sledge_hammer
08-15 03:10 PM
I'm went to the infopass website to make an appointment for interim EAD; I chose the "Washington Field Office" since I live in the DC Metro area. There are no appointments available in Aug and Sep!
This is unbelievable! What other options do I have?
Please advise. Thanks!
This is unbelievable! What other options do I have?
Please advise. Thanks!
wallpaper hot half up down wedding half
immidude
06-28 02:12 PM
i need big help with my 140 filed in Premium Processing
and i did not get my receipt to file 485
applied it on Jun 20 2007 (this month)
any way i can get some copy of the receipt to file 485?
and i did not get my receipt to file 485
applied it on Jun 20 2007 (this month)
any way i can get some copy of the receipt to file 485?
qasleuth
05-02 02:56 PM
What is this OBC battle you are talking about?
It has nothing to do with immigration but a bane of India.
It has nothing to do with immigration but a bane of India.
2011 HALF UP HALF DOWN HAIR STYLE
ItIsNotFunny
03-11 12:16 PM
Lets find real information. Don't start guessing game (unless you just love the mess you are in). Please contribute on FOIA thread.
more...
sk.aggarwal
02-01 04:03 PM
You were right. It seems they have updated status today. My case got processed on 01/27. Now waiting for the documents
ganguteli
02-25 09:34 AM
You mean to say sell US real estate for GC/citizenship? I don't see this going very far. I can see anti immigrants waiting for this one. Best is to lobby using aides of big corporations, developing relationship with lobbyists who already have connections, hiring lawyers, developing strong case, donations in election campaigns etc. All of this needs loads and loads of money. Are we ready to donate to IV and build strong lobbying group for our cause? That is the only way to change our current situation.
Sending flowers, sending pizzas, sending all these proposals will only fall on deaf ears. Congress understands language of money to pass laws, Rest of the country/orgranizations understand language of laws/court.
gcnotfiledyet is a LAWYER in disguise.
Sending flowers, sending pizzas, sending all these proposals will only fall on deaf ears. Congress understands language of money to pass laws, Rest of the country/orgranizations understand language of laws/court.
gcnotfiledyet is a LAWYER in disguise.
more...
chanduv23
11-08 08:17 AM
Happy diwali to the many IV members who celebrate the festival of lights with joy and happiness.
On this wonderful ocassion, lets all look back at what IV has done and continues to do as an organization. Lets look back at the July fiasco and how IV members united for a cause. Look at all the legislative efforts IV has been working and continues to work for our cause.
Lets all start becoming more active and continue with ongoing grassroots efforts.
On this wonderful ocassion, lets all look back at what IV has done and continues to do as an organization. Lets look back at the July fiasco and how IV members united for a cause. Look at all the legislative efforts IV has been working and continues to work for our cause.
Lets all start becoming more active and continue with ongoing grassroots efforts.
2010 Olivia Wilde#39;s sexy half up
vinodmp
02-11 09:59 PM
**************
- Labor was filed with a minimum requirement as Masters degree. No alternate degree requirement or equivalency was mentioned. --> just found out that it did say BS+ 5 exp is ok - USCIS mistakenly approved the I-140 (I am assuming OP does not have a US Masters and only has masters equivalent or BS + 5 yrs)
- Sponsoring employer revoked approved I-140
- USCIS checked the I-140 and realized it made a mistake in initial I-140 approval
- USCIS denied the pending I-485 based on incorrect I-140 approval
If all of the above is correct, then I doubt if anything can be done. I dont see any grounds to file MTR based on the fact that beneficiary does not have a US Masters degree which is the requirement as indicated in LC filing. I dont think you can do anything with respect to USCIS's mistake in approving I-140 earlier and now denying it. Got to wait and see what the attorney's view is in this regard.
**********
Since the application do say BS+5 years and I have copy of the Edu evaluation which says Master equivalent , I do see a good chance now to re-open the case .
