Author: tancincowp

Categories
Updates

Pusong Pinoy Sa Amerika renews contract with GMA Pinoy TV

Share this:

IMG_0153

QUEZON CITY, PHILIPPINES – In ceremonies held at the GMA Network Center in Quezon City, Philippines last April 4, 2019, Atty Lou Tancinco and Eric Quizon, hosts of Pusong Pinoy sa Amerika, renew their partnership with GMA Pinoy TV in a contract signing with GMA First Vice President and Head of International Operations Joseph T. Francia.

IMG_0155

“I think it’s a real blessing that I’ve partnered through these years with GMA Pinoy TV ,” says Atty Lou Tancinco. According to her, the partnership has allowed them to reach the huge Filipino audience of GMA Pinoy TV which has made possible the 15 seasons of Pusong Pinoy sa Amerika so far.

IMG_0158

For Joseph T. Francia, GMA Head of International Operations, the contract signing is a “renewal of vows” of sorts with Atty Lou Tancinco whose show Pusong Pinoy sa Amerika had been a part of GMA Pinoy TV since the early days of the international channel. He also recognizes the value of the show to the Filipino community who need guidance with their immigration concerns.

Pusong Pinoy sa Amerika is a 30-minute talk show on the most common U.S. immigration concerns of Filipino immigrant communities in the United States. The show prides itself in having helped empower thousands of Filipino immigrants on how to deal with immigration-related matters.

“Truth, resiliency and family unity” is the theme of the upcoming season of Pusong Pinoy sa Amerika which begins June 9, 2019. The show airs on GMA Pinoy TV, the flagship international channel of the GMA Network.

IMG_0202

Categories
Updates

Why Is It Taking Too Long for USCIS to Adjudicate a Visa Petition/Application?

Share this:

The delay in the processing of visa benefits applications with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) has reached a critical level that’s affecting U.S citizen families and employers filing visas on behalf of their relatives and employees, respectively. Last month, U.S. Congressional Representatives led by Rep. Jesus G. “Chuy” Garcia (D-IL) sent a letter to the USCIS Director Lee Francis Cissna demanding accountability on the current delays in the adjudication of visa petitions and other applications. What is causing the delay and what actions can we take to help address this issue?

Many years back, specifically in 2004, an applicant for naturalization will have to wait for 14 months before s/he is called for an interview. To address the increasing delay in the processing of applications, the USCIS created the “Backlog Elimination Program” with the purpose of working smarter and eliminating redundancies in the adjudications of visa petitions and applications. At that time the number of backlog of cases was approximately 1.7 million. After 2 years of implementing the Backlog Elimination Program, the processing time for naturalization applications was reduced from 14 months to 5 months. In fact, in an election year, such as in the year 2016, the naturalization applications were adjudicated in three months.

In 2017, there were changes in USCIS policies that resulted in processing delays. According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, there is now a net backlog exceeding 2.3 million in delayed cases. The study of the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) indicates that number amounts to more than 100% increase over the span of one year. If an applicant for naturalization would notice now, there is an average of 10-19.5 months before the application is adjudicated. Other than naturalization applications, the other visa applications that are suffering from processing delays are the petitions for immediate relatives (I-130); applications for employment authorization (I-765) and applications for adjustment of status(I-485).

A spouse of a U.S. citizen applying for lawful permanent resident must now wait at least 17.5 months before the spouse is called for the interview on the I-130 and 485 application. An employment authorization document application is taking now at least 4 to 6 months if it is based on adjustment application. Other basis for applications for employment authorization now take anywhere from 6.5 to 8.5 months before being adjudicated and released.

While historically, staffing levels and volume of cases received at the USCIS are contributory to the delay, shift in policies being implemented by USCIS now have the same effect. DHS stated in its report to Congress in 2018 that “policy shifts” are factors influencing its diminished per hour case completion rate. One of the changes in policies are the elimination of the long standing deference policy which gives deference to prior determinations involving the same employer and same position. Now the USCIS is assessing and re-examining prior approved cases. Other policy changes are the (1)requirement for a domestic interview for employment-based petition; (2) adopting extreme vetting security protocols (even if existing screening measures are adequate) and (3) adding enforcement duties to USCIS officers under the new NTA policy where an adjudicating officer is required to issue Notices to Appear to individuals with denied petitions. Undeniably, diversion of resources from adjudication to enforcement could slow down case processing.

