Skip to main content

Dear Daily Kos Community:

Last week, I started a super mini series on general points to consider regarding immigration law and the CIR debates.  There was limited interest expressed for me to continue, and that's enough!  So continue, I will.  Today, I will briefly (in an ongoing effort to avoid causing people to pass out from boredom) touch on immigrant versus non-immigrant intent issues (huge topic, BTW) and a few comments on what this often-mentioned H-1B thing is.  Disclaimer:  Nothing in this diary shall constitute legal advice.  This diary is comprised of my opinions, observations, and experiences only.  More below . . . .

Immigrant Intent versus Non-Immigrant Intent.  

Understanding how intent can affect a particular application is very, very important.  I spend a lot of time advising clients on what intent means, how it is framed, when it can change, and how it is expressed/demonstrated/proven.  

America's immigration policy is arguably very arrogant or honest, depending how you look at it.  In law, presumptions are very powerful methods of shifting burdens of proof.  Presumed innocence highlights a fundamental aspect of our criminal law system--one is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of his or her peers.  That is one U.S. Constitutional right that I believe many Americans know.  That is criminal law related, however, and the U.S. Constitution makes this high burden fall squarely on the government.  This is one of those rights that really makes America great.  

Immigration law, however, is administrative law and not criminal law.  The laws place virtually all burdens of proof pertaining to immigration matters on the alien, the petitioner, the applicant--anything but the government.  There are times when the government bears the burden, such as in cases of proving alleged fraud, but those are quite limited.  For argument's sake, the burden is pretty much always falls on the alien's shoulders.

Back to the arrogant or honest part.  U.S. immigration law states, in no uncertain terms, that arriving aliens are presumed to have immigrant intent.  Repeat:  Arriving aliens are presumed to have immigrant intent.  The burden is on the alien to prove otherwise, if required (obviously, if one seeks to enter the U.S. with a green card, immigrant intent is permitted).  That means our nation's immigration laws automatically assume that every, single alien who appears at a port of entry for admission to the U.S. is seeking to stay here forever.  That is quite a legal presumption, IMO.

I often explain to folks that immigration law is basically divided into two camps:  Those laws and regulations for intending immigrants, and those for intending non-immigrants.  These laws rarely cross over into the other camp.  Once immigrant intent is expressed to the government, the ramifications can be severe.

For example, Japanese Student ("JS") seeks a non-immigrant F-1 visa at the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo.  JS has already received her endorsed Form I-20 from her U.S. based university.  She has been processed and admitted, etc.  When she visits the U.S. Embassy, she is asked about her intent regarding her prospective stay in the U.S.  She duly explains that she is very excited about studying biology at State University.  The adjudicator asks her about her plans when her studies are complete.  She explains that she intends to apply for Optional Practical Training (often called an "OPT card") at the conclusion of her bachelor's degree studies.  And after that? the adjudicator asks.  

What JS intends at this point is now very important, critical in fact.  If she intends to apply for a green card so she can have a permanent career in biology in the States, things could go very badly for her at the interview.  If she intends to return home prior to the expiration of her authorized period of stay (OPT card holding F-1 status holders are entitled to a 60-day grace period upon the expiration of the one-year work authorization), within that 60-day period, and take the knowledge she gained in the U.S. back to Japan, she will likely be in good shape.  

You see, F-1 is an absolutely non-immigrant-only status.  There is no "dual intent" allowed, as there is in the H-1B context, for example (a little more on that, below).  As such, in order to even quality for an F-1 visa and/or status, the alien is required to maintain an unreliquished domicile abroad.  Side note:  A person can have multiple residences, simultaneously, but only one domicile at a time.  For JS, her domicile must be in Japan.

Getting clients to fully understand these issues to where they really comprehend the difference between intending to immigrate and intending to return home, years later, takes a lot of time.  