Mine is not a labor substitute. ( just to clarify)
Thanks
-vinod
- Labor was filed with a minimum requirement as Masters degree. No alternate degree requirement or equivalency was mentioned. --> just found out that it did say BS+ 5 exp is ok - USCIS mistakenly approved the I-140 (I am assuming OP does not have a US Masters and only has masters equivalent or BS + 5 yrs)
- Sponsoring employer revoked approved I-140
- USCIS checked the I-140 and realized it made a mistake in initial I-140 approval
- USCIS denied the pending I-485 based on incorrect I-140 approval
If all of the above is correct, then I doubt if anything can be done. I dont see any grounds to file MTR based on the fact that beneficiary does not have a US Masters degree which is the requirement as indicated in LC filing. I dont think you can do anything with respect to USCIS's mistake in approving I-140 earlier and now denying it. Got to wait and see what the attorney's view is in this regard.
**********
Since the application do say BS+5 years and I have copy of the Edu evaluation which says Master equivalent , I do see a good chance now to re-open the case .
Mine is not a labor substitute. ( just to clarify)
Thanks
-vinod
more...
mrsahaayam
03-15 09:54 PM
Guys, Already suffering that pain. Please enough of the beating...
I have requested for your valuable advise. But if you ask me why?No reason.... Why do we have many criminals? Why? Why? why? I believe every one is not perfect in any sense, some get caught, some not....
Thanks pal
I have requested for your valuable advise. But if you ask me why?No reason.... Why do we have many criminals? Why? Why? why? I believe every one is not perfect in any sense, some get caught, some not....
Thanks pal
hair Half Up Half Down Hairstyles
immi2006
05-24 10:34 AM
Basically they want to prevent offshoring legally... meaning
if microsoft wants job done.. hire locally.. or bring people on direct H1 so they net the taxes. or do the job overseas.
If Infosys brings people - do not let them work in CIsco, microsoft or, HP... that way they put overseas company OUT OF Business
USA needs fruit pickers not hi tec, this can be outsourced..
if microsoft wants job done.. hire locally.. or bring people on direct H1 so they net the taxes. or do the job overseas.
If Infosys brings people - do not let them work in CIsco, microsoft or, HP... that way they put overseas company OUT OF Business
USA needs fruit pickers not hi tec, this can be outsourced..
more...
gc_on_demand
08-20 11:08 PM
bump
hot wedding Wedding Hairstyle
zoho
08-28 07:54 PM
My wife has h4 visa till 2010.
Her AP is going to expire in october and planning to go to india soon.
Can she go to india after applying for AP renewal.
Applying for her AP because if my i 485 got approved and her's will be pending,then her h4 visa will automatically get cancelled which prevents from entering into US.
Please advice guys
Her AP is going to expire in october and planning to go to india soon.
Can she go to india after applying for AP renewal.
Applying for her AP because if my i 485 got approved and her's will be pending,then her h4 visa will automatically get cancelled which prevents from entering into US.
Please advice guys
more...
house A half up, half down style of
beautifulMind
03-17 10:30 AM
I had a misdemenor and went to india. My case was dismissed while I was in india. I returned on AP at the newark airport and nothing was even mentioned about it..infact AP is considered the safest way to travel even safer than h1b because you are technically not admitted to US but are "admissible"..There is a difference
tattoo Re: Half up half down
Leo07
05-27 02:08 PM
Pappu or other IV folks, can you please post your comments on this thread?
Best!
Best!
more...
pictures Half Up, Half Down Styles for
katrina
03-27 01:27 PM
Thanks to the efforts of everyone at IV and QGA, we have the golden opportunity for a member of IV to actually testify before Congress. No kidding!
This has to be one of the best and most effective chance we have to make our point directly to the lawmakers
IV is looking for someone who is in the �limbo� stage, and has made a significant contribution to the economy (ie, invented something, made a medical discovery, created a lot of jobs, etc.)