These delays had adversely affected applicants, their families and their employers – resulting in job losses, inability to travel internationally for important family and business events or simply the inability to obtain social security numbers and driver’s licenses.

USCIS is an agency created by Congress, hence, it is just appropriate that it remains accountable for the delays in adjudication. Affected U.S. citizen businesses and families and immigrant advocates must contact their congressional representatives and urge them to direct USCIS to focus on its service oriented purpose as an agency, create a backlog elimination program and remove enforcement functions to resolve this critical issue of adjudication delays.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through this website tancinco.weareph.com/old)

Categories
Updates

Overstaying and Human Trafficking Cited As Main Reasons for Rendering Filipinos Ineligible for U.S. Temporary H2 Working Visas

Share this:

Every year since 2008, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State publish a list of countries whose nationals are eligible to receive H2A and H2B visas. Philippines has always been on this list except for 2019. In a surprising announcement through the Federal Register publication on January 18, 2019, the Philippines together with Dominican Republic (H2B only) and Ethiopia were deleted from the list. This means that no Filipinos will be able to receive H2 Visa beginning 2019.

Only Limited Categories of Working Visas Affected

The working visas impacted by this bad news are limited to the H2A and the H2B visas.

H2A visas are working visas issued to perform agricultural labor or agricultural services of a temporary or seasonal nature. The farm labor includes the raising of livestock, any practices including forestry and lumbering incident to or related to farming operations, handling, planting, packaging to market or carrier for marketing.

H2B visas, on the other hand, are those applied for to work in non-agricultural labor. The type of jobs mostly availed by Filipinos who are temporary and seasonal work in the hotel or construction projects.

Both these agricultural and non-agricultural working visas are temporary in nature and the holder of these visas are expected to return to their homeland after the expiration of the visas.

There are other categories of working visas that are not affected by this recent development and these include the H1B professional and specialty occupations, the H3 Trainees and the O1/P1 working visas. Filipino nationals may continue to apply for the latter visa categories.

Overstaying and Human Trafficking

The U.S. Department of Homeland Securities reports that 40% of those issued H2 visas do not return to the Philippines after the expiration of their visas. It was also mentioned that 40% of the quota number for derivatives of “T1” Trafficking Visas are issued to Filipinos. Visas for derivatives of victims of trafficking are identified as T2 or T3 visas.

Human trafficking occurs when traffickers lure individuals with false promises of employment and a better life often taking advantage of the vulnerable unemployed or low income individuals who lack access to social safety nets. Victims of human trafficking are issued T nonimmigrant visas and are allowed to work and remain in the United States. To prohibit the use of the H2B visa as a route for human traffickers to take advantage of their victims, the DHS decided to designate Philippines as a country whose nationals are no longer eligible for the H2B and H2A visas.

Given that overstaying the authorized stay is unlawful, It must be pointed out that overstaying of H2 workers is one major resulting consequence of becoming victims of human trafficking. Most of the victims borrowed huge sums of money to be able to pay their agents or traffickers. These workers are hesitant to return to the homeland because they will be facing financial issues, lawsuits if not harassment from their creditors in the Philippines.

There are 66,000 visas that are issued each fiscal year. For the year 2017, Filipinos availed of 767 of the H2B visas and that is approximately a little more than 1% of the allocated visa. In rendering Filipinos ineligible of the H2B visas, there is not much impact on U.S. employers in general. However, the 1% is still important to Filipino workers and to their employers and that most of those affected are head of their families. If there is a genuine employer and employee relationship, despite the ineligibility of Filipinos, their employers may still seek a reconsideration to qualify Filipino workers as a matter of discretion and on a case by case basis if it is in the U.S. interest for the Filipino worker to receive the H2B visa. A discretionary factor that may be taken into account is the worker’s prior admission as H2B and that the worker complied with the terms of the program.

In regards to the human trafficking issue, this is a more serious concern not just for the United States but also for the Philippine government. With the delisting of the Philippines from the H2B program, it will be an opportune time to review existing regulations and initiate more restrictive measures to protect our Filipino workers.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com, facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through her website tancinco.weareph.com/old)

Categories
Updates

Effect of Shutdown On Immigration-Related Programs & Applications

Share this:

For three weeks now, a partial government shutdown is still in effect. What is the impact of this shutdown on immigration related programs?

