severe backlog in adjudicating these cases. The number of cases is up 82% from 10 years ago. There are now 228,421 cases in the first three months of 2010 and this number is increasing everyday.

To address the issue of backlog of cases, the US Department of Justice is hiring more immigration judges. According to the Transactional Records Clearinghouse, there is a shortage of judges and Attorney General Eric Holder is interviewing candidates to fill the vacancies.

The Department of Homeland Security should instead re-assess its policy on whether those in deportation proceedings are a threat to the US. Most of those that are being deported have been long time residents who have been able to establish their lives in the US with their family. There are also those who were educated in the US and possess skills that may contribute to the economic growth. They are, instead, being sent back to their homeland.

Number of TNTs Down

With the unemployment rate remaining high, there is a recent study that the number of undocumented immigrants has gone down. But this is true also for legal immigrants. Even if they are green card holders or US citizens, many have decided to return to their place of birth. The housing and health care crisis are also factors in deciding whether theses immigrants choose to remain in the US.

For those who have families in the US, departing will be a difficult option. But for those who have available choices, moving their families back to the Philippines may not seem to be such a difficult choice. The Philippines should be ready for the reverse migration of its nationals. Those returning come with valuable skills, education and experience. There should be programs developed for the returning immigrants, the true balikbayans.

Undergoing the deportation process may be humiliating to most deportees. But at least for a few deportees I have met, they have no qualms about returning. Eduardo claims,  “I shall return with my dignity intact. This immigration court need not force me to return to my homeland.”

(Tancinco may be reached at law@tancinco.com or at 887 7177).

Categories
Immigration Round Table

Conditional Resident Suffers Abuses from US Citizen Spouse

Share this:

Dear Atty. Lou,
 
I am a conditional permanent resident here in the US. My wife and I got married in the Philippines in January of 2007. My wife then petitioned me and I arrived here last December 2009.  Recently, we have been having serious marital problems and it came to a point that I am concerned for my safety. I fear for my life.

What happened in February 2010 was very traumatic for me and I can no longer live with the person I used to love who constantly abused me verbally, emotionally, sexually and this time physically! She’s becoming very violent from the usual pushing me around on the bed and on the wall to pinching me to throwing breakable house decors on my face and to blocking the doors of the house because she will not allow me to leave the house for me to go to work.  She does not want me to see my relatives who also reside in the US. She expects me to follow everything she says and if I disagree, she threatens me with a divorce.  She’s blackmailing me since she knows I’m just a conditional permanent resident here.

My question now is about my status. What will happen to me/my status here in US if I or she will file a divorce? What is the best move for me to do (since it’s impossible now to patch things up with my wife)? Please help.
 
DV Victim

Dear DV Victim,

I sympathize with your situation. It is not unusual that spouses who are petitioned by their spouses are vulnerable to abuses. The immigration matter is always an issue that comes up whenever there is a misunderstanding between the couple.

The immigration law has specific provisions that protect that conditional permanent resident from being removed from the country based on refusal of the petitioning spouse to file the joint removal of conditional resident. On the other hand, there are also provisions that protect the US citizen spouse from abuses from petitioned spouses who use the marriage to circumvent immigration law.

In your particular case, you have described instances of abuse from your US citizen spouse. Since you are on conditional resident status, the filing of divorce will not generally affect your ability to remove your conditions and obtain a permanent resident status. There is a “waiver” of joint filing of the removal of conditions on USCIS Form I-751.  This means that you even if your spouse files for divorce, you may still get your permanent green card as long as you show proof that you entered the marriage in good faith. Another ground for the waiver is  “extreme cruelty” by your US citizen spouse.

In proving either the good faith marriage or the extreme cruelty in your waiver of joint filing, you should support your petition with supporting documents.  Examples of these documents are your detailed declaration, written testimony from witnesses who are aware of your situation, medical records, police reports, counseling records or photographs.

Your case therefore is not as worse as you think it would be if she files a petition for dissolution of your marriage. You are right in saying that your safety should now be your immediate concern. Do what you believe would be appropriate based on the information I have provided.

