Tag: Donald Trump

Categories
Updates

2021 Year In Review: Top 10 U.S. Immigration Issues Affecting Filipino Immigrants and Families

2021 Year in Review - Top 10 US Immigration Issues Affecting Filipino Immigrants and Families.
Share this:

Two years since the start of the pandemic, reality has already set in not just in our personal lives but also in the immigration front. With the surge in the different variants of covid, we are nowhere close to returning to normal.

To recap this year’s top immigration issues, we are summarizing a few of the key changes that happened this year.

1. Filipino World War II Veterans Parole Program (FWVP) Is Alive

On top of my list is the FWVP program that will benefit certain family members of Filipino World War II veterans who were naturalized as U.S. citizens under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1990. 

After a proposal to terminate the FWVP program under the past Trump Administration, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services reversed its proposed termination. On September 29, 2021, USCIS published on its website that it will continue the FWVP program. Current parolees who benefited from the program may continue to apply for extensions. Also, it announced that USCIS is accepting new FWVP applications.

Although it is continuing the FWVP program, USCIS mentioned the unpredictability of the processing time adjudicating the FWVP parole at the U.S. Embassy in view of the COVID-19 pandemic closures.

2. Vaccine Mandate for Travelers

On November 8, 2021, the Biden administration implemented a policy for international air travelers flying into the U.S. from most countries. It now requires all non-U.S. citizens and nonimmigrant travelers to have been fully vaccinated prior to boarding a plane to come to the United States.

According to CDC, you are considered fully vaccinated:

  • 2 weeks (14 days) after your dose of an accepted single-dose COVID-19 vaccine;
  • 2 weeks (14 days) after your second dose of an accepted 2-dose series COVID-19 vaccine;
  • 2 weeks (14 days) after you received the full series of an “active” (not placebo) COVID-19 vaccine in the U.S.-based AstraZeneca or Novavax COVID-19 vaccine trials; or
  • 2 weeks (14 days) after you received 2 doses of any “mix-and-match” combination of accepted COVID-19 vaccines administered at least 17 days apart.

There are exceptions to this rule. First, travelers who are under the age of 18 are exempted from this requirement. Instead, minors aged 2 to 17 must test negative prior to departure. Second, persons who have a pertinent medical condition are exempted. Third, people from countries with less than a 10% total vaccination rate due to lack of availability of vaccines are also exempted. CDC’s website is providing and constantly updating the list of such countries with limited vaccine availability. However, they must agree to be vaccinated within 60 days of arrival in order to enter the U.S.

These new vaccine rules do not apply to U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, or U.S. lawful permanent residents.

Unvaccinated travelers — whether U.S. citizens, lawful permanent residents, or the small number of exempt unvaccinated foreign nationals — will now need to test within one day of departure.

3. COVID-19 Hate Crime Act Passed Into Law

In response to the rising cases of Anti-Asian rhetoric and hate crimes impacting our community, President Biden signed into law on May 20, 2021 the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act (Pub L.117-13). This new legislation addresses hate crimes throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

It includes critical provisions to expand language access and allow for culturally competent and linguistically accessible public education campaigns to reach communities targeted by hate with information regarding reporting and support services. It improves data collection and law enforcement policies on identifying, investigating, and reporting hate crimes, provides grants for state-run hotlines for reporting and connection to support services, and creates opportunities to restore communities and address the root causes of hate crimes through alternative sentencing for offenders. Investing in better quality data and reporting infrastructure are vital in addressing racial equity for the long-term.

4. DACA Update

The past Trump administration attempted to end the DACA program but the U.S. Supreme court  overruled the effort in 2020. In July 2021, a Texas federal judge barred the USCIS from processing new requests for DACA protections. As a result of the ruling, no new DACA applications are being adjudicated by the USCIS.

The Biden administration nonetheless moved to codify the program in a regulation to give it a stronger foundation against legal attacks.

Those who had prior DACA protections may continue to avail of deportation relief and work permits. Efforts to pass a legislation that will afford a pathway to citizenship to hundreds of thousands of unauthorized immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children did not materialize this year.

5. Trump’s Public Charge Rule Rescinded

Public charge rule determines if immigrants should be denied green cards or prevented from entering the United States because they may become financial burdens on the government.