A. Court Hearings of Non-citizens in Removal Proceedings

With 800,000 cases pending before immigration courts nationwide, the partial shutdown only worsens the backlog. At the moment, the immigration courts under the Department of Justice’s Executive Office on Immigration Review (EOIR) are not hearing cases of non-detained individuals and their hearing if scheduled during the shutdown will be reset for a later date. Individuals who are in detention will proceed with their scheduled hearings.

B. USCIS Petitions, Applications and Interviews

Most family and employment-based petitions, applications for naturalization, adjustments of status and other applications are accepted by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Unlike other federal agencies, USCIS is a fee-funded agency and is open for business despite the federal budget issues. It will remain open and individuals seeking immigration benefits must attend interviews and appointments as scheduled. The only programs that are suspended during the shutdown are the following:

  1. EB5 Immigrant Investor Regional Center Program;
  2. E-Verify;
  3. Conrad 30 Waiver Program for J1 medical doctors; and the
  4. Non-minister religious workers petitions.

C. Consular Processing with the National Visa Center and U.S. Embassy

Those with approved petitions and individuals whose visas are available for processing are not affected by the shutdown. The Department of State issued an announcement on December 22, 2018 stating that all visa services in the United States and at U.S. Embassies/Consulates overseas will continue during the partial shutdown.

D. Application for Temporary and Permanent Visas at the U.S. Embassy

Visa operations are fee-funded so the U.S. Embassies will continue functioning despite the shutdown. Those applying for visas and who have scheduled interviews must attend their scheduled appointments for visa issuance.

E. U.S.Passport Applications

For travelers whose passports are expiring or first time applicants, the Department of State announced that their passport offices are open to receive applications. The National Passport Information Center still accepts telephone calls and inquiries from the public.

F. ICE Enforcement and Removal

The ICE remain operational during a government shutdown. According to ICE Spokeswoman Gillian Christensen, ICE is deemed a law enforcement necessary for the safety of life and protection of property. This mean that ICE may still enforce a removal orders or may conduct raids as it deems necessary. There are 15,254 ICE employees who are working without pay because of the shutdown.

G. CBP and those Entering the U.S.

CBP agency is considered “essential” and so ports of entry will be open. CBP officers will remain on duty but will not be paid during the shutdown.

The information above is obtained from the different respective federal agencies’ public notices regarding the effect of the current shutdown. With the bi-partisan politics and opposing views on immigration, the shutdown may continue for a while. Recent studies show that majority of Americans have always been opposed to a border wall. But if the government is reopened, hopefully it will happen without a border wall funding since there is no imminent threat to national security to substantiate the significant cost being requested by President Trump.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco-based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through her website tancinco.weareph.com/old)

Categories
Updates

Merry Christmas from your TLO Family!

Share this:

Tancinco Law Offices is blessed to have served our immigrant community for more than 26 years and we are grateful to you for entrusting us with your immigration matters. The practice of U.S. immigration law has never been more challenging but we remain strong and vigilant in resisting efforts that threaten our families.

As Filipino immigrants we hold strong the values of family unity. This Christmas season we express our determination to remain steadfast. We can combat the negativity cast around and choose to focus on what is most important – love for our family.

Here’s wishing you a joyous season of hope. Merry Christmas!

Gatsby Theme Christmas Party
The TLO Family during our recent Gatsby Themed Christmas Party.
Categories
Updates

Philippines Ranks Second in List of Countries with Most Backlogged Petitions

Share this:

The U.S. Department of State released a report indicating the number of petitions that are still considered pending for issuance of visas. In the numerical system of immigration, there are only limited number of visas that may be allocated in a given year. The worldwide quota for family based petitions each year is 226,000 and each country gets 7% of this quota. For the petitions filed by US citizens or lawful permanent residents for their qualified relatives in the Philippines, this means that only 15,820 are issued each year.

Immediate relative petitions for spouses, parents and minor children of U.S. citizens do not fall into a category where they have to wait for a visa to be made available. These immediate relative visa petitions have immediate visas available but will have to undergo a visa approval process and a consular processing. On the other hand, family preference petitions relating to petitions filed by U.S. citizens on behalf of their adult single (F1B), adult married children (F3), their siblings (F4) will have to wait for their priority dates to be current. The same holds true to petitions filed by green card holders on behalf of their spouses, unmarried minor (F2A) or unmarried adult (F2B) children.