Please treat this as very very urgent. We need someone like this ASAP.
Please contact any of the following if you come across someone who fits the criteria
shrey@immigrationvoice.org
jay@immigrationvoice.org
sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
nagaraj@immigrationvoice.org
kapooraman@immigrationvoice.org
This is your chance to speak up and be heard. Please pass it on to everyone you know.....
I just want to make sure that IV not forgotten People that stuck in PBEC. So far as an active member and an active contributor for IV I have to say that I'm dissapointed as far as the way IV addressed PBEC Issued.
Most of disscussion in IV forum seems like focusing on retrogression issue only.
for people that have their case are among 350000 case pending in PBEC the retrogression has no effect at all unless their case clear out before the retrogression get solved.
There are so many of us had been waiting for their labor get approved.
5, 6, 7 year are a long wait.
I noted that IV do have PBEC mentioned on the web fax, but please make sure that retrogression is not the main goal of IV.
Thanks.
This has to be one of the best and most effective chance we have to make our point directly to the lawmakers
IV is looking for someone who is in the �limbo� stage, and has made a significant contribution to the economy (ie, invented something, made a medical discovery, created a lot of jobs, etc.)
Please treat this as very very urgent. We need someone like this ASAP.
Please contact any of the following if you come across someone who fits the criteria
shrey@immigrationvoice.org
jay@immigrationvoice.org
sandeep@immigrationvoice.org
nagaraj@immigrationvoice.org
kapooraman@immigrationvoice.org
This is your chance to speak up and be heard. Please pass it on to everyone you know.....
I just want to make sure that IV not forgotten People that stuck in PBEC. So far as an active member and an active contributor for IV I have to say that I'm dissapointed as far as the way IV addressed PBEC Issued.
Most of disscussion in IV forum seems like focusing on retrogression issue only.
for people that have their case are among 350000 case pending in PBEC the retrogression has no effect at all unless their case clear out before the retrogression get solved.
There are so many of us had been waiting for their labor get approved.
5, 6, 7 year are a long wait.
I noted that IV do have PBEC mentioned on the web fax, but please make sure that retrogression is not the main goal of IV.
Thanks.
dresses ridal hairstyles half up half
svn
04-07 10:50 AM
this poll is a good idea to understand what most of the members expect from CORE....
....this is a grass-roots organization and any highly skilled legal immigrant should be able to donate $25
Great point praveenuppaluri. But let's face reality for a moment - as several senior members routinely point out, inspite of our organization having several thousand "highly paid" members, the "donor" base is very limited. As Zen says in a truly Zen manner "we are where we are"...and we have to figure out where to go from here. Unquestionably, I am really thankful to our highly dedicated Core team for sacrificing their personal time and making all of the efforts that have led to substantial progress over the last few years for the immigration community. However,, that with a new government in place, we now have a truly unique window of opportunity to make some progress and the question before us is how do we maximize our potential to take advantage of this? The real beauty of my proposal is that we could leverage the enormous dedication of the core team and multiply it several fold, if we could build a strong donor base that provides us the funding required to engage effective lobbyists. Needless to say the more the funding, the stronger can be our lobbying.
but I also understand that most of these lobbying efforts are done in the back ground and its not good idea to share anything in these times. who knows, may be there is an anti-immigrant lurking around (ofcourse paying $$ to become Donor, become senior member whatever) to get inside information.
.....transparancy is good as long as it doesn't hurt the cause.