In 2019, former President Trump released a “wealth test” public charge rule with very restrictive requirements and extensive documentation. This Trump’s rule is no longer in effect since March 2021 when a court order vacated the Trump’s Public Charge final rule. Instead, USCIS is using inadmissibility rules based on public charge using USCIS 1999 guidance in applications for admission and adjustment of status.

On August 23, 2021, DHS published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and is seeking public input on how to craft the new public charge ground of inadmissibility.

6. Foreign Worker’s Spouse Work Permits

In November 2021, spouses of certain foreign workers in the U.S. won a victory when a settlement was reached by their lawyers and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services over its policies for issuing employment authorizations.

Pursuant to the settlement, USCIS agreed to change its policies regarding work permits for those who are eligible for H-4 and L-2 visas based on their partners’ status as H-1B specialty workers or executives transferred to the U.S. The H-4 visas are for spouses of H-1B visa holders, and the L-2 visas are for spouses of executives holding L-1 visas.

Those who hold L-2 visas will be allowed to work in the U.S. by default, and those with H-4 visas will be eligible for an automatic extension of their current work permits for up to six months if they satisfy certain criteria, according to the settlement agreement.

7. No More Mass Worksite Raids

The Biden administration announced on October 12, 2021, that it would no longer conduct “mass worksite enforcement operations” which means raiding workplaces to arrest undocumented workers. This announcement puts an end to the Trump-era policy.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said that such shift is to focus more on “employers who exploit the vulnerability of undocumented workers” than migrant workers. He added that undocumented workers have been victimized by human trafficking, child exploitation, substandard wages, and impose unsafe working conditions only because of their lack of immigration status. Secretary Mayorkas also shared that by prioritizing workplace enforcement against “unscrupulous employers”, “the American labor market, the conditions of the American worksite, and the dignity of the individual” can be protected most effectively.

As a result of this shift in workplace enforcement, it is expected that undocumented worker would speak out against unjust treatment and exploitation without fear of arrest and deportation, as previous worksite enforcement operations have led to the arrests of hundreds of workers at once.

8. Waiver of Interview at the U.S. Embassy Manila for Certain Non-immigrants

Repeat travelers to the United States may, under some circumstances, renew their visas without appearing at the U.S. Embassy for an interview.  To avail of the Interview Waiver , an applicant must have a B1/B2, F, M or J nonimmigrant visa that expired within 48 months from date of renewal and must meet certain qualifications. If eligible an applicant for renewal may be able to drop his/her visa application at a 2GO courier office location.

9. Backlog of Immigrant & Non-immigrant Visa Interviews at the U.S Embassies

COVID-19 resulted in a severe backlog of immigrant cases waiting for interviews. An immigrant visa applicant who is declared “documentarily qualified” by the National Visa Center may have to wait longer for a scheduled interview because of the backlog of cases.

Worldwide, there were 461,125 applicants pending interviews in the month of November 2021. Of this number, only 28,964 were scheduled for interviews by the U.S. Embassies worldwide. The rest remains pending.

The U.S. Embassy in Manila schedules interviews following a 4-tier guideline as follows:

  • Tier One: Immediate relative intercountry adoption visas, age-out cases (cases where the applicant will soon no longer qualify due to their age), and certain Special Immigrant Visas (SQ and SI for Afghan and Iraqi nationals working with the U.S. government)
  • Tier Two: Immediate relative visas; fiancé(e) visas; and returning resident visas
  • Tier Three: Family preference immigrant visas and SE Special Immigrant Visas for certain employees of the U.S. government abroad
  • Tier Four: All other immigrant visas, including employment preference and Diversity Visas

Nonimmigrant Visa (NIV): 

The US Embassy continues to prioritize travelers with urgent (i.e. matter of life and death) travel needs, foreign diplomats, and certain mission-critical categories of travelers, such as students and exchange visitors (F-1, M-1, and J-1) and temporary employment visas (H-1B, H-2B, and L nonimmigrants). Visa appointments and processing for B1/B2 (Business/Tourist) have resumed at significantly reduced levels.