Atty. Lou

(Lourdes Santos Tancinco Esq .is a partner at the Tancinco Law Offices, a Professional Law Corp. Her office is located at One Hallidie Plaza, Suite 818, San Francisco CA 94102 and may be reached at 415 397 0808, email at law@tancinco.com. The content provided in this column is solely for informational purposes only and do not create a lawyer-client relationship. It should not be relied as legal advice. This column does not disclose any confidential or classified information acquired in her capacity as legal counsel. Consult with an attorney before deciding on a course of action. You may submit questions to law@tancinco.com)
 

Categories
SideBar

Foreclosure Basics

Share this:

I am surprised by the number of clients who come and ask me with about foreclosure but are ill-informed about the process. Here are some common myths and realities about foreclosure.

One common misinformation that homeowners have is that the moment they receive a foreclosure notice, they can be evicted from their house anytime.  Not wanting to be homeless, and fearing that their personal effects may be thrown out to the streets, many homeowners immediately abandon their homes and move to a rental apartment.  When homeowners do this, they start paying out rental money right away. Homeowners, in fact, could have stayed in their homes for a couple more months for the foreclosure process to complete. Depending on the state where you live, the process normally takes a few months before the property is actually foreclosed. Hence, homeowners can actually save their rental money for a couple more months if they stay in their homes while the foreclosure is pending, instead of abandoning the home right away and renting an apartment.

The other reason why some homeowners leave right away is because they think that after foreclosure, the bank will not only take the home but also all of the homeowner’s personal stuff in the home. Not so. All personal property is yours to take and only those fixtures permanently attached to the house goes with the property.  

Some homeowners, surprisingly, still think that they can go to jail if they do not pay their mortgage. This misinformation may be given to homeowners by debt collectors who will do or say anything to make debtors pay their debts. The thing to remember is that no one goes to jail for failing to pay an obligation.

Some homeowners, when they are delinquent in their mortgages, think that the banks will jump at the opportunity to foreclose their homes right away. Banks, in fact, are in the business of providing loans – not in the business of owning or selling homes. They would prefer that you keep your home. Hence, it is in the homeowner’s best interest to contact their banks when they are in financial trouble about options for keeping their homes instead of just giving up and not paying the mortgage.

Some homeowners are also worried that if they undergo foreclosure now, they will never be able to buy a house again. While it is true that a foreclosure can be one of the worst things that can go in your credit report, you may still qualify for a home loan again. Though just be aware that terms of your future loans may require more down payment or higher interest rates. Eventually, even a homeowner with a foreclosure record can always build up the credit record again.  

The other common concern some homeowners have is that on the foreclosure auction day, they are worried that they have to leave right away after the Buyer purchases the property at the foreclosure auction.  Once again, a homeowner who is in possession of a property cannot just be kicked out of the house immediately by the buyer at public auction. For the homeowner to be evicted, the buyer will have to go to court and file an eviction lawsuit. The Buyer has to secure a judgment in court and has to have a Sheriff enforce that judgment. Normally that process will take a few months to complete. Hence, the homeowner will still have a few months to stay in the home even after foreclosure before he can be physically evicted.

(DISCLAIMER: material presented above is intended for informational purposes only. It is not intended as professional advice and should not be construed as such. Rey Tancinco is a partner at Tancinco Law Offices, a professional corporation with offices in San Francisco, Vallejo, and Manila. The law office website is at: tancinco.weareph.com/old.  Rey Tancinco can be contacted at (800) 999-9096 or (415) 397-0808 or via email at: attyrey@tancinco.com

Categories
Updates

USCIS Introduces New Initiatives to Strengthen E-Verify Program

Share this:

USCIS and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) this week announced
three new initiatives aimed at strengthening the accuracy and
efficiency of the E-Verify system. These new initiatives include a new
agreement with the Department of Justice that proposes to streamline
adjudication in E-Verify misuse and discrimination cases. Additionally,
a new telephone hotline has been created to better provide customer
service to employees seeking information about E-Verify. Finally, new
training videos have been developed that will focus on E-Verify,
including employee rights and employer responsibilities. These videos
will be in both English and Spanish.

