Possible Changes of the US Immigration system and laws?

[firebird00 66]

Bracero Program

Operation Wetback

Chinese Exclusion Act

etc etc etc

What about my main question in the post. Do you think there will be new changes in immigration laws targeting the legal immigrants, or it's mainly focused on illegal ones?

[Boiler 43,516]

I doubt there will be any significant changes in the foreseeable future.

[firebird00 66]

I doubt there will be any significant changes in the foreseeable future.

How far is the foreseeable future? Like till November 2016?

[Pitaya 2,576]

How far is the foreseeable future? Like till November 2016?

Highly unlikely.

Do you hear any of the current batch of presidential or congressional candidates announcing specific plans regarding meaningful immigration reform during this election cycle? The only things being spewed by the various candidates are worthless rhetoric and empty promises pandering to the rabble on the campaign trail. The topics of this rhetoric is quite often the middle east mess, or healthcare, or hairstyles, or gender, with half-baked immigration reform far down the pecking order; and meaningful immigration reform not even getting a nod or a mention.

[firebird00 66]

Highly unlikely.

Do you hear any of the current batch of presidential or congressional candidates announcing specific plans regarding meaningful immigration reform during this election cycle? The only things being spewed by the various candidates are worthless rhetoric and empty promises pandering to the rabble on the campaign trail. The topics of this rhetoric is quite often the middle east mess, or healthcare, or hairstyles, or gender, with half-baked immigration reform far down the pecking order; and meaningful immigration reform not even getting a nod or a mention.

That's true. Such changes doesnt happen between a day and night, and as you said its all promises for the campaign trail.

[SunflowerSweet 1,321]

How far is the foreseeable future? Like till November 2016?

New president doesn't even get sworn in until January 20th 2017, so definitely not before then.

[MeryAsawa 3]

I'll echo what has been said previously. It is highly unlikely (almost impossible) there will be any changes in the next year until the new president takes office in Jan 2017. Even if it were all Democrats or Republicans it would be unusual for them to take action very quickly. And there would be a grace period for applications in process.

What you hear is mostly people talking tough to get elected. No one really wants to do much on immigration because one group or another will get mad. And they are mostly concerned with illegal immigration anyway, legal immigration should actually get better. All that's likely to happen is slightly longer processing times if people get scared and there are a lot of applications.

Some of the candidates are talking about Muslims and that likely isn't even legal to pass that kind of law (the Supreme Court would decide.) But I wouldn't be surprised if there are better background checks. That could add a few months to the process. But, if they pass that hopefully they shorten it in other areas.

[kris&me 572]

Congress makes any changes to immigration under Homeland Security

This is present list of committes Congress is working on

http://www.contactingthecongress.org/cgi-bin/committee_list.cgi?site=ctc2011

No matter how much they talk about immigration / no one is working on changes to the present system

they would have to appoint a committee to study and suggest any changes and then put forth a bill / this takes time

[Pitaya 2,576]

The emerging issue of the filling of the vacancy on the SCOTUS will likely push any meaningful immigration reform from the back burner to the back closet until after this election cycle.

[firebird00 66]

The emerging issue of the filling of the vacancy on the SCOTUS will likely push any meaningful immigration reform from the back burner to the back closet until after this election cycle.

This issue made things more complicated.

[vpalermo85 62]

Let's be realistic here. I'm an American citizen by birth and I'm about to take the NY Bar Exam in July to get my license to be an attorney. To sum up some fears and concerns about how a bill becomes a law in the states is simple. Someone....anyone proposes a Bill to the House of Representatives who will review the Bill and then take a vote on it. If the bill has 2/3rds approval of the House, it goes to the Senate who votes on it and the same standard applies. Once is gets the okay from both houses of Congress, the President can either sign the bill or have it sent back to Congress with Presidential notes or an all out refusal. The President can even sign the bill and cross certain lines out and add certain lines in to make it fit his taste, but mind you this process is highly controversial and is often taken under scrutiny by the Supreme Court (this method was favored by Clinton when he was President). If the President signs it becomes law but the Supreme Court can and may determine that the law is unconstitutional if it goes against the Constitution. If the President refuses the bill, Congress can filibuster the bill and get it to become a law without his signature but of course right now neither party in Congress has the numbers to do that. So it's a balance on all sides.

Immigration is not a right protected under the Constitution, nor is it an exclusive right of the President to determine who or what can enter into this country. It's a privilege that Congress and the President has delegated to offices like Homeland Security and the USCIS and the NVC to oversee and review cases concerning immigration. Congress gives these organizations guidelines and those organizations will make rules and procedures they feel best execute those actions. Bills placed into laws later on may alter those parameters.