10. Philippines EB3 Preference Category Priority Date Remains Current

For more than a year now, and as may be observed from the latest December 2021 visa bulletin issued by the Department of State, visa applicants under the employment-based third preference (often referred to as EB3) category visa remains current.

 When a priority date for a visa petition is current, it means that the visas are available.

There are a significant number of Filipino professionals who are beneficiaries of existing EB3 petitions. But we also know that there are many more Filipino nurses and physical therapists who are already pre-certified and can immediately take advantage of this visa availability. Schedule A occupations are those jobs for which there are not a sufficient number of U.S. workers who are able, willing, qualified, and available to fill the number of available jobs that exist in the United States, and the wages and working conditions of U.S. workers similarly employed will not be affected by the employment of foreign workers in Schedule A occupations.

Other health care workers such as licensed vocational nurses (LVNs), licensed practical nurses (LPNs), certified nurse assistants (CNAs), as well as nurses’ aides and caregivers do not qualify for Schedule A precertification. However, they may still qualify and benefit under this concurrent filing if they have approved Labor Certifications or PERMs.

Our Renewed Hope for 2022

In his first year of office, President Biden made modest changes to US immigration policy but we have also been waiting to see legislation that provides a pathway to citizenship for the millions of unauthorized immigrants.

While President Biden unveiled his immigration reform, the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021 which included an 8-year path to citizenship for millions of unauthorized immigrants, no significant movement has been made in Congress. This bill has yet to be voted on by the House and the Senate. While the Democrats attempted to include immigration provisions in the Build Back Better Act, this bill was never passed by the Senate. To make matters worse, Senate parliamentarians opposed the inclusion of the immigration measures on a spending bill.

While Democrats are in control of both the House and the Senate, it is so hard to to pass any bills due to a very divided Congress with very partisan issues dividing both. The Senate requires 60 votes to pass a bill and with the 50-50 split between Democrats and Republicans, passing any legislation is no easy task. Nevertheless, the new year brings new hope and new beginnings. Happy New Year to all!

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is an immigration attorney with the Tancinco Law P.C., a San Francisco CA based law firm. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com , facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through her website www.tancinco.com.)

Categories
Updates

Census, Apportionment and All Immigrants

Share this:

Trump administration issued a Presidential memorandum in July 2020 that will prohibit undocumented immigrants from being counted in the apportionment following the 2020 census. Under this memorandum, he wants the undocumented to be subtracted from the census numbers for purposes of apportionment.

In a separate memorandum, he also wants to have the census concluded by the end of September 2020.

Lawsuits were filed against Trump opposing both these policies.

In the first case, the Federal Judge issued an order blocking the Census Bureau from laying off staff and halting in person counting efforts. A hearing will be held on September 17 where the plaintiffs are arguing for more time to count.

In the other case filed, NY v. Trump the Plaintiffs alleged that the Presidential Memorandum violates statutes governing the census and apportionment. The Court ruled against Trump in favor of the plaintiffs on the grounds that there may not be two (2) sets of numbers, one from the decennial census and another set that will be used for apportionment. There should only be one set of numbers and that is from the decennial census. Secondly, even those who are in unlawful immigration status qualify under the definition of “persons in” a “State” as Congress used those words. On these bases, the Presidential Memorandum was declared to be an unlawful exercise of the authority granted to the President by statute.

Data derived will be used to determine congressional districts, for distribution of federal funds. These funds will in turn be used to finance federal benefits and programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, highway construction etc.. which apportionment of funds will be based on population based on the number derived from census which includes people living in each district.

It is important for all residents of the United States to fill up the census if they have not already. Every person counts regardless of immigration status.

Categories
Global Pinoy

Trump’s bid to restrict legal immigration will harm Filipino families

Share this:

There are almost 400,000 family petitions already filed by Filipino immigrants waiting for visa availability. These immigrants and their families play by the rules and are patiently waiting for their priority date to become current. With the proposed changes approved by President Donald Trump to eliminate these visa petitions, many will lose out on their opportunity to be with their families in the United States. While there is a grandfather provision that will create exceptions; this will not be enough as it will only cover a limited number of petitions.

If passed into law, the Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy (RAISE) Act introduced by Senators Tom Cotton (R-Arizona) and David Perdue (R-Georgia) and endorsed by President Trump will substitute the current immigration policy based on family unity into a rigid merit-based system.