So, JS is admitted to the U.S. to attend State University.  After she is here two years, she meets Person A ("PA").  PA is a U.S. Citizen, and they fall in love, deciding to get married.  Now JS is married to a U.S. Citizen.  PA wants to petition for JS's marriage-based green card (official term:  Lawful Permanent Resident status).  He must then commence with filing at least the petition.  By filing that (even though JS does not sign it), JS has now expressed her immigrant intent to the USCIS through her husband's petition.  

Departing the U.S. and returning with the F-1 visa at this point is simply not advisable.  If the adjudicator at the port of entry ascertains that, since the time of her last admission, JS has become married to a U.S.C. who has actually filed an immigrant petition on her behalf, things will likely go badly for her.  Denying the existence of immigrant intent becomes, well, pretty much not possible at this point--even if JS has, literally, not yet completely made up her mind to file for her green card (this is called "adjusting" status--more on that some other time).  

Assuming her initial non-immigrant intent actually did change to immigrant intent more than 60 days after her last admission (the 30/60 day fraud rule is yet another topic for yet another time), there will be no presumption of fraud regarding JS.  As long as one's intent is bona fide at the time of admission, subsequent changes may be allowed because, well, stuff changes and shit happens, as they say.

So that was a brief and extremely general discussion on immigrant versus non-immigrant intent.  Very important to understand as various issues are discussed in the coming months regarding CIR.

One final note--"Permanent Resident" and "Citizen" are not interchangeable.  In most cases, one must be a permanent resident for at least five years before he or she is even eligible to apply for naturalization.  Again--topics for a different post.  I just get frustrated when I hear "path to citizenship" when actually the correct term should be "path to permanent residence" IMO.

H-1B time . . . .

H-1B status is often referred to as "specialty occupation" status.  Avoiding as much legal jargon as possible, this essentially means that a) an offered H-1B position, itself, must require at least a 4-year college degree, in that specialty, for competent performance; b) industry standards and/or company standards confirm this degree requirement; c) the petitioning entity has, in fact, the financial ability to guarantee payment of the prevailing wage (as determined by the DOL); d) the petitioned for alien possesses an appropriate degree or the equivalent in experience (BIG side topic); and e) the petitioning entity is actually in need of such services.  In other words, as with all cases, it must make sense in its entirely.  It must be rational.

That is extremely general, but you get the point.  H-1B status holders are meant to be professional workers, as is traditionally understood in many aspects.

The limit:  H-1Bs are adjudicated according to two "caps."  The U.S. master's cap of 20,000 H-1Bs per fiscal year, plus the general cap of a 65,000 H-1Bs per fiscal year.  

A note about these limits--way back in the late 90s and early 2000s, when I first entered practice, the cap had been increased during a three year period, as I recall, to much higher limits.  They were in the 120,000 per year range, but that number varied slightly each of those three years.  The cap was not reached once in that time--this meant that H-1B petitions could be filed year round.

Now, a given non-immigrant petition, such as an H-1B, may be filed up to 180 days prior to the requested start date.  As H-1B numbers become available on October 1 of every year, the earliest one may file for the upcoming numbers is April 1 of every year.  This year, according to the USCIS, approximately 120,000 H-1B petition were filed during the first and only week of open H-1B acceptance.  

In other words, about double the number of available H-1Bs were filed right away.  So the cap was hit and no more H-1Bs are accepted.  Of the approximate 120,000 petitions the USCIS received, they were allegedly placed in a random lottery.  For more information, see here.

During the prior three years or so, the cap was reached slightly later, such as in August or June.  This means demand for the H-1B is way more than supply, and thus the news.  Employers want more, labor unions want less.  Immigration attorneys probably are happy with as many as possible.  So opinions on this are all over the place.

