chanduy9
07-03 12:50 PM
Order # FNM1314828
Guys do it..lets try our best.
Thanks,
Chandra.
Guys do it..lets try our best.
Thanks,
Chandra.
wallpaper it was Jennifer Aniston.
sunny1000
07-08 08:08 PM
The case should not have been accepted if the lady does not have constitutional rights. Lets see if they reject the case on this basis after listening to Tancredo.
The following link may throw some light on what non-citizens are entitled under the U.S constitution.
http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
------------------------------------------------------
explainer: Answers to your questions about the news.
Do Noncitizens Have Constitutional Rights?
Chris Suellentrop
Posted Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001, at 5:47 PM ET
Attorney General John Ashcroft wants the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn't this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
In 1952's Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to expel noncitizens who were former Communists. "In recognizing this power and this responsibility of Congress, one does not in the remotest degree align oneself with fears unworthy of the American spirit or with hostility to the bracing air of the free spirit," Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote in his concurrence. "One merely recognizes that the place to resist unwise or cruel legislation touching aliens is the Congress, not this Court."
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt").
On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.
Next question?
Explainer thanks Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association; immigration lawyer David Leopold; Russ Bergeron of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; this American Civil Liberties Union report; and Dan Nelson of the Department of Justice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The following link may throw some light on what non-citizens are entitled under the U.S constitution.
http://www.slate.com/id/1008367/
------------------------------------------------------
explainer: Answers to your questions about the news.
Do Noncitizens Have Constitutional Rights?
Chris Suellentrop
Posted Thursday, Sept. 27, 2001, at 5:47 PM ET
Attorney General John Ashcroft wants the power to lock up immigrants suspected of terrorism and hold them indefinitely. Wouldn't this violate the Constitution?
Not necessarily. True, the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, even illegal immigrants. So an immigrant, legal or illegal, prosecuted under the criminal code has the right to due process, a speedy and public trial, and other rights protected by the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. This fact sheet from the National Lawyers Guild outlines a host of rights afforded to immigrants and citizens alike. (There are a few rights reserved for citizens. Among them are the right to vote, the right to hold most federal jobs, and the right to run for political office.)
But immigration proceedings are matters of administrative law, not criminal law. (As a result, the consequence of violating your immigration status is not jail but deportation.) And Congress has nearly full authority to regulate immigration without interference from the courts. Because immigration is considered a matter of national security and foreign policy, the Supreme Court has long held that immigration law is largely immune from judicial review. Congress can make rules for immigrants that would be unacceptable if applied to citizens.
In 1952's Harisiades v. Shaughnessy, the Supreme Court upheld the right of Congress to expel noncitizens who were former Communists. "In recognizing this power and this responsibility of Congress, one does not in the remotest degree align oneself with fears unworthy of the American spirit or with hostility to the bracing air of the free spirit," Justice Felix Frankfurter wrote in his concurrence. "One merely recognizes that the place to resist unwise or cruel legislation touching aliens is the Congress, not this Court."
Still, immigrants facing deportation do have some rights. Most are entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge, representation by a lawyer (but not one that's paid for by the government), and interpretation for non-English-speakers. The government must provide "clear and convincing" evidence to deport someone (a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt").
On the other hand, some immigrants who are suspected terrorists may not be allowed to confront the evidence against them. In 1996, Congress established the Alien Terrorist Removal Court, a secret tribunal that can examine classified evidence. (Interestingly, Congress mandated in the same law that an immigrant tried by the terrorist court would have the right to counsel at government expense.) But the Alien Terrorist Removal Court has never been used, and a Department of Justice spokesman said he isn't aware of any plans to use the terrorist court any time soon.
Next question?
Explainer thanks Jeanne Butterfield, executive director of the American Immigration Lawyers Association; immigration lawyer David Leopold; Russ Bergeron of the Immigration and Naturalization Service; this American Civil Liberties Union report; and Dan Nelson of the Department of Justice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
rssb
09-23 09:10 PM
dummgelauft porting is happening and you may be correct about non IT companies and big IT companies being unwilling to port.
I can recollect 7 people immediately of which 1 is a genuine EB2 , 1 was a genuine Eb3 (2003) and remaining 3 have done labor substitution in Eb3 , 2 in Eb2 with dates ranging from 2002-2004 during the July Fiasco. 2 Eb2 people already got their GC's.
The other 3 people now have at least 3 years exp from 2007 --> 2010. Making them eligible for Eb2 ( with a variety of education + work exp combinations).
Lucky people are the ones, who could manage to get labor substitution during June-July 2007, got EAD's within 6 months, had the flexibility these 3 years and are now capable of porting to Eb2.
