如果INSPECTIION查出问题，# Living
o*n
1 楼
08/21/2014: Clarification of Ongoing Consideration of Treament of Immediate
Relatives of Principal Beneficiary of Immigrant Petitions in Immigrant Visa
Counts
The current law involves Section 203(d) of 8 U.S.C, Immigration & Naturality
Act which provides that "A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A),
(B), (C), or (E)....shall,...be entitled to the same status, and the same
order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if
accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent." As readers can see
it, the statute does not specifically require that their immigrant visa
numbers should be taken out from the numerical limit of various immigrant
petitions. It is the INS and USCIS that have restrictively interpreted this
statutory section to require to take out such visa numbers from various
immigrant petitions annual national numerical limit. Thus whether or not the
spouses and children must take out immigrant visa numbers from the annual
quota remains a matter of interpretation. Should the President Obama
interprete it different way and revises the rules that will provide that
they do not take out from the annual national numerical limitation, it can
prevail unless such executive action is challenged in the federal courts,
eventually before the U.S. Supreme Court, that his interpretation is wrong.
When we reported this issue, we focused on the employment-based immigration
quota system without mentioning other immigrant petitions, such as family-
based immigrant petitions, diversity visa immigrant visa petitions, etc. etc
. because we were discussing employment-based immigration system. However,
the current statute encompasses all types of immigrant petitions and should
the President exercise his executive power without limiting it to the
employment-based visa petitions, it can cover any types of petitions and
family members, which allegedly amount to 800,000. However, whether or not
the President would go that far remains a question at this time. We will see
whether he will indeed include this new interpretation in the forthcoming
executive action and if yes, how far.
Relatives of Principal Beneficiary of Immigrant Petitions in Immigrant Visa
Counts
The current law involves Section 203(d) of 8 U.S.C, Immigration & Naturality
Act which provides that "A spouse or child as defined in subparagraph (A),
(B), (C), or (E)....shall,...be entitled to the same status, and the same
order of consideration provided in the respective subsection, if
accompanying or following to join, the spouse or parent." As readers can see
it, the statute does not specifically require that their immigrant visa
numbers should be taken out from the numerical limit of various immigrant
petitions. It is the INS and USCIS that have restrictively interpreted this
statutory section to require to take out such visa numbers from various
immigrant petitions annual national numerical limit. Thus whether or not the
spouses and children must take out immigrant visa numbers from the annual
quota remains a matter of interpretation. Should the President Obama
interprete it different way and revises the rules that will provide that
they do not take out from the annual national numerical limitation, it can
prevail unless such executive action is challenged in the federal courts,
eventually before the U.S. Supreme Court, that his interpretation is wrong.
When we reported this issue, we focused on the employment-based immigration
quota system without mentioning other immigrant petitions, such as family-
based immigrant petitions, diversity visa immigrant visa petitions, etc. etc
. because we were discussing employment-based immigration system. However,
the current statute encompasses all types of immigrant petitions and should
the President exercise his executive power without limiting it to the
employment-based visa petitions, it can cover any types of petitions and
family members, which allegedly amount to 800,000. However, whether or not
the President would go that far remains a question at this time. We will see
whether he will indeed include this new interpretation in the forthcoming
executive action and if yes, how far.