An approved preference petition will have to wait for its priority date to become current before a visa may be issued. When there are more petitions filed than the visas that are available, a backlog is created. This means that petitions are adjudicated on a first come first serve basis depending on what the priority date is on the petition. Priority date is the date when the petition was filed and it is usually reflected on the the Approval Notice issued by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

Let us examine the severity of the backlogs in family petitions filed on behalf of Filipino nationals. As of November 1, 2018, there are 3,671,442 petitions that are on the pipeline waiting for visas to be issued. The top 3 countries with the highest waiting list are:

  • Mexico with 1,229,505
  • Philippines with 314,229
  • India with 298,571

The petitions that are mostly backlogged for Philippines are petitions by U.S. citizens for their married children (119,315) under the F3 category and those for their siblings (113,489) under the F4 category.

Considering this backlog in the issuance of visa petitions, the longest waiting time for a Filipino family member to receive his/her visa under the F3 and F4 category is 23-24 years. As of the December 2018, the visa petitions that are being processed are those with priority dates of 1995. This means that only petitions that were filed in 1995 are being processed. And if your relative is filing the petition for a sibling or married child in 2018, the waiting time will be 23 years assuming that the the movement of the priority dates is yearly.

Other visa categories like petitions for unmarried adult children of U.S. citizens or permanent residents are taking at least 9-10 years before visas are issued. The petitions by lawful permanent residents for their spouses and minor children take more or less 2 years.

With lengthy waiting periods, situations relating to status or health of petitioners and even beneficiaries (persons being petitioned) may change. Some petitioners may live long enough to see the beneficiaries arrive in the United States and be reunited with them. Others may be stricken with illness and eventually decide to return to the Philippines or even die while waiting for their visas to be issued. Unfortunately, the petition dies with the petitioner rule applies generally unless there is humanitarian reinstatement.

Despite this broken immigration system, a Filipino immigrant does not give up and waits patiently for the relative to arrive. Time passes swiftly and I have witnessed significant number of family reunifications through this lengthy petition process. As I often say to my senior citizen clients, stay healthy and in jest, even tell them ‘bawal mamatay’ (you can’t die yet) if you have a pending petition for your relative. For a Filipino immigrant, family is everything. We are all inspired to work hard because of family and in the end “family unity” is what every immigrant attains to achieve.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco-based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through her website tancinco.weareph.com/old)

Categories
Updates

New NTA Policy Fully Implemented: Non-U.S. Citizens Whose USCIS Applications are Denied May Risk Deportation

Share this:

On October 1, 2018, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) announced the implementation of its New Notice to Appear (NTA) policy that will have an impact on immigrants with denied applications for benefits. On November 8, 2018, an expansion of the list of applications and petitions affected by this new policy was announced by USCIS and most of them are humanitarian in nature.

WHAT IS AN NTA ?
NTA stands for Notice to Appear which refers to the charging document that is issued to foreign nationals who are deemed “removable” or deportable from the United States. When an individual receives a notice to appear, it means that he is put in removal proceedings so he should appear before an Immigration Judge. During the hearing, he is expected to defend himself from deportation by raising appropriate relief/defenses/waivers that may be available to avoid his deportation or to allow him to remain in the United States.

WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS NEW NTA POLICY TO NON-U.S. CITIZENS APPLYING FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS?
USCIS began issuing notices to appear on October 1, 2018 to non U.S. citizens whose applications for immigration benefits are denied. More specifically this applies to those with denied applications for adjustment of status and applications to extend or change non-immigrant status. Before October 1, 2018, those with denied applications are not affected by this new NTA policy and may not necessarily be put in removal proceedings.

In its recent press release, starting Nov. 19, 2018, USCIS may issue NTAs based on denials of the following humanitarian type of applications/petitions:

  1. I-914/I-914A, Applications for T Nonimmigrant Status, and
  2. Petitions for Forms I-918/I-918A, Petitions for U Nonimmigrant Status;
  3. I-360 Petition for Amerasian, Widow(er);
  4. I-929, Petition for Qualifying Family Member of a U-1 Nonimmigrant,
  5. Special Immigrant (Violence Against Women Act self-petitions and Special Immigrant Juvenile petitions); and
  6. I-730 Refugee/Asylee Relative Petition, when the beneficiary is present in the US, as well as Form I-485, Application to Register Permanent Residence or Adjustment of Status, filed with these underlying form types.