In the end it boils down to how resourceful one is and adapts to the situation and able to make things better for themselves. Same goes for L1 -> EB1 route. Porting by a person who has a substitute labor of 2002 ( in July 2007) will also effect a genuine EB3 application from 2006, as they are moving ahead even in the Eb3 queue.
Porting is here to stay , the only hope for people is to combine efforts and try to follow up on the various proposals ( STEM Exemption, visa recapture, counting dependents in family quota, and provide relief to people by at least letting them file 485's without waiting for dates to become current )
I can recollect 7 people immediately of which 1 is a genuine EB2 , 1 was a genuine Eb3 (2003) and remaining 3 have done labor substitution in Eb3 , 2 in Eb2 with dates ranging from 2002-2004 during the July Fiasco. 2 Eb2 people already got their GC's.
The other 3 people now have at least 3 years exp from 2007 --> 2010. Making them eligible for Eb2 ( with a variety of education + work exp combinations).
Lucky people are the ones, who could manage to get labor substitution during June-July 2007, got EAD's within 6 months, had the flexibility these 3 years and are now capable of porting to Eb2.
In the end it boils down to how resourceful one is and adapts to the situation and able to make things better for themselves. Same goes for L1 -> EB1 route. Porting by a person who has a substitute labor of 2002 ( in July 2007) will also effect a genuine EB3 application from 2006, as they are moving ahead even in the Eb3 queue.
Porting is here to stay , the only hope for people is to combine efforts and try to follow up on the various proposals ( STEM Exemption, visa recapture, counting dependents in family quota, and provide relief to people by at least letting them file 485's without waiting for dates to become current )
2011 Jennifer Aniston Looks HOT At
sbabunle
05-03 05:12 PM
Does SKILL or any other upcoming Bill would annul AC-21 rules? ( if enacted into law)
thanks
babu.
thanks
babu.
more...
vinabath
03-25 04:35 PM
Thats not true. My PD is March 2005. When my PD comes, I have to apply for EAD whereas others will get GC. Oh such a screwed up system.
It is true. I will take a bet. If your PD does not go to March 2005 by Sep 2009, I will give you $100. It it goes give me $100:D
It is true. I will take a bet. If your PD does not go to March 2005 by Sep 2009, I will give you $100. It it goes give me $100:D
smohan
07-20 03:51 AM
hello anzerraja
By putting date coloumn in the Excel sheet, this sheet will provide a reader the trend in the pledge making. Most of the techies are always curious...sniff-sniff type you know.
thanks
Thanks Mohan !!!
By putting date coloumn in the Excel sheet, this sheet will provide a reader the trend in the pledge making. Most of the techies are always curious...sniff-sniff type you know.
thanks
Thanks Mohan !!!
more...
sankap
07-09 10:00 PM
Chandu,
1. "W2 Self-employed" is an oxymoron. Self-employed option is possible through 1099. Nowhere on the Yates memo (or any other USCIS resource) does it say that you have to be on a "permanent" job. You sure can be self-employed (i.e., not on a W2) with AC21 provision, as the Yates memo clearly says.
[Now, you can be self-employed with unlimited liability. If you want to reduce your liability, you can open an LLC, which gives you the freedom of filing your income taxes either as a "Sole Proprietor," a "C-Corp," or an "S-Corp." (Please see IRS website for tax implications, e.g., http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=154770,00.html)]
Also, no employer can give you an EVL saying "permanent" job, nor are you required by USCIS to mention that, nor your salary (unless asked for), nor the date when your job ends. Therefore, your statement that "As long as your self employed as drawing w2 salary and doing the same duties - it is permanent employment" is wrong for two reasons. One, you can't be on W2 AND self-employed for the same job (you can, though, open a part-time business on EAD with same/similar responsibility as your labor cert, and file that income as a "Self-employed," or as a "C-Corp," or as an "S-Corp"). Two, your definition/interpretation of "permanent job" is wrong: No job in this country can be permanent (legally speaking), and I haven't seen *any* job offer letter saying it would be a "permanent" job. Also, being on W2 doesn't imply or guarantee that you're on a "permanent job:" Jobs in most states are "at will."
2. You're *not* required by USCIS to notify them of your job change under AC21 provision. Nor is there anything called "filing AC21."
I agree with you that these two topics need discussion and closure, following which you may want to change your wiki article on "How to File AC21."
sankap - I think these folks are asking you to be cautious. AC21 RFEs request if the prospects of employment.
the "permanant" job means "the job is always there" as per projection.
even if your employer has consulting business - as long as you are employed with this employer under w2 "yours" is a "permanant job" at that time projected - things MAY change later.