It is definitely not a good idea to broadcast confidential information on strategies/plans. However, what you are referring to is the merchanics of the process of sharing updates- there are several ways in which we could implement the update process so that information is only shared to a predefined "pool" and that "donors" are first vetted before being brought into the "pool", so to speak. The way IV has currently implemented this process, of course, is through the local chapters. However, their current process is subject to lack of consistency (depending very heavily on the availability of the local chapter coordinators) and more importantly, does not take advantage of the tool that really enables us to all come together i.e. the internet. It is a paradox that an organization founded on the net and is still subjecting itself to the constraints of "physical communication" via the local chapters. I thought they were taking a step in right direction with the creation of the "Donor Forum", however, for some reason, we still seem stuck in the previous mode of operation. We can find a middle ground here that would not compromise confidentiality or our goals - one alternative (certainly not the only one I am sure) is quite simply, email updates compiled by one person (for consistency and uniform direction) that go out a distribution group, where the "donors" on the distribution list, have been vetted by the local chapter coordinators. I know this takes work, but if the Core is looking for a person to pull together a Conference Call to compile this update and send it out, I would be glad to volunteer my services.
Still I've some open issues. If you look at the poll, there isnt a single person who voted NO. We should expect to see a healthy mix of Yes,No and Dont Care. But the way the poll has been put and partly the wording, partly the current IV environment, people are sceptical of putting their real thoughts publicly. This excercise is futile if you have minimal 'NO's --- hope you are getting my point here. The only thing you might end up with is x number of YES and hope to translate the YES into more dollar value for IV and there will be some YES who are already contributing monetarily.
You are correct dilbert_cal - not a single person has explicity voted "No". In reality though, everyone who has viewed this thread (1563 views when I last checked - even if you assume each person has checked this thread at least 10 times, that's about 156 individuals out of whom only about 35 have voted so far!) and not bothered to vote is essentially voting "No"! However, again as you point out, I am not really looking for the "No"s since these people have clearly decided they don't want to part with their money at this stage (not ascribing any reasons or motives here - just stating the facts). Instead, my focus is on coalescing a group around those who voted "Yes" since they, like me, agree that they would contribute more if they received more regular updates of what is going on. Our organization just needs a little more "organization" (pun, intended :p) to make it more effective! Again, just reality but that is also the usual natural evolution of most organizations that start out as pure grassroots organizations.
I really do believe there are substantial number of folks out there who can be engaged more effectively in this process and I invite the Core Leadership team to put more thought in figuring out how to achieve this - I hope you take my suggestion constructively!
Cheers
....this is a grass-roots organization and any highly skilled legal immigrant should be able to donate $25
Great point praveenuppaluri. But let's face reality for a moment - as several senior members routinely point out, inspite of our organization having several thousand "highly paid" members, the "donor" base is very limited. As Zen says in a truly Zen manner "we are where we are"...and we have to figure out where to go from here. Unquestionably, I am really thankful to our highly dedicated Core team for sacrificing their personal time and making all of the efforts that have led to substantial progress over the last few years for the immigration community. However,, that with a new government in place, we now have a truly unique window of opportunity to make some progress and the question before us is how do we maximize our potential to take advantage of this? The real beauty of my proposal is that we could leverage the enormous dedication of the core team and multiply it several fold, if we could build a strong donor base that provides us the funding required to engage effective lobbyists. Needless to say the more the funding, the stronger can be our lobbying.
but I also understand that most of these lobbying efforts are done in the back ground and its not good idea to share anything in these times. who knows, may be there is an anti-immigrant lurking around (ofcourse paying $$ to become Donor, become senior member whatever) to get inside information.
.....transparancy is good as long as it doesn't hurt the cause.
It is definitely not a good idea to broadcast confidential information on strategies/plans. However, what you are referring to is the merchanics of the process of sharing updates- there are several ways in which we could implement the update process so that information is only shared to a predefined "pool" and that "donors" are first vetted before being brought into the "pool", so to speak. The way IV has currently implemented this process, of course, is through the local chapters. However, their current process is subject to lack of consistency (depending very heavily on the availability of the local chapter coordinators) and more importantly, does not take advantage of the tool that really enables us to all come together i.e. the internet. It is a paradox that an organization founded on the net and is still subjecting itself to the constraints of "physical communication" via the local chapters. I thought they were taking a step in right direction with the creation of the "Donor Forum", however, for some reason, we still seem stuck in the previous mode of operation. We can find a middle ground here that would not compromise confidentiality or our goals - one alternative (certainly not the only one I am sure) is quite simply, email updates compiled by one person (for consistency and uniform direction) that go out a distribution group, where the "donors" on the distribution list, have been vetted by the local chapter coordinators. I know this takes work, but if the Core is looking for a person to pull together a Conference Call to compile this update and send it out, I would be glad to volunteer my services.