As eyes are probably becoming googly at this point due to boredom, I will conclude with the following points:

1.  H-1Bs can be filed as full or part-time petitions (employment-based green card petitions never can be filed as part-time)
2.  H-1Bs allow for the equivalent in experience in lieu of a degree (more on this later), and that is a big deal
3.  H-1Bs allow dual intent (the filing of a permanent resident petition shall not constitute to sole basis of a denial of a request for admission in H-1B status, for example)
4.  Although there are exceptions, in many cases H-1Bs will be available for up to three years per petition with a maximum limit of 6 years in the aggregate permitted before the alien must depart the U.S. for one full year before being able to be readmitted in H-1B status for up to another six.  I.e. you have to leave for a year after you hit the six year mark (again, exceptions apply).
5.  An alien may have more than one H-1B petitioners, simultaneously.

I hope you are not asleep.

More next week.

Thanks for your interest.

Cheers.

Originally posted to Yonkers Boy on Thu May 16, 2013 at 11:58 AM PDT.

Also republished by Community Spotlight.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Your writing is interesting and I am interested. (6+ / 0-)
  •  thanks for this! nt (4+ / 0-)

    "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies." - Groucho Marx

    by Greg Dworkin on Thu May 16, 2013 at 12:57:18 PM PDT

  •  Thanks, very good explanation. (5+ / 0-)
  •  Oh? So what's counted (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Villanova Rhodes, FarWestGirl
    An alien may have more than one H-1B petitioners, simultaneously.
     In counting toward that cap, are we counting persons, or petitions?

    Interestingly enough, on that subject, Sen Ted Cruz wanted a major increase in the cap

    SENATOR TED CRUZ: I think it makes some positive steps with regard to legal immigration, but I don't think it goes nearly far enough, and this amendment is designed to go substantially farther, in particular, to take the current cap on H1B high skilled visas from 65,000 and to increase it by 500 percent to 325,000.
    http://www.npr.org/...

    His amendment failed in committee.

    “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

    by Catte Nappe on Thu May 16, 2013 at 01:20:08 PM PDT

  •  Glad to see you are continuing. (3+ / 0-)

    A question. Can this:

    4-year college degree, in that specialty, for competent performance
    be used to argue that there aren't enough U.S.-based workers in a specialty when there really are? This isn't a great example, and I can't think of a better one right now, but suppose the employer says "no, there are U.S. grads with degrees in computer science, but we need grads with degrees in computer analytical assessment and programming (totally invented, of course, but you get the gist), which the foreign University of Somewhere Cheaper happens to offer." And is the "equivalent experience" a sword that only the employer wanting to bring in H1-Bs can wield, or is it a shield for U.S. workers as well? And if none of that makes sense, I'll understand.
    •  That is a good question. However, demonstrating (0+ / 0-)

      non-availability of U.S. Workers is not a requirement in the H-1B context unless the petitioning entity is "H-1B dependent," which, based on my experiences over the years, is not common.  Thus, the cap.  My general point was to emphasize that a person with a bachelor's degree in architecture, for example, would not qualify for the generally accepted H-1B position of "Accountant" without more.  Getting to the nitty gritty of whether a particular degree qualifies for a particular position constitutes a lot of the back and forth between the USCIS and petitioners during the petition process.  

      Mix the blood and make new people!

      by Yonkers Boy on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:30:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I am in the process of getting a spouse (4+ / 0-)

    residency visa for my wife, JS (Japanese spouse) and can guarantee that this is an administrative, byzantine process, with the decisions made somewhat arbitrarily. We have been at this since December (about average) and are at the last step before an interview. And all of a sudden the agent (clerk) at NVC finds a requirement that is impossible to fulfill for the country from which we are immigrating. This even disagrees with the information said country provides in writing and which the US Embassy in said country also provides.

    The legitimate immigration was a bit more equitable when embassies in the various countries made the decisions as they had ready access to changing environments. Since it has been centralized and place under Homeland Security in a component called the National Visa Center, it is pretty hopeless. My finding to date is that it is the luck of the draw which clerk one gets.

