Trump's future immigration policies- speculation MEGATHREAD

[Hypnos 6,576]

4 minutes ago, Coco8 said:

And the part about the ineligibility of welfare is absurd since you are ineligible current for 10 years

It's currently 5 years and they're proposing 5 years, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Coco8 1,039]

8 minutes ago, Hypnos said:

It's currently 5 years and they're proposing 5 years, so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Really? I thought the financial sponsor was responsible until the GC holder became a citizen or had worked for 10 years. Something of the sort.

 

Well, basically the whole law is a big mess. It seems written by someone who has no clue about the laws and regulations to show off to their ignorant constituency. It doesn't surprise me.

 

That point system is also absurd. They give 10 points for being young and 25 points for a Nobel Prize? That is not even comparable. Besides, if you get the Nobel Prize you can get a GC through EB1 without having to go through this silly system.

[Coco8 1,039]

Grandparents have never been able to get GC as family based.

 

Have those senators actually said that? A lot of people are mentioning it and it just makes my point that the senators/white house have no clue how immigration works.

 

 

 

[Hypnos 6,576]

You're conflating two different things. 

 

The I-864 is no longer in effect once the alien can be credited with 40 quarters of employment, so for someone employed full-time that's 10 years. 

 

Separately, aliens are generally ineligible for most welfare programs (food stamps, TANF, etc.) for 5 years from the date they become an LPR. 

Edited August 3, 2017 by Hypnos

[N-o-l-a 7,167]

When they did the press conference, I believe they were talking about households with an immigrant in them receiving government benefits.  I don't know if they are trying to pull a fast one on the American public with the 5 year thing or if they really do not understand that it is the American citizens in those households likely receiving benefits.

 

Refugees are usually excluded from some of the 5 year bars, but I doubt they'd be able to pass the bill with them being penalized....so I'm not really getting what they are going for.

Edited August 3, 2017 by N-o-l-a

[Going through 5,668]

Remember, the new White House likes fear-mongering....the campaign was built off of fear-mongering, too.  His speech yesterday touched on fear-mongering again.  By fear-mongering he maintains the same support base that bought into his fear-mongering during his campaign.  Makes sense.

 

GC applicants running to apply for welfare the moment they cross the border is what he wants people to think.

Immigration benefits being an easy-peasy thing for "just anyone" to get is what he wants people to think.

Immigrants being uneducated, mostly criminals, non-English speaking and never working a day in their lives is what he wants people to think.

 

I think the White House is forgetting that the new regulations not only affect GC and visa applicants...more importantly, the White House is forgetting that the new regulations also greatly affect US CITIZENS who want to apply for immigration benefits on their loved one's behalf...the same Citizens who will be casting their votes during elections.  The same Citizens who will be pressing their congress representatives and senators to not support these new regulations.

 

This legislation as it stands is not going to be passed...if it does?  It will be an extremely watered-down version of what he is initially proposing.

 

[aa1979 100]

I am trying to understand this better.  I am told that this bill, if it becomes a law, will not affect people who are trying to obtain the immigration benefits based on marriage, but some people are disagreeing with that... and are saying that it will affect everyone including people who are applying for green cards for their spouses.

If this bill is passed, and it becomes the law of the land, will this new law affect the removal of conditions process of a 2-year conditional green card to become a 10-year permanent green card for someone who is married to a us citizen and has currently a conditional 2-years green card?  Will it affect obtaining the citizenship after completing the 3 years of having a green card?

Thanks everyone!

[Dutchster 1,106]

It won't affect K-1 or CR-IR1 applicants. Fiancees are not even mentioned. Yes, they said family-based but that also means parents, sisters, brothers etc. That's what they want to cut down. And it'll take years to make it even happen. "In a decade it will be cut down in half" It's because US citizens can sponsor spouses, children and parents for an unrestricted number of visas. 

From what I heard during yesterday's speech, if the bill passes, you can still petition for spouses and children under 21 (I-130) and sick parents. They want to introduce a 5 year residency card for parents with no path to citizenship. 

 

Quote

The legislation would award points based on education, ability to speak English, high-paying job offers, age, record of achievement and entrepreneurial initiative. But while it would still allow spouses and minor children of Americans and legal residents to come in, it would eliminate preferences for other relatives, like siblings and adult children. The bill would create a renewable temporary visa for older-adult parents who come for caretaking purposes.

 

[Unlockable 7,309]

Anymore info on what happens to adult children (over 21) from the proposed bill? In the current draft of the bill are they completely cutoff after 21 or will be placed in an even lower category?

[Dutchster 1,106]

It looks to me like they will cut down non-immediate category completely. Been googling all day at work yesterday and this morning to find some more information but this  is all I get of it.

Edited August 3, 2017 by Dutchster

[charmander 692]

41 minutes ago, NuestraUnion said:

Anymore info on what happens to adult children (over 21) from the proposed bill? In the current draft of the bill are they completely cutoff after 21 or will be placed in an even lower category?

this thread is exploding since yesterday, couldn't browse through to find if somewhere already shared the link for the bill https://www.cotton.senate.gov/files/documents/170802_New_RAISE_Act_Bill_Text.pdf

 

According to Page 24, only "dependent adult children" would be allowed a temporary status until they could take care him/herselves. No work authorization, no permanent residence benefits either (such as path to naturalization).

[charmander 692]

This thing is too complicated to understand. https://www.cotton.senate.gov/files/documents/170802_New_RAISE_Act_Bill_Text.pdf

Hundreds of cross-references from current law: Strike this out from Act a(2)(1), insert this to paragraph 3, amend section C with blah blah blah.

 

We need a paralegal VJer to write a RAISE Act for dummies booklet.

 

 

Edited August 3, 2017 by charmander

[Going through 5,668]

1 minute ago, charmander said:

This thing is too complicated to understand. https://www.cotton.senate.gov/files/documents/170802_New_RAISE_Act_Bill_Text.pdf

Hundreds of cross-references from current law: Strike this out from Act a(2)(1), insert this to paragraph 3, amend section C with blah blah blah.

 

We need a paralegal VJer to write a RAISE Act for dummies booklet.

 

 

It's a working document so it's going to change a ton of times before they actually put it up for a vote (if it even reaches THAT stage)...

 

I'm wondering how the people in the DV forum is doing considering the plan to cut the Lottery Visas out entirely and kill the program completely.  They must be all thinking too that their applications are suddenly going to be thrown in the garbage tomorrow...

[__immigrant__ 58]

points system is a good system but i don't think this bill pass the senate, yesterday i read on twitter that 2 GOP senators have said they're against it and of course all democrats in the senate are against it.

[Mike and Lily 13]

We have both F2B and F4 petitions in the works. Neither of which will be offered if this new bill becomes law. Will these applications still be processed if this new law goes into effect?