Still I've some open issues. If you look at the poll, there isnt a single person who voted NO. We should expect to see a healthy mix of Yes,No and Dont Care. But the way the poll has been put and partly the wording, partly the current IV environment, people are sceptical of putting their real thoughts publicly. This excercise is futile if you have minimal 'NO's --- hope you are getting my point here. The only thing you might end up with is x number of YES and hope to translate the YES into more dollar value for IV and there will be some YES who are already contributing monetarily.
You are correct dilbert_cal - not a single person has explicity voted "No". In reality though, everyone who has viewed this thread (1563 views when I last checked - even if you assume each person has checked this thread at least 10 times, that's about 156 individuals out of whom only about 35 have voted so far!) and not bothered to vote is essentially voting "No"! However, again as you point out, I am not really looking for the "No"s since these people have clearly decided they don't want to part with their money at this stage (not ascribing any reasons or motives here - just stating the facts). Instead, my focus is on coalescing a group around those who voted "Yes" since they, like me, agree that they would contribute more if they received more regular updates of what is going on. Our organization just needs a little more "organization" (pun, intended :p) to make it more effective! Again, just reality but that is also the usual natural evolution of most organizations that start out as pure grassroots organizations.
I really do believe there are substantial number of folks out there who can be engaged more effectively in this process and I invite the Core Leadership team to put more thought in figuring out how to achieve this - I hope you take my suggestion constructively!
Cheers
more...
makeup Bridesmaid Hairstyles Half Up
godbless
02-20 09:58 AM
How about the Insurance Policy offered by MetLife? They invest your money in Mutual Funds and provide you the insurance coverage as well. I bought 2 policies for 15 years, one for my self and another for my wife. Our monthly premium is $485(285 for me and 200 for my wife). The risk cover is half million dollars and its an investment plan on which the average return is between 14-18% pa. I don't know yet how good is going to come out.
girlfriend Half up half down | Wedding
akred
04-11 09:46 PM
^
hairstyles 2010 half up half down
WeShallOvercome
08-16 01:06 PM
How about not resigning 'officiallly', but taking another job?
Most of us work for consulting companies, if we stay with the sponsoring employer for 3-4 months, then go on leave(paid/unpaid), and then 'come back' and ask for work/project.... they might not have a project just ready to take you in. In that case they may ask you to resign or else they'll have to pay you (they can't keep you on bench anymore...) or they may fire you..
Are you any safer if the employer fires you?
OR something along these lines...
Most of us work for consulting companies, if we stay with the sponsoring employer for 3-4 months, then go on leave(paid/unpaid), and then 'come back' and ask for work/project.... they might not have a project just ready to take you in. In that case they may ask you to resign or else they'll have to pay you (they can't keep you on bench anymore...) or they may fire you..
Are you any safer if the employer fires you?
OR something along these lines...
chisinau
06-14 02:37 AM
My PD is september 2006, I140 approved, DS230 approved, 3 packet approwed or not ( I am not sure, accordig to the last reply from the attorney my case could be even in the consulate), Before the retro began my case used to be a subject for schedule "A"( nurse), now I am in EB3...
The question is - will I receive my appointment to the interview soon(next month), because all forms have been accepted already, or I have to wait for all cases with PD older then mine to pass before my case???
One more question.
