Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 341 posts

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#331

Post by PaulAJ »

jexah wrote: post #309
fredophile wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been plenty of news articles in the last two days about the current administration forming a task force to remove citizenship from naturalized citizens that they believe lied on their applications. That's citizens, not just permanent residents. The immigration process is long and complicated. It would be easy to make small mistakes here and there. Technically, some of those mistakes could get you deported.

> remove citizenship from naturalized citizens that they believe lied on their applications If the individual was given citizenship on the basis of those lies, then it makes total sense to revoke citizenship. That would be like hiring a developer who says he is an amazing programmer who can solve any problem. Turns out after he got the job, not only is he terrible at programming, but he's also a liar. So you fire him…

On the other hand, what if you say, for instance, that you got your degree in '93, but actually it was '92? The trouble with the law is that it doesn't distinguish between whoppers, fibs and clerical errors. They are all falsehoods, and all are grounds for deportation if the government decides it wants you out of the country.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#332

Post by Bahamut »

propman wrote: post #73
forapurpose wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you share more details with those of us who are unfamiliar with the issue? People from India have a multi-decade wait to work in the US? That sounds horrible. A new US President may be more interested in immigration. AFAIK the US public largely supports it still, as do the powerful (businesses). It's mostly the nationalists who object.

I agree but missing some info. Republicans in Congress are actually more willing t fix this and bipartisan bills that will for sure pass the House with a super majority have been introduced but not in the Senate. The Democrats don’t want to pass anything without passing DACA because they get no political points and The Trump Administrarion wants some other types of immmigration cut before passing this (giving diversi…

It doesn't sound like the Republicans are more willing to fix this based on that article - the bill is held up at the House Judiciary Committee, which is controlled by the Republicans.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#333

Post by bmelton »

dragonwriter wrote: post #317
bmelton wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> for the first time since this was done during the second Red Scare The Obama administration also sought out citizens for potential denaturalization when it was revealed that some of the fingerprint records they were naturalized under may have been faulty, or incorrectly held. https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/19/politics/us-citizens-deported...

The article you cite does not say the Obama Administration actively sought to find denaturalizable citizens, it says that an error which would have made citizens denaturalizable was discovered late in the Obama Administration, and a recommendation was made to identify all the effected persons and decide what course of action to take. Yes, every Administration has reacted to discovery of information which would have m…

Despite the poor media framing, Trump's "task force" is a response to that same fingerprinting snafu, and is predicated on the suspicion that some of these naturalized citizenships were improvidently granted.

https://www.theroot.com/trump-creates-denaturalization-task-...

From CNN:

> Since the Obama administration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement has also been working to put more than 300,000 fingerprint records into a system that can be checked against citizenship applications.

> According to USCIS, the effort to followup on those records has resulted in 2,500 cases that have been flagged for in-depth review, and 95 of those have been referred to the Justice Department to date.

Yes, I get that Trump's a big scary monster, but despite the media charade, and his inartful presentation, this seems to be exactly an extension of what the Obama administration did.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#334

Post by gist »

proberts wrote: post #208
gist wrote: post #81

This is you? http://www.robertsimmigration.com/index.html Your website should have a bio and information on your background, education and so on.

I don't want to scare potential clients away.

I am not seeing anything in your background that would scare away potential clients. And actually maybe the opposite.

Do you feel that because of your background potential clients will think you are expensive? If that is the reason you can counter that with the appropriate words indicating otherwise.

Or is it that you don't want potential companies to know you are a sole practitioner?

Only other thing I can think of is something age related given that the majority of clients are typically 20's or 30's.

If you'd care to elaborate I'd appreciate as I am curious and study this type of thing.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#336

Post by tempestn »

dariusm5 wrote: post #308
tempestn wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately with the new provincial government (elected to a majority with a strong 37% of the vote...) Ontario is starting to look a lot more like the US in its attitude toward immigrants, among other things. I would suggest Vancouver instead, if not for the astronomical cost of living (although I guess not compared to San Francisco). Edit: Fortunately the provincial government doesn't really have any say over imm…

You're making a very broad assumption and making a very specific suggestion based on it. Even though you corrected yourself later saying that immigration is not controlled provincially, this type of thinking is pretty backwards. I think it's caused by people reading too much into sensationalist news articles and headlines which exaggerate or hyper-focus on useless details to get attention and views. While in reality,…

I'm not suggesting that someone would leave Toronto to move to Vancouver because of the change in government. Just that if you were thinking about moving to Canada and evaluating possible destinations, the more immigrant-friendly attitude in BC compared to Ontario might be considered. Mostly I'm just lamenting the negative attitude in general though.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#337

Post by ninedays »

jexah wrote: post #309
fredophile wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There have been plenty of news articles in the last two days about the current administration forming a task force to remove citizenship from naturalized citizens that they believe lied on their applications. That's citizens, not just permanent residents. The immigration process is long and complicated. It would be easy to make small mistakes here and there. Technically, some of those mistakes could get you deported.

> remove citizenship from naturalized citizens that they believe lied on their applications If the individual was given citizenship on the basis of those lies, then it makes total sense to revoke citizenship. That would be like hiring a developer who says he is an amazing programmer who can solve any problem. Turns out after he got the job, not only is he terrible at programming, but he's also a liar. So you fire him…

If I continue the logic of your reasonning, the employer should have a technical test the candidate needs to perform in order for the employer to ensure that the candidate is not simply lying about his competences. If the employer gives the test, the employer hires him because he succeeded, then it is more the employer fault to hire him in the first place, not the employee fault because he performed the test.

The moment a person becomes a citizen of a country, he is entitled to the exact same right that the citizen next to him. There is no distinction of a citizen who was born in the country vs a citizen that was naturalized.

In your case, if someone profits from a lie, then we correct the process so that people cannot profit from it anymoreinstead of revoking things you gave by mistake (things _you_ gave by _your_ mistake).

If you hire someone without checking that what they say is true, then I am sorry but you're just stupid. If a country give citizenship to people without verifying that what is written in the application is true, then I think the process is incredibly stupid.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#338

Post by jexah »

PaulAJ wrote: post #331
jexah wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> remove citizenship from naturalized citizens that they believe lied on their applications If the individual was given citizenship on the basis of those lies, then it makes total sense to revoke citizenship. That would be like hiring a developer who says he is an amazing programmer who can solve any problem. Turns out after he got the job, not only is he terrible at programming, but he's also a liar. So you fire him…

On the other hand, what if you say, for instance, that you got your degree in '93, but actually it was '92? The trouble with the law is that it doesn't distinguish between whoppers, fibs and clerical errors. They are all falsehoods, and all are grounds for deportation if the government decides it wants you out of the country.

I assume you meant to say "you claimed you got your degree in 93 when you actually got it in 92". I work in the background check business and each check has its own windows of acceptance. Depending on how long ago the degree was awarded, the window can vary from 0 years to 10+ years. This is also contextual, as if the immigration application was submitted in 93, and you say you got your degree in 92, when you actually got it in 94, and your immigration was approved in 95. This is a clear case of an invalid application.

Having said that, I'd like to see an example of deportation on the grounds of a 1 year mistake in the year one had received their degree, when the degree was received 30 years prior to application. I would like to see it not because I'd agree with such a measure, but because it would give you a strong case.

As it stands I don't believe that anything close to that has happened.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#339

Post by jexah »

ninedays wrote: post #337
jexah wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> remove citizenship from naturalized citizens that they believe lied on their applications If the individual was given citizenship on the basis of those lies, then it makes total sense to revoke citizenship. That would be like hiring a developer who says he is an amazing programmer who can solve any problem. Turns out after he got the job, not only is he terrible at programming, but he's also a liar. So you fire him…

If I continue the logic of your reasonning, the employer should have a technical test the candidate needs to perform in order for the employer to ensure that the candidate is not simply lying about his competences. If the employer gives the test, the employer hires him because he succeeded, then it is more the employer fault to hire him in the first place, not the employee fault because he performed the test. The mom…

Okay let's just spend trillions of dollars giving every person who has applied for immigration complete background checks, and if any of the checks can't be completed for any reason what-so-ever, we should deny them citizenship. Sounds like a plan, Stan. That, or we just deny everybody because we can't afford it.

Employers can afford to vet their employees. The state cannot afford to vet any regular citizenship application to the same degree. If we could, that'd be great.

This is why it makes sense to assume the best in people (like we do), and if it turns out they intentionally lied or mislead on their application, then revoke the awards that were provided based on that misinformation.

Re: I’m Peter Roberts, immigration attorney who does work for YC and startups. AMA

#340

Post by godelmachine »

garyfirestorm wrote: post #23

What would you recommend to an H1B holder in terms of next steps? Applying for green card through employment(EB2) would take really long (Indian nationality). Does pursuing PhD improve the chances any better (EB1?)

Have you already finished your MS? If yes, may I ask from which university and when?
Post reply on HN