Author: Breanne Johnson

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.

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.

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!

In the heart of the nation’s political arena, immigration policies are once again taking center stage, casting a spotlight on the fate of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. With uncertainty looming, senators convened for a hearing today to address what the Senate Judiciary Committee deems an urgent need to protect immigrant youth.

Senator Dick Durbin (IL) chairing the Judiciary Committee, led the discussion by underscoring the invaluable contributions of Dreamers and DACA recipients. However, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the committee’s ranking member, struck a different chord in response. Graham emphasized that his current focus lies in addressing what he perceives as the dire state of the border and U.S. immigration policies, expressing reservations about prioritizing the resolution of DACA.

Graham’s stance on the issue suggests a shift from the bipartisan efforts of just a year ago, when both senators introduced the Dream Act of 2023, aiming to grant Dreamers lawful permanent residence. This change underscores the increasingly polarized nature of immigration politics, particularly in the lead-up to the November presidential election.

The DACA program, initiated in 2012 through executive action by former President Barack Obama, has provided a sense of security to over 800,000 young adults brought to the U.S. as children, who lack legal immigration status. However, the program has faced persistent challenges, including attempts by former President Donald Trump to dismantle it. Ongoing lawsuits challenging DACA, primarily led by Republican-led states, have left approximately 400,000 eligible individuals in limbo since a federal judge halted new registrations in 2021.

Despite these hurdles, proponents of DACA emphasize its effectiveness in integrating immigrants into American society. Since its inception, DACA recipients have significantly bolstered the economy, contributing $108 billion in wages and paying a combined $33 billion in taxes, as reported by FWD.us, a bipartisan group advocating for immigration reform.

The DACA debate encapsulates broader tensions within the immigration landscape, reflecting divergent viewpoints on border security, immigration policy, and the rights of undocumented immigrants. As political rhetoric intensifies, the fate of immigrant youth remains uncertain, awaiting decisive action from policymakers grappling with the complexities of the issue.

The H-1B cap lottery process has been conducted and completed for this fiscal year. Given the new H-1B regulation and registration process that was applied to this years’ lottery, no one really knew what to expect as far as what the odds of winning would be and how the process would go. This week USCIS finally released the lottery data which tells us:

• 114,017 beneficiaries were selected in the initial lottery this year.
• There was a decrease in the total number of registrations submitted as compared to last year, including a decrease in the number of beneficiaries with multiple registrations submitted on their behalf.
• This year there were ~442,000 beneficiaries who applied for the H-1B lottery whereas last year the number was ~446,000. However, the number of eligible registrations was down by 38.6% this year as compared to last year.
• Beneficiaries with multiple H-1B registrations submitted on their behalf decreased significantly – this year there were ~47,000 eligible registrations for beneficiaries with multiple registrations compared to more than 408,000 last year. That’s an 88% decrease!

This data tells us that while USCIS’s new regulations have improved the H-1B lottery process and made the system more fair, the H-1B system still falls short of offering the number of temporary nonimmigrant work visas that are needed by U.S. employers to cover demand.

USCIS announced last week that the Form I-693 Report of Immigration Medical Examination and Vaccination Record will no longer expire and can be used indefinitely so long as it was properly competed and signed by a U.S. civil surgeon on or after November 1, 2023. Woo!

Getting the medical exam completed can be expensive and time-consuming. Previously, long processing timelines resulted in applicants for lawful permanent residence needing to re-do their medical exams before their green card could be issued. Now, thanks to updates to public health electronic notification and recommendations from the CDC, USCIS has determined that a Form I-693’s evidentiary value should no longer be limited to a certain period if it is properly completed and was signed by a civil surgeon on or after Nov. 1, 2023. Of course, USCIS officers always have discretion to request more evidence or a new or updated Form I-693 if they have reason to believe the applicant’s medical condition has changed, that the Form I-693 submitted does not accurately reflect the applicant’s medical condition, or the applicant may be inadmissible on other health-related grounds.

If an applicant’s immigration medical examination was completed before Nov. 1, 2023, the prior policy still applies and the medical exam results will be valid for two years from the date of the civil surgeon’s signature.

The I-693 is filed when someone applies to get lawful permanent residence in the United States as a way of showing that they are not subject to any of the medical grounds of inadmissibility. Four general medical conditions can arise to make someone ineligible for permanent residence in the U.S. based on medical grounds. Those include:

1. Drug abuse or addition;
2. Failure to show proof of required vaccinations;
3. A communicable disease of public health significance; and/or
4. A physical or mental disorder with associated harmful behavior.

Public health concerns have been reflected in U.S. immigration law since the Immigration Act of 1882. Among other concerns, “persons suffering from a loathsome or a dangerous contagious disease” were not allowed to enter the United States. In 1990, Congress narrowed health-related grounds of inadmissibility to include only noncitizens with communicable diseases, physical or mental disorders with associated harmful behavior, or those with drug abuse or addiction problems. As of 1996, Congress began to require that all immigrant visa and adjustment of status applicants establish that they have been vaccinated against certain vaccine-preventable diseases.