The new President won't take his seat until 2017, but both Obama and the new Presidency are and will target immigration laws. It was made clear when Obama's executive action declared several countries in the Middle East region would no longer be able to enter the States on the Visa Waiver Program. This is just the start, but at the moment it hasn't effected the K-1 visa directly. If anything, USCIS is taking a slightly longer time pondering over our applications. Keep in mind the approval numbers aren't in and only a small portion of the applicants post on this site so there's no real way to know.

Don't listen to any Presidential candidates because the reality is, none of them are giving any concrete plans or proposals in terms of what they plan to do when they become President. They're just saying what they need to say to get elected--or in this case, what they think they need to say in order to get elected. This applies to Republicans and Democrats. In the end, we don't know what will happen to immigration. Our country really only reacts when something 'violent' happens. Congress and the President made a showing the last time we were 'attacked' and since then it hasn't really been in the public eye or in the public's conscience. You'll hear a lot about immigration reform in the candidates speeches, but the fact of the matter is, I don't see any newly appointed Presidential candidate really tackle the issue. If anything, we'd be more concerned about fortifying out border with Mexico than getting rid of the K-1 visa. You'll most likely see deeper checks and standards of review changes that just take a longer time.

Edited February 14, 2016 by vpalermo85

[firebird00 66]

Let's be realistic here. I'm an American citizen by birth and I'm about to take the NY Bar Exam in July to get my license to be an attorney. To sum up some fears and concerns about how a bill becomes a law in the states is simple. Someone....anyone proposes a Bill to the House of Representatives who will review the Bill and then take a vote on it. If the bill has 2/3rds approval of the House, it goes to the Senate who votes on it and the same standard applies. Once is gets the okay from both houses of Congress, the President can either sign the bill or have it sent back to Congress with Presidential notes or an all out refusal. The President can even sign the bill and cross certain lines out and add certain lines in to make it fit his taste, but mind you this process is highly controversial and is often taken under scrutiny by the Supreme Court (this method was favored by Clinton when he was President). If the President signs it becomes law but the Supreme Court can and may determine that the law is unconstitutional if it goes against the Constitution. If the President refuses the bill, Congress can filibuster the bill and get it to become a law without his signature but of course right now neither party in Congress has the numbers to do that. So it's a balance on all sides.

Immigration is not a right protected under the Constitution, nor is it an exclusive right of the President to determine who or what can enter into this country. It's a privilege that Congress and the President has delegated to offices like Homeland Security and the USCIS and the NVC to oversee and review cases concerning immigration. Congress gives these organizations guidelines and those organizations will make rules and procedures they feel best execute those actions. Bills placed into laws later on may alter those parameters.

The new President won't take his seat until 2017, but both Obama and the new Presidency are and will target immigration laws. It was made clear when Obama's executive action declared several countries in the Middle East region would no longer be able to enter the States on the Visa Waiver Program. This is just the start, but at the moment it hasn't effected the K-1 visa directly. If anything, USCIS is taking a slightly longer time pondering over our applications. Keep in mind the approval numbers aren't in and only a small portion of the applicants post on this site so there's no real way to know.

Don't listen to any Presidential candidates because the reality is, none of them are giving any concrete plans or proposals in terms of what they plan to do when they become President. They're just saying what they need to say to get elected--or in this case, what they think they need to say in order to get elected. This applies to Republicans and Democrats. In the end, we don't know what will happen to immigration. Our country really only reacts when something 'violent' happens. Congress and the President made a showing the last time we were 'attacked' and since then it hasn't really been in the public eye or in the public's conscience. You'll hear a lot about immigration reform in the candidates speeches, but the fact of the matter is, I don't see any newly appointed Presidential candidate really tackle the issue. If anything, we'd be more concerned about fortifying out border with Mexico than getting rid of the K-1 visa. You'll most likely see deeper checks and standards of review changes that just take a longer time.

Thanks for your comment it is really helpful and rich with information. But what you do mean by countries in the middle east will be affected by visa waiver program? Because non of the middle east countries are in a visa waiver program.

[vpalermo85 62]

The new rule is that if you have visited or you're from countries like Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Syria in the last five years you must obtain a visa from the United States before you can come here even if you have visited before. Prior to this change put in place by Obama, if you had obtained an ESTA/prior visa within a certain time, you can come here without obtaining a new visa.

[TBoneTX 43,133]

Nearly two dozen posts have been removed for being off-topic or for quoting off-topic posts.

For political discussion, find appropriate threads (or start one) in the Current Events forum.

Because the OP's question has been answered, this thread is now closed to further comments.

TBoneTX

VJ Moderation