Trump's new immigration order coming

[stringpuller 74]

1 minute ago, eirinlinn said:

Okay so for example hypothetically:  “if you file this type of petition AFTER this date then you will need to meet this merit based requirement”? 

But it wouldn’t take into account the k1s that were in process before? 

I don't know don't be alarmed I'm just speculating. . I think any blocks they may put on will have to come with some sort of grandfathered in scenerio

[Crazy Cat 39,250]

48 minutes ago, eirinlinn said:

Sorry but I don’t understand the context of a “cut-off date”? What do you mean?

Application submitted prior to a specific date for Adjustment of Status were not subject to the I-944, for example.

[Cyberfx1024 7,978]

9 hours ago, HKS said:

Does that mean like a point like system education level, wealth, connection with the country, language fluency, existing job offer, etc? 

Merit based systems still allow for you to petition your fiance, spouse, and children.... Just not the parents or siblings

[Ryan H 3,790]

~~~Closed for review~~~

[Ryan H 3,790]

***Thread back open; several derailing posts removed.  Going forward, only discuss the order itself without bickering or any political discussion that belongs in the Current Events and Hot Social Topics forum.  This will be the only warning, failure to take heed will result in Administrative Action.***

[geowrian 22,335]

12 hours ago, Louis61404 said:

It appears that he believes after the Supreme Court ruling on DACA recently, in an EO he can do this - that is certainly up for debate.  But that is his and his administration's interpretation of the ruling.

Nothing in the SCOTUS ruling suggested anything at all about changing existing visa requirements under the law. Literally nothing was there...only stuff relating to the APA in the implementation of revoking DACA.

I legitimately think claiming the ruling had anything to do with this move is just a cover It's just easier to say something recent allows the change as the general public doesn't read court opinions. They rely on others to to summarize them, and he has outlets there.

You can read it yourself here to confirm: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-587_5ifl.pdf

Furthermore, any substantially restrictive actions being taken as a result of that recent ruling would likely take a while to be reviewed and implemented, or else they would get immediately shot down as a violation of the APA again. If anything, the SCOTUS ruling should have made it clear that the courts want compliance with the APA.

Note: This is different than travel bans...INA 212(f) permits that.

 

More likely, IMO, is he will try to bring up merit-based reforms as part of the negotiation to get status for DACA recipients.

This failed last time he tried to do so, and he likely has less bargaining power now (lower position in the polls, and he very likely won't get the steps in place to actually dismantle DACA before the election so any threat to do so is lessened IMHO).

He referred to his actions as part of a very big bill multiple times. Bills are passed by the legislature. So it's possible he plans to put out a plan for a bill...like RAISE back in 2017 (which was immediately show down).

 

No idea what he plans to actually do with an EO, though. He can likely put some restrictions on DACA recipients and such...and maybe, possibly something with some NIV work visas? But he cannot actually change the requirements for existing visas, or eliminate any existing visas. Those are set by law.

[py6 43]

Canada has merit-based system. It allows both citizens AND permanent residents to sponsor parents for PR. 

 

Australia also allows parents sponsorship.

 

Going merit-based doesn't make it a necessity to end parents sponsorship. In fact, many high-skilled, filthy rich immigrants care a LOT about this. Countries with such policies continue to get those people.

 

But again, this is an EO. It's not going to be able to change the law and end categories created by law.

[Henry357 70]

11 minutes ago, py6 said:

Canada has merit-based system. It allows both citizens AND permanent residents to sponsor parents for PR. 

 

Australia also allows parents sponsorship.

 

Going merit-based doesn't make it a necessity to end parents sponsorship. In fact, many high-skilled, filthy rich immigrants care a LOT about this. Countries with such policies continue to get those people.

 

But again, this is an EO. It's not going to be able to change the law and end categories created by law.

This. 

[Lil bear 3,831]

21 minutes ago, py6 said:

 

 

Australia also allows parents sponsorship

At a cost of over $50000 dollars or $7000 and a wait if 30-50 years. Need to compare apples to apples. It’s nothing like the US IR 5 category. 

[Louis61404 133]

2 hours ago, py6 said:

Canada has merit-based system. It allows both citizens AND permanent residents to sponsor parents for PR. 

 

Australia also allows parents sponsorship.

 

Going merit-based doesn't make it a necessity to end parents sponsorship. In fact, many high-skilled, filthy rich immigrants care a LOT about this. Countries with such policies continue to get those people.

 

But again, this is an EO. It's not going to be able to change the law and end categories created by law.

In the Trump administration, going to merit based does mean the end to parents sponsorship.  Trump and the exact same people who wrote the 2019 attempt played their cards when they tried this a different way that failed back then.

 

I certainly don't know enough about what the Supreme Court said in the DACA ruling a couple of weeks ago - but according to Trump, him and his team have interpreted that he can do this merit based immigration order via EO.  Whether he can or can't is certainly up for debate and will obviously be challenged, but it's on record that's why they're moving forward with this now, via EO.

 

Australia allowing parent sponsorship is quite misleading - at an insane cost, should be mentioned.

[py6 43]

35 minutes ago, Louis61404 said:

In the Trump administration, going to merit based does mean the end to parents sponsorship.  Trump and the exact same people who wrote the 2019 attempt played their cards when they tried this a different way that failed back then.

 

I certainly don't know enough about what the Supreme Court said in the DACA ruling a couple of weeks ago - but according to Trump, him and his team have interpreted that he can do this merit based immigration order via EO.  Whether he can or can't is certainly up for debate and will obviously be challenged, but it's on record that's why they're moving forward with this now, via EO.

 

Australia allowing parent sponsorship is quite misleading - at an insane cost, should be mentioned.

I would be very concerned if the Supreme Court decision is truly going to give the President broad powers to change immigration law and enact new laws. I certainly don't believe the executive branch can do this. However, if Trump does implement this, the next Democratic President similarly will have the power to scratch whatever Trump comes up with and install his/her version. I see a lot of instability in this approach.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

On 7/11/2020 at 10:43 AM, Louis61404 said:

It appears that he believes after the Supreme Court ruling on DACA recently, in an EO he can do this - that is certainly up for debate.  But that is his and his administration's interpretation of the ruling.

That doesn't make sense. He has the authority to overturn DACA because it was an executive order. But the law is still to be voted by congress 

[Louis61404 133]

3 hours ago, py6 said:

I would be very concerned if the Supreme Court decision is truly going to give the President broad powers to change immigration law and enact new laws. I certainly don't believe the executive branch can do this. However, if Trump does implement this, the next Democratic President similarly will have the power to scratch whatever Trump comes up with and install his/her version. I see a lot of instability in this approach.

Yes, definitely that is all plausible.  Lots of questions if he actually can, but when he announced this, he announced he believes Supreme Court gave him the power to do so, whether or not that is true.

 

He's on the ropes in all swing states looking to make waves, and certainly something serious like this will have the legality challenged.

[Louis61404 133]

1 hour ago, Orangesapples said:

That doesn't make sense. He has the authority to overturn DACA because it was an executive order. But the law is still to be voted by congress 

I don't know what to tell you - just relaying what came out of the President's mouth, and why he's moving forward with this EO that will switch to merit based immigration.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

2 minutes ago, Louis61404 said:

I don't know what to tell you - just relaying what came out of the President's mouth, and why he's moving forward with this EO that will switch to merit based immigration.

What comes out of his mouth is highly unreliable. He can overturn a former EO because presidents can issue EOs. But he can't change the laws. He can of course lie all day long to appease his base.