Note that USCIS not ICE will issue the notice to appear when there is a denial practically compelling these individuals into a court system and making it difficult for them to depart the United States while their removal case is pending.

CAN YOU CITE EXAMPLES OF THOSE WHO MAY POTENTIALLY BE AFFECTED?
An individual in possession of a H1B visa, or a student visa holder filing for an extension of status, and the application for extension of status is denied by the USCIS is an example. Upon denial, USCIS may now put this individual in removal/deportation proceedings. Another example is a spouse of a U.S. citizen filing for adjustment of status; if denied for any reason, the spouse applicant for adjustment of status may be put in removal proceedings. Also, beginning November 19, 2018, those whose U, T or VAWA (Violence Against Women’s Act) self petitions are denied may be issued NTAs.

WHAT CAN INDIVIDUALS WHO INTEND TO FILE FOR APPLICATIONS FOR IMMIGRATION BENEFITS DO TO AVOID RECEIVING NTAs?
This new NTA policy has harsh effects on applicants. The best step to take is to make sure that whatever application is filed, all eligibility requirements are met and all possible issues which may be grounds for denials are addressed in the application. I also understand that many file applications on their own but these days, it will be best to exercise due diligence by consulting with trusted legal professionals before filing an immigration application. In the worse case scenario that an NTA is received, do not depart immediately. If you depart after receiving an NTA without justifiable reason, an order of deportation in absentia may be issued and it will have a serious consequential effect on one’s ability to return to the United States in the future.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw.)

Categories
Updates

Update on DACA: Has the DACA Program Ended Yet?

Share this:

On November 8, 2018, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the rescission of the DACA program by the Trump Administration is arbitrary and capricious. What does this ruling mean to DACA applicants?

The Deferred Action on Childhood Arrivals, commonly referred as DACA, begun in 2012 allowing non-citizens who entered the United States as children, who have clean criminal records, and who meet certain eligibility requirements – to apply for two-year renewable periods of deferred action. Deferred action is a revocable decision by the government not to deport an otherwise removable person from the country. Those granted deferred action are issued an employment authorization document for limited periods of time.

Josh is a Filipino DACA recipient. He entered the United States when he was only 9 years old as a visitor visa holder. His parents are still without legal status but Josh was able to get DACA protection in 2016. He is now gainfully employed in a financial institution and has been a good citizen. When he was about to renew his DACA employment authorization, Joshua was told that he only has a small window to benefit from the DACA program as a result of the Trump Administration’s announcement in September 2017, that the DACA program is to be terminated in phases.

Lawsuits were filed in Northern District of California after the Trump announcement of the DACA rescission in September 2017; in January 2018, the District Court ruled that the DACA rescission was unlawful. Hence, a resulting nationwide preliminary injunction was issued to hold off Trump’s plan to phase out the DACA program.

The Trump administration continued to argue for the validity of the DACA termination arguing its case with the Court of Appeals. The primary bases of the government in stating that the DACA program is illegal was that DACA was “effectuated without proper statutory authority and is unconstitutional.” Without waiting for a decision from the Court Appeals the government filed in November 5, 2018 a petition for writ of certiorari before the U.S. Supreme Court arguing on the legality of the DACA rescission.

On November 8, 2018, three days after filing the petition before the Supreme Court, the Ninth Court of Appeals ruled that the DACA rescission was unlawful, arbitrary and capricious. It also affirms the District Court’s issuance of a preliminary injunction and thus holding off to the termination of the DACA program.

As a result of the affirmation of the preliminary injunction, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) will continue to receive and adjudicate renewal of DACA applications with the following exceptions:

  1. That new applications from applicants who have never before received deferred action need not be processed;
  2. That the advance parole feature need not be continued for the time being for anyone; and
  3. That DHS may take administrative steps to make sure fair discretion is exercised on an individualized basis for each renewal application.

Hence, in the case of Josh above, and based on recent developments on DACA, he can still be permitted to renew his DACA protection and seek renewal of his employment authorization document.