    Honestly it would have been quicker, easier and cheaper to do this illegally then to wait for the auto-legalization or to apply on compassionate grounds. Or be Rupert Murdoch and buy citizenship from a corrupt repug prez.

    If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. ~Henry David Thoreau, On the Duty of Civil Disobediance, 1849

    by shigeru on Thu May 16, 2013 at 02:45:07 PM PDT

    •  I understand the frustration. Arguments as to (0+ / 0-)

      what documents are unobtainable overseas can be very difficult to prove.  Obviously, start with the reciprocity tables.  This type of unreasonable scrutiny happens in adoption cases quite a bit, based on my experiences.  We have been successful appealing denials that are wholly unreasonable.  Sometimes, the appeals phase is where the fight must be won.

      Mix the blood and make new people!

      by Yonkers Boy on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:38:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Good series, and thank you (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YucatanMan

    It's a very clear presentation of a process that's more complicated than it has to be. Will you be getting to LGBT issues eventually?

    -7.75, -8.10; . . . Columbine, Tucson, Aurora, Sandy Hook, Boston (h/t Charles Pierce)

    by Dave in Northridge on Thu May 16, 2013 at 02:49:34 PM PDT

  •  All very interesting, Yonkers, but what's the (0+ / 0-)

    chase gonna be when you cut to it?

    The elevation of appearance over substance, of celebrity over character, of short term gains over lasting achievement displays a poverty of ambition. It distracts you from what's truly important. - Barack Obama

    by helfenburg on Thu May 16, 2013 at 03:58:10 PM PDT

    •  More boring immigration experience-sharing! n/t (0+ / 0-)

      Mix the blood and make new people!

      by Yonkers Boy on Mon May 20, 2013 at 09:31:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I was hoping you'd offer some kind of insight (0+ / 0-)

        regarding the new proposed immigration law.  

        Are you thinking along those lines?  Or is this just a immigration law tutorial.

        The elevation of appearance over substance, of celebrity over character, of short term gains over lasting achievement displays a poverty of ambition. It distracts you from what's truly important. - Barack Obama

        by helfenburg on Mon May 20, 2013 at 10:12:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Understood. I am offering background for the (0+ / 0-)

          sake of assisting folks participating in the CIR conversation.  I was not sure how the diaries would go, since this is the first time I have done something like this.  I am happy to adjust my comments according to reader feedback.  I did not even know if there would be any at all.  I will start to include notes about the current CIR proposals very soon, so thank you for your input.  I greatly appreciate that.

          Mix the blood and make new people!

          by Yonkers Boy on Mon May 20, 2013 at 12:12:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's always so helpful to hear from someone who (0+ / 0-)

            has some real knowledge and insight, so put that together with the proposed legislation and we might just start learning something worth knowing.  

            Cheers.

            The elevation of appearance over substance, of celebrity over character, of short term gains over lasting achievement displays a poverty of ambition. It distracts you from what's truly important. - Barack Obama

            by helfenburg on Tue May 21, 2013 at 04:34:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Not bored at all, very readable. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    YucatanMan, lgmcp

    I found the intent part to be especially illuminating. Unlike most that I hear of I've had very good luck with what used to be called the INS. Extremely fast processing and great service.

    I'll have to go back and read your first post.

    How big is your personal carbon footprint?

    by ban nock on Thu May 16, 2013 at 07:17:15 PM PDT

  •  I find this very interesting. I'll go find your (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp

    earlier diary and read it too.

    Thank you. (and please continue, if you can, to cover more areas)

    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

    by YucatanMan on Thu May 16, 2013 at 08:23:33 PM PDT

  •  Very interesting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lgmcp

    and quite readable. You've educated me a bit. :)

  •  Those companies applying for H1B slots (0+ / 0-)

    I am wondering- all these companies that are applying for H1B slots in April- do they already have a prospective employee in mind, or are they just applying for generic placeholder slots?  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site