I am not in the US. Should I try to go to the US, and then(after 2 months) apply for I485, before the retro will start again in september??? Is it necessary to have I485 approved in order to receive legal status or it just have to be filled and applied? Will I lose my place in the consular processing after applying for the adjastment of status?
I know , too much questions, sorry for that but I am realy confused, and badly need your help and advice!
Thanks, all replies are appreciated!
The question is - will I receive my appointment to the interview soon(next month), because all forms have been accepted already, or I have to wait for all cases with PD older then mine to pass before my case???
One more question.
I am not in the US. Should I try to go to the US, and then(after 2 months) apply for I485, before the retro will start again in september??? Is it necessary to have I485 approved in order to receive legal status or it just have to be filled and applied? Will I lose my place in the consular processing after applying for the adjastment of status?
I know , too much questions, sorry for that but I am realy confused, and badly need your help and advice!
Thanks, all replies are appreciated!
chanduv23
12-15 10:11 AM
Denied licenses, legal immigrants sue state Registry
Say status wrongly contested
By Yvonne Abraham, Globe Staff | December 15, 2006
Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles employees are routinely and unlawfully denying driver's licenses to immigrants who are here legally, according to a class-action law suit filed yesterday.
According to the suit, Registry workers asked the immigrants for proof of legal residency when they were not authorized to do so. The workers then denied licenses to the applicants, incorrectly concluding that the immigrants had not demonstrated they were in the United States legally, the suit alleges.
In all cases, the immigrants' lawyers said, the Registry workers were overstepping their legal authority and violating the immigrants' constitutional rights.
"They don't have the authority to enforce federal immigration law," said Sarah Wunsch, staff attorney for the ACLU of Massachusetts, who is representing the seven immigrants who brought the suit. "But they've taken it upon themselves to do it, and they're doing it wrong. It's not an isolated case here and there. This appears to be policy."
Wunsch said hundreds of other immigrants have similarly been denied licenses.
A spokeswoman for the Registry of Motor Vehicles declined to comment, saying Registry lawyers had not yet had a chance to review the lawsuit.
Under state policy, applicants for a driver's license must present proof of their identity by providing a valid Social Security number, which the Registry checks against a Social Security Administration database.
In order to obtain a valid Social Security number, an immigrant must be in the country legally. Applicants must also show proof of their age and address.
All of the plaintiffs presented valid Social Security numbers when they applied for licenses, Wunsch said. Even so, Registry workers rejected their applications.
In some of the cases, applicants were not given any reason why they were rejected. In the others, Registry employees improperly sought additional proof of the applicants' immigration status and then said the documents were not adequate.
Registry spokeswoman Amy Breton, speaking generally, said Registry employees do not enforce immigration laws.
But she added: "Certainly, we've had to become more familiar with immigration documents. We want to make sure we are issuing licenses to Massachusetts residents, because that is what the law calls for."
She said the Registry has been responsive to complaints that immigrants have been treated unfairly. On Wednesday night, the head of the agency, Registrar Anne L. Collins, met with about 300 immigrants and their advocates in Hyannis to hear their concerns about the license application process, she said.
In many cases, Breton said, immigrants who feel they have been unfairly denied a license can file an appeal, which costs $50.
Lawyers for the seven plaintiffs say their clients should not have to spend money to challenge what is clearly a discriminatory practice.
"The Registry seems to be asking immigrants to produce justification for their presence in the United States," said lead attorney Kenneth Berman of Nutter McClennen & Fish.
The lawyers said that the problems demonstrate the danger of having state employees who are not trained in immigration law taking on enforcement of that law.
Two immigrant advocacy groups are also plaintiffs in the suit, alleging that the Registry's discrimination against immigrants forces them to divert time and resources from other activities.
"This is extremely common," said Desmond FitzGerald, an immigration lawyer who represents four immigrants who were denied licenses in a separate case to be heard early next year. "We want the Registry to regulate the safety of our roads, not enforce immigration rules."