The fate of the DACA program is now with the U.S. Supreme Court. With the current structure of the court and the recent appointment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, several of us immigration advocates are quite apprehensive about the future of the DACA program. Meanwhile, considering that it has not ended, DACA recipients must continue to avail of its benefit.

In concluding the panel’s recent decision, Justice Wardlaw of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals emphasized how important it is for the government to be “democratically accountable” to the public in the exercise of its discretion in the enforcement of immigration law. It stated in part, “whether Dulce Garcia and the hundreds of thousands of other young dreamers like her may continue to live productively in the only country they have ever known is, ultimately, a choice for the political branches of our constitutional government. With the power to make that choice, however, must come accountability for the consequences.”

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com, or through facebook.com/tancincolaw.)

Categories
Updates

Who Will Be Affected by Trump’s Proposed Public Charge Rules?

Share this:

On September 22, 2018, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security published on its website a 447 page proposal called the “Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds”. This proposal would have the effect of denying green cards to immigrants who have legally availed public benefits. Obviously, this is part of Trump administration’s overall trend of cracking down on both legal and illegal immigration.

Most non-immigrants and unauthorized immigrants in the United States are not eligible for most public benefits. But for those who find themselves availing of food stamps, housing vouchers and Medicaid, they may face risk to their future immigrant status if the proposal is fully implemented.

What is this new proposal about?

This new proposal refers to a “public charge” finding as a ground for inadmissibility or basis for denial of visas. An individual is considered a public charge if s/he is dependent primarily on government assistance for her/his subsistence.

Currently the public charge rule is that a person who is dependent primarily on welfare or government assistance will be denied a visa if s/he availed of monetary public benefits such as (1) Supplemental Security Income or SSI for the aged, blind and disabled; (2) Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance, and (3) State and local cash assistance programs known as General Assistance (GA).

Under the recent proposal, the definition of public benefits in determining whether one is a public charge has been expanded. The additional public benefits are Medicaid (with limited exceptions for medicaid benefits paid for an “emergency medical condition,” and for certain disability services related to education), Medicare part D low income subsidy, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, or Food Stamps), institutionalization for long-term care at government expense, Section 8 housing choice voucher program, Section 8 project-based rental assistance, and public housing.

In addition, the proposal added the totality of circumstances test in determining whether one is a public charge. This means that USCIS examiner or consular officers may now examine varying factors that may lead them to the conclusion that the applicant for visa is likely to become a public charge. These factors include applicant’s age, health, family status, assets, resources, and financial status, and education and skills.

Who are affected by this proposal?

Those affected are those (1) non-immigrants present in the United States who are applicants for adjustment of status; (2) those applying for visas at consular offices abroad and (3) those entering the United States who are found to be receiving public benefits within 5 years of of being a lawful residents or in green card status.

Will green card holders applying for U.S. citizenship be affected?

Generally, a finding of public charge is not a ground for denial of U.S. citizenship and so a green card holder who is an applicant for naturalization is not affected by the proposal. The issue of public charge will only matter and result in denial of U.S. citizenship if during the examination on the naturalization application, it is determined that the green card holder had engaged in fraud and misrepresentation in obtaining public benefits.

Should prospective immigrants withdraw from receiving public assistance?

Several community immigrant advocates had opposed the new proposals as being discriminatory against low income immigrants who may happen to receive some benefits because of sudden illness or they have unexpectedly lost their jobs due to economic downturns or changes in their company. In most cases receipt of benefits is only temporary and simply served as a basic economic safety nets to provide economic stability until the individuals becomes self sufficient again. To take this safety net against them in their future application for green cards is cruel and unjust.

A person who is prospectively affected by this proposal may be compelled to choose between risking his future immigration status and meeting his basic need. But it is premature to make a decision on whether those who are receiving public assistance should start withdrawing from these government programs. Although in anticipation of the implementation of the proposals, several public benefit recipients already stopped receiving public benefits at the expense of their health and safety. This proposal becomes a final rule 60 days after it is published with the Federal Register. It must be clear that the proposal is not yet a final rule. It was just recently published on the DHS website. Once it is published with the Federal Register the public will be afforded 60 days to comment and oppose these restrictive proposals. There is still an opportunity to completely negate the impact of this proposal.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is a San Francisco based immigration attorney and an immigrant rights advocate. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com or facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through this website tancinco.weareph.com/old)