Proposed changes
The current immigration system is broken and outdated. Family immigration petitions for adult children and siblings take decades before visas become available. There are also increasing backlogs in employment petitions.

In response to the call for comprehensive immigration reform, Republican Senators Cotton and Perdue came up with a proposed legislation that does not resolve any of the outdated immigration provisions of the law; instead it worsens the current state of family-based immigration.

The RAISE Act proposes to cut immigration by at least half from current levels. It eliminates family-based immigration preference categories by restricting ability of U.S. citizens and permanent residents to petition for family members. Only spouses and minor children can be petitioned. Parents, siblings and adult children will be eliminated as beneficiaries of petitions.

Trump’s reason for supporting the RAISE Act was to demonstrate “compassion for struggling American families” who deserve “an immigration system that puts their needs first and puts America first.” This rationale is based on the premise, rightly or wrongly, that immigrants take jobs away from Americans.

Immigrants continue to build strong communities that foster business development or local businesses. In Silicon Valley, many innovators of big businesses were started by immigrants who came to the country through family-based immigration.

There is also a study published by the Immigration Policy Center showing that family-based immigrants contribute to the well-being of the current and future labor force. The value of extended families in US households, with members who take care of grandchildren or seniors needing care, is overlooked as adults work or are engaged in their businesses outside their homes. Filipino immigrant households find it common to have their lolos (grandfathers) or lolas (grandmothers) around to help take care of their children or do household chores. It is the family unit that inspires every worker or businessman to strive towards success and leads them to positively contribute to the growth of the US economy.

To deny the ability of a US citizen to petition for a parent is a direct attack on a right of a US citizen. Besides, if the goal is to attract the best and highly skilled workers, who would want to immigrate to a nation that does not welcome their family?

The RAISE Act was just introduced, and the debate on its merits just started. We still have time to send out the right messages to our legislators and emphasize the value of family. The merit-based system and the family-based petition system can go hand-in-hand as they can surely complement each other so long as the number of visa allocations are not reduced.

(Atty. Lourdes S. Tancinco is a San Francisco based immigration lawyer and immigrant’s right advocate. She may be reached at law@tancinco.com, facebook.com/tancincolaw, or 1 888 930 0808.)

Categories
Updates

Expedited removal may be expanded under Trump

Share this:

Several advocates are distributing “Know Your Rights” literature to those who may possibly be affected by the enhanced enforcement of immigration law brought by Trump’s Executive Orders. One of the rights that one should know is the right to a hearing before an immigration judge. This is a constitutional due process right that may be asserted during apprehension and prior to removal.

There is one particular instance where there is no right to hearing, and that is during an expedited removal. Given the changes brought about by Trump’s Executive Order, will an extension of this process affect those who are present in the United States in unlawful status?

Expedited removal

For 20 years now, the expedited removal has been a process used by the Department of Homeland Security to fast track the removal of certain individuals at the ports of entry, who are in violation of immigration law relating to fraud or are unable to show proper legal documents to prove lawful status.

It is commonly referred to by Filipino travelers as “Airport to Airport” or “A to A,” referring to a case where a passenger at the port of entry in the United States is found inadmissible and is returned the same day of arrival (or the next available flight) to the country of origin. In these cases, the arriving alien is not entitled to a hearing, and a determination of a federal agent is sufficient to send the traveler back to his home country.

Expedited removal has been extended twice. The first expansion of expedited removal is in 2002 when it applied it to those who:

  1. entered the United States by sea, either by boat or other means;
  2. were not admitted or paroled in the United States (entered without inspection) and
  3. have not been continuously present in the United States for at least 2 years.

In 2004, the DHS expanded the application of expedited removal to non-citizens who are encountered within 100 miles of the border, and who entered the United States without inspection less than 14 days before they are encountered by immigration authorities.

Due process right to a hearing

President Trump’s Executive Order instructs the Secretary of Homeland Security to apply expedited removal to the fullest extent of the law. Section 11(c) of the Executive Order states in full: “Pursuant to section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(I) of the INA, the Secretary shall take appropriate action to apply, in his sole and un-reviewable discretion, the provisions of section 235(b)(1)(A)(i) and (ii) of the INA to the aliens designated under section 235(b)(1)(A)(iii)(II).”

