Beginning this September 2024, USCIS will start automatically extending the validity of lawful permanent resident cards to 36 months for permanent residents who file the Form I-90 to renew their expiring green card. Previously, a 24-month automatic extension was applied. Individuals taking advantage of this 36-month automatic extension will need to show their expired green card in addition to the Form I-90 receipt notice to take advantage of the extension for employment authorization and international travel purposes.
U.S. Department of State Announces Exhaustion of EB-2 Visas for FY 2024
On Monday, the U.S. Department of State made a significant announcement: all available Employment-Based Second Preference (EB-2) visas for fiscal year 2024 have been issued. This marks an important update in the annual visa allocation process and will impact employers and workers seeking to utilize this immigration pathway.
The EB-2 visa is designed for foreign professionals with advanced degrees or individuals with exceptional abilities. However, the number of these visas issued each year is limited by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which sets a cap at 28.6% of the worldwide employment-based visa limit. For the 2024 fiscal year, the cap has already been met, meaning U.S. embassies and consulates will not issue any more EB-2 visas until the next fiscal year begins on October 1, 2024.
For U.S. employers, this development temporarily halts the ability to permanently hire foreign talent through the EB-2 program. Foreign workers aiming to secure EB-2 visas will need to wait until the new fiscal year to either apply or continue their application process.
This news follows last month’s announcement from the State Department that all visas in the Employment-Based Third Preference (EB-3), Other Workers (EW), and Employment-Based Fifth Preference (EB-5) categories had also been fully issued for FY 2024. As the new fiscal year approaches, both employers and visa applicants will be looking forward to fresh opportunities in 2025.
District Court Stay on Parole in Place Applications is Extended Further
On August 26, 2024, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in Texas v. Department of Homeland Security, administratively stayed the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), from granting parole-in-place (PIP) under the Biden Administration’s Keeping Families Together program for another 14 days. In the meantime, USCIS can continue to accept and review PIP applications but cannot grant parole.
To comply with the district court’s administrative stay, USCIS will:
- Not grant any pending parole in place requests under Keeping Families Together.
- Continue to accept filings of the Application for Parole in Place for Certain Noncitizen Spouses and Stepchildren of U.S. Citizens.
- Continue to schedule biometric appointments and capture biometrics at Application Support Centers (ASCs).
The program, announced by the Biden Administration on June 18, 2024 and officially implemented on August 19, 2024, is a process for certain noncitizen spouses and noncitizen stepchildren of U.S. citizens to request parole-in-place under existing statutory authority. If granted parole, and if otherwise eligible, these noncitizens may apply for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident without having to leave the United States and be processed by a U.S. consulate overseas. The district court’s administrative stay order does not affect any applications that were approved before the administrative stay order was issued at 6:46 p.m. Eastern Time on August 26, 2024.
If you have questions about the Keeping Families Together program, please schedule a consult with a CYA attorney today!
USCIS Updates Policy Manual Regarding Children’s Acquisition of Citizenship
In 2017 the US Supreme Court heard the case of Sessions v. Morales-Santana. This case dealt with the issue of gender-based discrimination in the context of U.S. citizenship law. The case addressed whether the Immigration and Nationality Act’s (INA) provisions for acquiring U.S. citizenship at birth violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
The specific question was whether the INA’s differing requirements for a U.S. citizen parent to transmit citizenship to a child born abroad based on the parent’s gender were unconstitutional. Under the law, if a U.S. citizen father had a child abroad, the father had to meet a higher residency requirement than a U.S. citizen mother in order for the child to automatically acquire U.S. citizenship.
In Morales-Santana, the Supreme Court found that the gender-based disparity in these requirements was unconstitutional and did violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution. The Court ruled that the law must provide equal treatment for both fathers and mothers in terms of the residency requirements necessary for a child born abroad to acquire U.S. citizenship. The decision required the government to apply the same residency requirements to both mothers and fathers, thus aligning with principles of gender equality under the Constitution.
In its newly released guidance and pursuant to the decision in Morales-Santana, USCIS clarifies how and when children may obtain US citizenship if they were born abroad through their US citizen parent or parents. Want to know more? Schedule a consultation with a CYA attorney!