One of FitzGerald's clients, the wife of a prominent Spanish scientist who is in the United States on a visa reserved for persons of exceptional ability, was denied a license because Registry workers who asked for proof of her legal residency did not recognize her visa. After she sued the Registry, the agency settled the case, granting her a license.
One of the plaintiffs in the class action suit filed yesterday is an immigrant from Zimbabwe who has a pending application for asylum. The woman, a nurse, has work authorization and had already been granted a driver's license.
When she tried to renew that license this week, she produced her old license, her Social Security number, and proof of her car insurance coverage, which showed her address. Still, she was asked for her passport.
The woman, who fled political persecution in Zimbabwe, does not have a current, government-issued passport from that country. She showed the Registry employee a document showing that the US government had granted her permission to remain here. Her application was still denied, as was her daughter's application for a learner's permit.
"Given how dependent we all are on the right to drive an automobile, the denial of a license is causing real hardship to the people I represent," Berman said.
The issue of driver's licenses for immigrants has become highly charged over the past year, as the national debate on immigration has grown more fractious.
The question of issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants was a matter of fierce dispute during this year's gubernatorial race, in which Governor-elect Deval Patrick said he would consider giving licenses to those who are here illegally. He was pilloried for that suggestion by his opponent, Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, who with Governor Mitt Romney has taken an aggressive stance against illegal immigration.
Immigrants' advocates said they worry that the Republican administration's zeal is causing Registry employees to punish immigrants who had followed all the rules.
Earlier this year, I haad problems getting a driver's lisence in CT, the officer would not accept my h1b papers and would say it is fake. I wrote a strong complaint to DMV and they replied back to me that I must go back to DMV and go through the process again and if I have trouble again, I must report to DMV. I went next time and I got it.
Most times it is improper education that makes people do it. They keep hearing negative thhings about immigrants and they be advised by their bosses to strictly scrutinize immigrants, and they try to experiment their crack down on us. It is very unfortunate that such things are happening.
There seems to be an agenda to catch illegal immigrants. As Illegals who cross the border are getting busted through raids, those who violate visa regulations or overstay visas, or do not have proper work authorization come under strict scrutiny when they approach govt agencies. Unfortunately, it is us legal immigrants who are bearing the brunt because we also go through the same scrutinity. DMV people are not educated in immigration law ,so is the common public and it is this process that's hurting us a lot.
Say status wrongly contested
By Yvonne Abraham, Globe Staff | December 15, 2006
Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles employees are routinely and unlawfully denying driver's licenses to immigrants who are here legally, according to a class-action law suit filed yesterday.
According to the suit, Registry workers asked the immigrants for proof of legal residency when they were not authorized to do so. The workers then denied licenses to the applicants, incorrectly concluding that the immigrants had not demonstrated they were in the United States legally, the suit alleges.
In all cases, the immigrants' lawyers said, the Registry workers were overstepping their legal authority and violating the immigrants' constitutional rights.
"They don't have the authority to enforce federal immigration law," said Sarah Wunsch, staff attorney for the ACLU of Massachusetts, who is representing the seven immigrants who brought the suit. "But they've taken it upon themselves to do it, and they're doing it wrong. It's not an isolated case here and there. This appears to be policy."
Wunsch said hundreds of other immigrants have similarly been denied licenses.
A spokeswoman for the Registry of Motor Vehicles declined to comment, saying Registry lawyers had not yet had a chance to review the lawsuit.
Under state policy, applicants for a driver's license must present proof of their identity by providing a valid Social Security number, which the Registry checks against a Social Security Administration database.
In order to obtain a valid Social Security number, an immigrant must be in the country legally. Applicants must also show proof of their age and address.
All of the plaintiffs presented valid Social Security numbers when they applied for licenses, Wunsch said. Even so, Registry workers rejected their applications.