If you’re looking to become a lawful permanent resident in the U.S. and have questions about health-related grounds of inadmissibility, reach out for a consultation.

It has been a whirlwind of a first quarter for USCIS and immigration attorneys across the country. In addition to USCIS announcing the conclusion of the H-1B Cap Lottery selection process yesterday, it was also the first day that USCIS’s new fee rule went into effect. Additionally, it was the first day that new versions of some of the most common immigration forms such as the I-129 and I-140 took effect. For some of these forms there is no grace period to accept prior editions of the forms, while for others prior editions will be accepted through June 3, 2024. The filing location for many immigration applications and petitions has also changed. CYA attorneys and staff are closing following all these updates and moving pieces. Never a dull moment trying to stay on top of the many substantive and procedural changes in the world of immigration! If you have questions about these or other changes, please reach out to your attorney or schedule a consultation with us.

If you thought USCIS was catching up with the 21^st century, think again! USCIS recently issued updated guidance regarding the signature requirement for the USCIS fillable version of the Form I-9. Even though the Form I-9 is an electronic fillable form, USCIS has clarified that employers/employees must still print and manually sign the form rather than typing or electronically signing signatures. Thus, employers and employees using the fillable version of the Form I-9 may electronically type answers directly into the form, except for the signature blocks. Any I-9s that have been completed with an electronic signature are noncompliant and need to be corrected. For more info, see this link.

The Senate is hurrying to pass a set of six government funding bills before the shutdown deadline looms at the end of Friday March 8th. While there’s confidence that a shutdown won’t occur, securing unanimous agreement among all 100 senators on a voting schedule is still crucial. Once the Senate greenlights the funding bills, they’ll head to President Joe Biden for his signature, after having been approved by the House on Wednesday. Lawmakers are grappling with two impending shutdown deadlines, one on Friday March 8th and another on March 22nd.

If government agencies close for budgetary reasons, all but “essential” personnel are furloughed and are not allowed to work. Below is a brief summary of how U.S. immigration agencies have operated during prior shutdowns.

• U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS): Nearly three in four DHS employees – more than 185,000 people – would be required to continue working through a shutdown, without receiving a paycheck. Those working without pay include law enforcement officers, analysts, investigators, and disaster response officials conducting work such as border security and deportation and removal operations. DHS provided the following information regarding what would happen during a government shutdown.
• U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS): USCIS is a fee-funded agency so if the government shuts down, USCIS typically continues to operate per normal with the exception of any programs that receive appropriated funds such as the E-Verify program.
• U.S. Department of State (DOS): Visa and passport operations are fee-funded and thus are not normally impacted by a shutdown. However, consular operations can be impacted if there are insufficient fees to support operations at a particular post. In this case, posts will generally only handle diplomatic visas and emergencies.
• U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP): CBP personnel are considered “essential.” Ports of entry will be open, and processing of passengers will continue; however, processing of applications filed at the border may be impacted.
• Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE): ICE enforcement and removal operations continue during a shutdown, although ICE attorneys generally focus on the detained docket. The ICE Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) offices are unaffected since SEVP is funded by fees.
• Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR): Immigration court cases on the detained docket will proceed during a lapse in congressional appropriations while non-detained docket cases will be reset for a later date when funding resumes.
• U.S. Department of Labor (DOL): The DOL would stop processing all applications in the event of a government shutdown, and personnel would not be available to respond to e-mail or other inquiries. Web-based systems, such as FLAG and PERM, would be inaccessible, and BALCA dockets will be placed on hold.

This week Senate negotiators proposed a bipartisan deal to address the situation at the U.S. – Mexico border. However, on Wednesday, the Senate encountered a roadblock as the bipartisan border and national security bill failed to move forward.

The vote margin was razor-thin, with 49 senators in favor and 50 opposed; 45 Democrats and four Republicans supported advancing the bill, falling short of the required 60 votes to initiate debate. The majority of the GOP caucus opposed the bill’s advancement, arguing that it inadequately addressed the escalating crisis at the US-Mexico border, where unauthorized crossings have surged to record levels. Additionally, five members of the Democratic caucus voted against the bill due to concerns over the severity of proposed border security measures and the allocation of funds for Israel’s military amidst ongoing conflicts, notably in Gaza. The proposed $118 billion bill included provisions granting the president new authority to close the border during periods of heightened crossings and expediting the asylum review process, potentially leading to expedited deportations. It also allocated $60 billion in military aid for Ukraine, $14 billion in security assistance for Israel, and $10 billion in humanitarian aid for civilians affected by conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, and the West Bank.