“E-Verify is a smart, simple and effective tool that helps employers
across the country maintain a legal workforce,” said Janet Napolitano,
Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. “The initiatives
announced today will provide essential information to workers about
their rights and ensure that E-Verify is used fairly while bolstering
the Department’s efforts to protect critical employment opportunities.”

The new educational training videos are available online at either
www.dhs.gov/e-verify or www.youtube.com/ushomelandsecurity. The new
hotline number, which will be active starting April 5, 2010, is (888) 897-7781

Categories
Updates

Utah and Virginia Pass E-Verify Laws

Share this:

Two new states have just passed laws requiring employers to participate
in the federal government’s E-Verify program. Both Utah and Virginia
recently passed laws that would mandate employers to verify the
identity and employment eligibility status of all new hires starting in
2010.

The Utah law, the Private Employer Verification Act, will require all
private employers who employ 15 or more employees as of July 1, 2010 to
register with and use E-Verify to verify the employment eligibility
status of their new hires, in accordance with the requirements of the
federal verification system. The law does not, however, apply to
private employers of foreign nationals, in cases where the foreign
national holds an H-2A or H-2B visa.

The Virginia law, the E-Verify Program (HB 737), requires only state
agencies to enroll in and use the E-Verify program to verify the
employment eligibility status of their new hires by December 1, 2012.
This bill, in its original form, would have required all public
contractors, local municipalities and private companies with 15 or more
employees to additionally register with and use the E-Verify program;
those measures were removed from the bill via amendments introduced in
the State Senate. The State Senate additionally shifted the
implementation date from December 1, 2010 to December 1, 2012.

Categories
Updates

USCIS Reminds Chilean Nationals of Certain Available Immigration Benefits

Share this:

USCIS recently posted a reminder of U.S. immigration benefits available
to certain eligible Chilean nationals. In the notice, USCIS comments
that they understand the effects that a natural catastrophe can have on
a person’s ability to establish lawful immigration status in the U.S.
and that there are certain temporary relief measures available to
Chilean nationals. These relief measures include:

Granting an application for change or extension of nonimmigrant status
on behalf of a Chilean national who currently resides in the U.S., even
when the request for change or extension of status was made after the
person’s authorized period of admission expired.

Re-paroling individuals granted parole by USCIS.

Extending certain grants of advance parole and the expedited processing of requests for advance parole.

The expedited adjudication and approval of requests for off-campus
employment authorization for certain Chilean F-1 students in cases of
severe economic hardship.

The expedited processing of immigrant petitions for immediate Chilean relatives of U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents.

The expedited issuance of employment authorization for certain Chilean nationals.

The provision of assistance to lawful permanent residents that are stranded overseas without necessary documents.

Categories
Updates

USCIS Will Accept FY 2011 H-1B Petitions on April 1, 2010

Share this:

Earlier this week, USCIS announced that it will start accepting H-1B
petitions for Fiscal Year 2011 on April 1, 2010. The fiscal year cap
for FY 2011 is 65,000. There will be an additional 20,000 H-1B
petitions available for employers filing on behalf of persons who
earned a U.S. master’s degree or higher; such persons will be exempt
from the FY 2011 H-1B annual cap.

As they have done in previous years, USCIS will monitor closely the
number of petitions they received and will notify the public of the
date on which they have received the necessary number of petitions to
meet this annual cap. If they receive more than this necessary number
of petitions, USCIS will randomly select the number required to reach
the annual cap limit from all petitions received on the final receipt
date. In such a case, all cap-subject petitions not selected will be
rejected, as will all petitions received after the final receipt date.

Please note that USCIS considers the acceptance date for petitions to
be the date they receive a properly filed petition with the correct fee
and not the date that the petition was postmarked.