In some of the cases, applicants were not given any reason why they were rejected. In the others, Registry employees improperly sought additional proof of the applicants' immigration status and then said the documents were not adequate.
Registry spokeswoman Amy Breton, speaking generally, said Registry employees do not enforce immigration laws.
But she added: "Certainly, we've had to become more familiar with immigration documents. We want to make sure we are issuing licenses to Massachusetts residents, because that is what the law calls for."
She said the Registry has been responsive to complaints that immigrants have been treated unfairly. On Wednesday night, the head of the agency, Registrar Anne L. Collins, met with about 300 immigrants and their advocates in Hyannis to hear their concerns about the license application process, she said.
In many cases, Breton said, immigrants who feel they have been unfairly denied a license can file an appeal, which costs $50.
Lawyers for the seven plaintiffs say their clients should not have to spend money to challenge what is clearly a discriminatory practice.
"The Registry seems to be asking immigrants to produce justification for their presence in the United States," said lead attorney Kenneth Berman of Nutter McClennen & Fish.
The lawyers said that the problems demonstrate the danger of having state employees who are not trained in immigration law taking on enforcement of that law.
Two immigrant advocacy groups are also plaintiffs in the suit, alleging that the Registry's discrimination against immigrants forces them to divert time and resources from other activities.
"This is extremely common," said Desmond FitzGerald, an immigration lawyer who represents four immigrants who were denied licenses in a separate case to be heard early next year. "We want the Registry to regulate the safety of our roads, not enforce immigration rules."
One of FitzGerald's clients, the wife of a prominent Spanish scientist who is in the United States on a visa reserved for persons of exceptional ability, was denied a license because Registry workers who asked for proof of her legal residency did not recognize her visa. After she sued the Registry, the agency settled the case, granting her a license.
One of the plaintiffs in the class action suit filed yesterday is an immigrant from Zimbabwe who has a pending application for asylum. The woman, a nurse, has work authorization and had already been granted a driver's license.
When she tried to renew that license this week, she produced her old license, her Social Security number, and proof of her car insurance coverage, which showed her address. Still, she was asked for her passport.
The woman, who fled political persecution in Zimbabwe, does not have a current, government-issued passport from that country. She showed the Registry employee a document showing that the US government had granted her permission to remain here. Her application was still denied, as was her daughter's application for a learner's permit.
"Given how dependent we all are on the right to drive an automobile, the denial of a license is causing real hardship to the people I represent," Berman said.
The issue of driver's licenses for immigrants has become highly charged over the past year, as the national debate on immigration has grown more fractious.
The question of issuing driver's licenses to illegal immigrants was a matter of fierce dispute during this year's gubernatorial race, in which Governor-elect Deval Patrick said he would consider giving licenses to those who are here illegally. He was pilloried for that suggestion by his opponent, Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, who with Governor Mitt Romney has taken an aggressive stance against illegal immigration.
Immigrants' advocates said they worry that the Republican administration's zeal is causing Registry employees to punish immigrants who had followed all the rules.
Earlier this year, I haad problems getting a driver's lisence in CT, the officer would not accept my h1b papers and would say it is fake. I wrote a strong complaint to DMV and they replied back to me that I must go back to DMV and go through the process again and if I have trouble again, I must report to DMV. I went next time and I got it.
Most times it is improper education that makes people do it. They keep hearing negative thhings about immigrants and they be advised by their bosses to strictly scrutinize immigrants, and they try to experiment their crack down on us. It is very unfortunate that such things are happening.
There seems to be an agenda to catch illegal immigrants. As Illegals who cross the border are getting busted through raids, those who violate visa regulations or overstay visas, or do not have proper work authorization come under strict scrutiny when they approach govt agencies. Unfortunately, it is us legal immigrants who are bearing the brunt because we also go through the same scrutinity. DMV people are not educated in immigration law ,so is the common public and it is this process that's hurting us a lot.
No comments:
Post a Comment