Musings on Immigration

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed certain parts of President Trump’s travel ban to proceed. The ban affects six Muslim-majority countries: Sudan, Somalia, Libya, Yemen, Syria, and Iran. The executive order originally banned all nationals from those countries for 90 days; however, the Supreme Court ruled that the ban could only be enforced against people who do not have a “bona fide” connection with a person or entity in the United States. The Trump administration then issued guidelines that allowed the ban to be enforced against grandparents, aunts, uncles, and others; however, Federal District Judge Derrick Watson ruled that the administration’s interpretation of the court’s ruling was too narrow. Watson ruled that the ban did not apply to grandparents and other close relatives. According to CNN , the Trump administration subsequently asked the Supreme Court to put that decision on hold. The Supreme Court left the decision intact, meaning that the travel ban ...

The EB-5 visa program was designed to stimulate the U.S. economy and to encourage job creation in rural and low-employment areas. Although the program has been effective, a recent report from Breitbart News identifies several cases of fraud related to the EB-5 program. Reform has been elusive despite bipartisan efforts to reduce fraud. According to the news site VTDigger , Senators Patrick Leahy and Chuck Grassley recently testified before the House of Representatives regarding the various issues with the EB-5 program. Leahy, who had once championed the program, pointed out several potential improvements that could reduce fraud and abuse: 1.      Prevent the formation of Targeted Employment Areas through gerrymandering; 2.      Increase the minimum investment requirements; 3.      Adequately vet the funds invested through the EB-5 program; 4.      Ensure jobs created by the EB-5 program ...

Much has been made recently of the increased ICE enforcement activity against employers. The majority of this enforcement activity is directed towards the Form I-9 and whether or not employers have either properly completed the Form, or have somehow knowingly hired individuals who are not authorized to work. In support of this enforcement activity, in May 2010, ICE released the “ICE Guide to Administrative Form I-9 Inspections and Civil Monetary Penalties.” That agency field manual provides insight into the administrative procedures and penalty scheme for administrative inspections for the agency’s special agents and forensic auditors. This “fine guideline” only briefly discusses the remedial impact of “auditing” a company’s Forms I-9 PRIOR to ICE serving a Notice of Inspection on the company. There have been countless seminars over the last several years talking about the need for Human Resource (HR) professionals to “audit” their own Forms I-9, and even describing how this auditing...