The same works with self - employment. As long as your self employed as drawing w2 salary and doing the same duties - it is permanant employment.
So lets not get confused here. If you project that your current job is ONLY temporary in nature then that does not qualify as a permanant job.
Being self employed and doing consulting work means you r constantly doing projects under your own corp which is perm job.
Lets discuss this in detail - i will get back to this as my kid is not allowing me to type now
1. "W2 Self-employed" is an oxymoron. Self-employed option is possible through 1099. Nowhere on the Yates memo (or any other USCIS resource) does it say that you have to be on a "permanent" job. You sure can be self-employed (i.e., not on a W2) with AC21 provision, as the Yates memo clearly says.
[Now, you can be self-employed with unlimited liability. If you want to reduce your liability, you can open an LLC, which gives you the freedom of filing your income taxes either as a "Sole Proprietor," a "C-Corp," or an "S-Corp." (Please see IRS website for tax implications, e.g., http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=154770,00.html)]
Also, no employer can give you an EVL saying "permanent" job, nor are you required by USCIS to mention that, nor your salary (unless asked for), nor the date when your job ends. Therefore, your statement that "As long as your self employed as drawing w2 salary and doing the same duties - it is permanent employment" is wrong for two reasons. One, you can't be on W2 AND self-employed for the same job (you can, though, open a part-time business on EAD with same/similar responsibility as your labor cert, and file that income as a "Self-employed," or as a "C-Corp," or as an "S-Corp"). Two, your definition/interpretation of "permanent job" is wrong: No job in this country can be permanent (legally speaking), and I haven't seen *any* job offer letter saying it would be a "permanent" job. Also, being on W2 doesn't imply or guarantee that you're on a "permanent job:" Jobs in most states are "at will."
2. You're *not* required by USCIS to notify them of your job change under AC21 provision. Nor is there anything called "filing AC21."
I agree with you that these two topics need discussion and closure, following which you may want to change your wiki article on "How to File AC21."
sankap - I think these folks are asking you to be cautious. AC21 RFEs request if the prospects of employment.
the "permanant" job means "the job is always there" as per projection.
even if your employer has consulting business - as long as you are employed with this employer under w2 "yours" is a "permanant job" at that time projected - things MAY change later.
The same works with self - employment. As long as your self employed as drawing w2 salary and doing the same duties - it is permanant employment.
So lets not get confused here. If you project that your current job is ONLY temporary in nature then that does not qualify as a permanant job.
Being self employed and doing consulting work means you r constantly doing projects under your own corp which is perm job.
Lets discuss this in detail - i will get back to this as my kid is not allowing me to type now
2010 Jennifer Aniston secretly
Leo07
11-21 09:42 AM
Mehul,
All the suggestions/information in these forums is from peoples personal experiences. Yours is a very unfortunate situation, please rely only on a first-hand information from an attorney.
God will help you. Have Faith.
God Bless you!
All the suggestions/information in these forums is from peoples personal experiences. Yours is a very unfortunate situation, please rely only on a first-hand information from an attorney.
God will help you. Have Faith.
God Bless you!
more...
rdehar
10-09 09:42 AM
gjoe: "It would be more effective atleast" ...
Agreed. The current system makes old filer feel very insecure.
If you are in a queue for a long time, and then when your turn arrives, USCIS announces it is a "free for all" ...
Agreed. The current system makes old filer feel very insecure.
If you are in a queue for a long time, and then when your turn arrives, USCIS announces it is a "free for all" ...
hair him the Jennifer Aniston.
sayonara
08-22 12:58 PM
I'm going to call Texas Tomorrow ! If i call USCIS they never transfers to TSC or NSC easily.
Anyone got TSC direct number?
Anyone got TSC direct number?
more...
buddyinsd
08-25 05:06 PM
What about ur case? Is that assigned to an officer as well?
Any idea how long it takes for a decision once it has been assigned to an officer?
My wife's case was assigned to an officer on Aug 11th.
Any idea how long it takes for a decision once it has been assigned to an officer?
My wife's case was assigned to an officer on Aug 11th.
hot Jennifer Aniston or Jennifer
chmur
07-26 01:05 PM
If I am not wrong, it is more to do with a rule interpretation change by USCIS.
Insuppose the most feasible solution for the ones that are really bothered and have a chance is to do a EB2 porting. EB3 is like the slow lane. EB2 also used to be like that but benefited from the change in spillover.
EB3 best chance is to have the Visa Recapture which is already being pursued or have some other legislative fix.