Applying expedited removal to the fullest extent of the law means putting millions of unauthorized immigrants who have been in the United States for less than 2 years at risk of an expedited removal without a hearing even if apprehended beyond 100 miles from the border.

The DHS rules are still being developed and they will soon be published in the Federal Register. Yet, overzealous immigration officers may put anyone in expedited removal if apprehended and if unable to prove legal status and 2 years of physical presence.

The right to a hearing of those who have been residing in the United States extends even those who are without legal status. The Supreme Court had settled this issue many years ago. Should there be a deprivation of the right to a hearing because of the proposed expanded expedited removal, the Executive Order entitled “Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements,” will be challenged in the judicial courts as being unconstitutional just like the executive order on the travel ban.

(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

We’re now facing Trump’s harsh immigration policies

Share this:

After eight years of being accustomed to the Obama Administration’s compassionate and humanitarian immigration policies, we’re now witnessing a 180-degree. Enforcement of immigration law will soon be heightened not only against aliens with criminal convictions, but to practically all who are violators of immigration law, including those who have overstayed their visas and those who have committed acts that are considered misdemeanors.

The Executive Order signed on January 23, 2017 relate to border security, admission of refugees and immigration enforcement. Building a physical border wall that extends 2,000 miles along the border with Mexico will cost taxpayers billions. While President Trump says that Mexico will pay for the wall, the pronouncements of Mexico’s President show otherwise. How will this be feasible? Also with a provision in the Executive Order barring political asylum seekers, what will America do with those women and children escaping persecution?

More agents

On immigration enforcement, the hiring 10,000 more Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers to arrest non-citizens who have violated immigration law, detain and remove undocumented immigrants already ordered removed in the past are also part of the Executive Order.

ICE together with CBP at the border will be turned into a deportation force with the power to remove any non-citizen without due process, who in the “judgment of the immigration officer” (not an immigration judge) is a risk to public safety or national security.

For the Filipino immigrant who has already fallen out of status, there is grave concern about this aggressive immigration enforcement. There is a marked distinction between former President Obama’s Executive Action and that of President Trump.

In former President Obama’s Memorandum on Prosecutorial Discretion, he categorized certain immigrants that should be subjected to removal. There is a list of priorities that were enumerated emphasizing that those with strong family ties in the U.S. are to be accorded deferred action and will be the last on the list of priorities for removal. ICE was instructed to prioritize those with serious criminal offenses, resulting in record high removal of immigrants with criminal offenses at the same time preserving family unity.

Broad range of targets

On the other hand, Trump’s Executive Order lists a broad range of individuals that are subject to enforcement. The list includes those who (1) have been convicted of any criminal offense; (2) have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved; (3) have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense; (4) who have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a government agency; (5) Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits; (5) Are subject to a final order of removal, but have not departed. There is no ranking or prioritizing in this list and no reprieve from removal is mentioned to those with strong family ties in the U.S.

The effectivity date of Trump’s Executive Orders is uncertain. It is possible that ICE is already immediately acting on it. A day after President Trump signed the Executive Order, a group of ICE Officers were spotted at a non profit child care center in San Francisco, to apprehend a criminal offender. The children and workers at the center were all taken aback and eventually the ICE officers left without arresting anyone. This is alarming considering that there is an existing 2011 ICE Memorandum instructing ICE officers to stay away from sensitive places like churches and schools.

Whether the presence of ICE officers in our cities will be a common sight in the coming days is horrifying to all of us not only to undocumented immigrants. But this is just the beginning. There are concrete steps we can take. We start by writing our legislators and urge them to oppose Trump’s immigration policies of indiscriminately prosecuting and removing immigrants. Legal challenges in court will be filed to attack the constitutionality of Trump’s Executive Actions. We stand in solidarity with all immigrants and stay firm with our principles and values that made America a strong nation of immigrants.

(Atty. Lourdes S. Tancinco is a San Francisco based immigration lawyer and may be reached at law@tancinco.com, tancinco.weareph.com/old, facebook/tancincolaw, or at 1 888 930 0808 or 415 397 0808)

Categories
Global Pinoy

Should ‘TNTs’ start planning for voluntary departure from US?

Share this:

More than 11 million unauthorized immigrants in the United States, including approximately 300,000 from the Philippines, are now in panic mode and uncertain about their future under a Trump administration. Deporting immigrants who are in unlawful status is one of Trump’s campaign promises.

The presidential election result was a bitter pill to swallow for most immigrants. Most of the Filipino American immigrants in the San Francisco Bay Area are not happy with the result of the election. Immigration attorneys have received many phone calls and emails from concerned immigrants, both legal as well as those who are undocumented, asking about the immediate threat of removal from the US come January 20, 2017.

Lawful permanent residents or those with status are seriously concerned about pending petitions for their family members. Will the petitioning process take longer with the coming Trump administration? Those who are in possession of professional working visas are worried about whether the H1B program will be eliminated. Filipino healthcare workers such as registered nurses, physical therapists and caregivers with pending immigrant petitions from US employers have no clue on whether their visas are still going to be issued if immigration policy changes.

The most vulnerable immigrants who are most likely going to be affected are the DREAMERS (children who were supposed to benefit from the Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors or the DREAM Act) and the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) recipients. These are the young immigrants who came to the United States when they were below 15 years old and who are still present in the US as young adults without legal status.

For the last eight years, President Obama has supported a DREAM Act that allows these young immigrants to have lawful status, but the bill failed to pass in Congress. Using his executive power, he released a program called the DACA where thousands of young immigrants were given temporary employment authorization cards to allow them to live without fear of deportation and enabling them to work temporarily. Thousands of young Filipinos availed of this program. Their names and information are in the current system of the Department of Homeland Security. They fear not just losing their DACA status, but also about their parents who may be subject to removal.

After listening to the interview of President-Elect Donald Trump on “60 Minutes,” it appears that he also has priorities for dealing with immigration. He explicitly mentioned the immediate deportation of three million undocumented immigrants. Also, he confirmed that border security would be tightened and then removal of undocumented with criminal records would be next. Prioritizing border security is paramount on his agenda as may be assumed from his campaign plan of building a wall in the US-Mexico border.

If Trump follows through with his public statements, those who are in unlawful presence or TNTs including the DACA recipients are not (yet) in danger of immediate deportation. While there is no immediate threat at the moment, they have to be mindful of their activities, be familiar about their rights and keep in their immediate possession whatever legal documents relating to their immigration history in this country.

Most importantly, this vulnerable population must be able to distinguish between real and fake news on immigration. At the present time, it is easy to fall victim to false information on social media because bigotry and hatred are on the rise against minorities and immigrants. Be very vigilant.

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

Categories
Updates

Trump calling PH a ‘terrorist nation’ is absurd

Share this:

At a campaign rally in Portland, Maine earlier this month, Presidential candidate Donald Trump discussed his plans to suspend the entry of nationals from terrorist nations into the United States because it’s too difficult to vet terrorists. In his speech, Mr. Trump listed the Philippines as one of the terrorist nations whose immigrants, or in Mr. Trump’s words – “animals”, have been arrested in the United States for terrorism-related offenses. Not only is Mr. Trump’s inclusion of the Philippines offensive considering the historical relationship between the Philippines and the United States, but it sends the wrong message to Filipino immigrants in the US and future immigrants from the Philippines.

The U.S. Department of State designates only three countries as states sponsoring terrorism – Iran, Syria and Sudan – and the Philippines is not one of them.

The United States and the Philippines have strong historical ties as allies. We were allies in the fight against fascism during World War II. During the cold war, the U.S. military bases were present in the Philippines for more than half a century. In the present war on terror, the Philippines entered into an agreement with the U.S. to allow U.S. soldiers to be stationed in some areas in the Philippines to train local forces on counter terror operations. So how can the Philippines be on the list as a terrorist nation? Was Mr. Trump referring to a dangerous terrorist group called Abu Sayyaf in Southern Philippines? This extremist group has been designated as a terrorist group even by the Philippine government together with other nations, like UK, Canada, Australia and the United States, among others. How can a terrorist group not be distinguished from a terrorist nation?

Filipinos have been coming to America for over 100 years. Filipino immigrants are one of the largest foreign-born groups in the United States. Latest census indicates that there are 3.4 million Filipinos (native- and foreign-born) which is the second largest Asian ethnic group in the United States.

Studies show that the median income of Filipino households headed by an immigrant was $82,370 as of 2013, far above the $53,000 of United States-born households.

Filipino Americans (most of whom are voters) have family members who are in the Philippines and a significant number of these Filipinos have pending petitions for their family members. Currently, there is a pending backlog of 400,000 petitions where applicants for visas have been patiently waiting for visa availability. Instead of barring admission based on assumptions, Presidential candidates should consider supporting federal legislative reforms that will eliminate the visa backlogs and create a more efficient immigration system for family members of U.S. citizens and residents. The changes must reflect policies that promote family unification, facilitate immigrant assimilation and boost economic growth.

Lawful Filipino immigrants who have played by the rules and who have contributed to the growth of this nation must be recognized.

In this war on terror, the Philippines and the United States are allies as they have been historically. On the immigration policy of admitting immigrants, both permanent and temporary, the vetting procedures for those who wish to enter the United States is quite extensive. The various levels of security checks that a person undergoes before being issued a temporary and permanent resident visa are comprehensive enough to determine who are threats to national security. If, in fact, the current vetting policy is not enough, the solution is certainly not to bar admission of nationals of a country who have always been an ally of the United States.

(Atty. Lourdes Santos Tancinco, Esq. is an immigration attorney with the Tancinco Law Offices, a San Francisco CA based law firm. She may be reached at 1 888 930 0808, law@tancinco.com, facebook.com/tancincolaw, or through her website tancinco.weareph.com/old)

Categories
Global Pinoy

Donald Trump’s hostility to U.S. citizen children of undocumented immigrants

Share this:

IN AN EFFORT to curb illegal immigration, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump announced his plan, if he is elected, to eliminate this birthright citizenship to children of the undocumented immigrants.

Is this plan an effective solution to resolving the broken US immigration system? Why is it that other Republican candidates do not support Trump’s proposal?

Karen entered the United States on a fiancé visa. Her US citizen fiancé George knew that Karen was a victim of a sexual offense and became pregnant prior to entering the US as a fiancée.

Six months after her arrival in the United States, Karen gave birth to Mariel. Meanwhile, Karen and George had a falling out and never got married.

Mariel is a US citizen by birth while her mother has an expired fiancée visa and is now an undocumented immigrant. Having heard of the proposed elimination of the birthright citizenship, Mariel, who is now in high school is wondering if she will be “deported” and divested of her US citizenship should Trump succeed in getting elected President. What is the likelihood that the birthright citizenship will be eliminated?

Birthright citizenship
Unlike in the Philippines where citizenship is determined by the citizenship of the parents, the United States follow the jus soli principle of citizenship. This means that any individual born in American soil is a US citizen at birth irrespective of the nationality of the parents. This birthright citizenship is not a legal principle but a constitutional right enshrined in the Fourteenth Amendment of the US Constitution.

This birthright was historically intended by the framers of the Constitution to place citizenship status above prejudices based on the fundamental belief that each person is born equal regardless of color, creed or social status.

Proposal
The 14th Amendment withstood many challenges in judicial courts and in Congress. Now that it is being mentioned again, it is not clear how this elimination of birthright citizenship is going to take place. In fact, Trump has not specifically stated in detail which proposal he is going to make.

One of the proposals being floated is that both parents must be citizens or legal residents at the time of each child’s birth. The other extremely cruel proposal is that all US citizen children of immigrants should retroactively prove that they were entitled to their citizenship by proving the legal status of their parents.

Mariel’s fear of being divested of her US citizenship will, in all probability, not be a reality. It is election season and it is not unusual that this birthright citizenship is an issue that is being brought up but there are high legal hurdles that will need to be accomplished before that even happens.

A constitutional amendment, for example, requires the vote of two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of all the states. With the views on immigration as polarized as it is, getting the two-thirds majority in Congress will be an impossible task. Much less will it be any easier to get three-fourths of the states to approve a constitutional amendment.

(The author may be reached at law@tancinco.com, facebook.com/tancincolaw, tancinco.weareph.com/old or [02] 721-1963.)