----
Not a lawyer.
EB3 May 2006
Contributed $100
EB3-I 's best chance in the current context , in the order of faster results,
1. Port to EB2 , If possible
2. Lobby to change spill over distribution. USCIS has been inconsistent over the years. So we need to lobby hard and impress upon them that this year distribution algorithm is unfair .who knows it can change again next year , this time a more balanced one ..
3. Recapture effort: This is a big one and we need to support carry out the tasks assigned by IV and other biggies .
IMO, No genuinely concerned fellow mate should advise EB3-I's to support only recapture effort.
Insuppose the most feasible solution for the ones that are really bothered and have a chance is to do a EB2 porting. EB3 is like the slow lane. EB2 also used to be like that but benefited from the change in spillover.
EB3 best chance is to have the Visa Recapture which is already being pursued or have some other legislative fix.
----
Not a lawyer.
EB3 May 2006
Contributed $100
EB3-I 's best chance in the current context , in the order of faster results,
1. Port to EB2 , If possible
2. Lobby to change spill over distribution. USCIS has been inconsistent over the years. So we need to lobby hard and impress upon them that this year distribution algorithm is unfair .who knows it can change again next year , this time a more balanced one ..
3. Recapture effort: This is a big one and we need to support carry out the tasks assigned by IV and other biggies .
IMO, No genuinely concerned fellow mate should advise EB3-I's to support only recapture effort.
more...
house Jennifer Aniston
pappu
03-10 11:36 PM
This will really help. Simple things like posting on various web site forums about IV will be great
Least someone can do. we had a thread with this campaign. Could someone activate it again and encourage everyone to participate. We need to grow the community pretty fast.
Least someone can do. we had a thread with this campaign. Could someone activate it again and encourage everyone to participate. We need to grow the community pretty fast.
tattoo Jennifer Aniston #39;s
h1techSlave
03-10 05:56 PM
"There goes my people, I must follow them."
I may sound some what negative here but I am not trying to diminish the IV plat form for all the folks here.Yes, it is just "about us" only... what "IV core" did so far is vague....flower campaign and this current FOIA requests started randomly by the individuals thinking collectively.... I don't think it is started by IV core team as an "ACTION" item in the first place.
I may sound some what negative here but I am not trying to diminish the IV plat form for all the folks here.Yes, it is just "about us" only... what "IV core" did so far is vague....flower campaign and this current FOIA requests started randomly by the individuals thinking collectively.... I don't think it is started by IV core team as an "ACTION" item in the first place.
more...
pictures the Jennifer Aniston of
ashwaghoshk
11-17 03:07 PM
Are we just supposed to enter our infomation on the form? or name, email etc? how does it go to our local congress men?
dresses NEXT WEEK: The winter box
franklin
07-09 11:46 PM
Please do find if U need permission from local law enforcement before holding the protest.
Yes, we have already initiated this process.
Vsach and all those interested in coming or organizing. The effort is being led by the Northern California State Chapter - please join up for more details (in sig)
Yes, we have already initiated this process.
Vsach and all those interested in coming or organizing. The effort is being led by the Northern California State Chapter - please join up for more details (in sig)
more...
makeup Leggy Jennifer Aniston
Jimi_Hendrix
12-11 10:43 PM
If you know what I mean.
girlfriend Famous Jennifer Aniston hair
corba
02-24 04:29 PM
Donated:$50
Receipt No: 2297-8392-3360-5210
Receipt No: 2297-8392-3360-5210
hairstyles Talking about Jennifer Aniston
tonyHK12
02-26 01:42 PM
thanks hopefullegalimmigrant, n_2006, kunjirs for your contribution.
I haven't added the amount from hopefullegalimmigrant now (missing). Also recurring donations won't be added to this total
Total Contributions............$9,725.00
Amount to be raised........$40,275.00
.
I haven't added the amount from hopefullegalimmigrant now (missing). Also recurring donations won't be added to this total
Total Contributions............$9,725.00
Amount to be raised........$40,275.00
.
xyz_123
07-21 04:50 PM
I work for a Fortune 100 company and they have recently denied my request to convert my application to EB2 because its very hard to complete the recruitment and also they are afraid of an audit.
If there are options outside I wouldn't even think for a second, but there aren't that many employers willing to deal with the green card mess.
If there are options outside I wouldn't even think for a second, but there aren't that many employers willing to deal with the green card mess.
DianaSteve
03-10 12:27 AM
I believe when you get a promotion a new H1B has to be filed and that is hurdle in many aspects. Or what if the company is small and there is nothing to aspire for... like me?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar