151–160 of 527 posts
Thanks for doing this.
If the recent trend continues, the May 2025 visa bulletin might have my priority date (May 30, 2013) current for EB-3. Originally, I am on EB-2. I have two questions:
Is it worth downgrading to EB-3, or should I wait for my EB-2 date to become current? If my date becomes current, what are the next steps to getting a Green Card (GC)? Is there anything I can do to expedite the process?
Both Musk and Vivek initially supported H1B, and saw massive backlash in the conservative communities. So much so that Vivek left (was removed?) from DOGE and went to run for Gov now with a largely sour taste in MAGA people’s opinions. Pointing to me that H1B is advantageous for employers but deeply unpopular with the majority of voters this last election. Do you see the Administration taking on H1B changes in a big…
It's so hard to say but looking at what they tried to do last go-round might provide some insight and this included dramatically changing the prevailing wage requirements (didn't happen) and tightening the adjudication of H-1B petitions (happened). But the U.S. economy relies on foreign workers in general and H-1B workers in particular so I think in the end, there will just be some tinkering around the edges.
I'm on H-1B with an approved EB-2 via my current employer and an approved EB-1A (self-petition). I want to switch employers or take a break. I expected my priority date to become current in Q3 or Q4 2025.
Questions
1. If I switch to an H-4 status for a break, can that affect I-485 via EB-1A?
2. I need to visit family urgently and I have got a few offers in hand. Can I quit and travel internationally while the H-1B transfer is in progress and re-enter the US? My stamp expires in 6 months and my partner can mail the approved I-797. What are the general risks here apart from the mail getting lost?
3. Can a change of employment lead to issues with an AOS application in the future using EB-1A?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With all respect, everything happening in the US at the moment is "extraordinarily unusual" today. Tomorrow it will be the "new normal".
According to this article, Canada rejected her entry as well. Maybe it's not just the US, but this person actually had a real issue with her visa and her travel plans were not prepared well. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c80y3yx1jdyo "...when she reached the border [Canada], Mr Burke said the Canadian authorities denied her entry as they were concerned she may try to work illegally."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Advocating for Palestinians isn’t advocating for a “terror group”. Which is itself a nebulous term that is used for political reasons. Now, working to carry out a foreign governments interests against the best interests of the American public IS treason, but that’s okay when you’re the president I guess.
I've seen recent examples of the government targeting green card holders for their speech. As a naturalized citizen who wants to exercise my free speech rights, how concerned should I be about potentially having my citizenship challenged on technical grounds? Are there realistic scenarios where this could happen despite First Amendment protections?
I've seen recent examples of the government targeting green card holders for their speech. As a naturalized citizen who wants to exercise my free speech rights, how concerned should I be about potentially having my citizenship challenged on technical grounds? Are there realistic scenarios where this could happen despite First Amendment protections?
[flagged]
I've seen recent examples of the government targeting green card holders for their speech. As a naturalized citizen who wants to exercise my free speech rights, how concerned should I be about potentially having my citizenship challenged on technical grounds? Are there realistic scenarios where this could happen despite First Amendment protections?
[flagged]
It's also important to remember that the government follows the public, not the other way around. The legitimacy of preferences among belligerents in foreign conflicts is determined through the equilibration of public opinion, and it's the end state of the protests and discussions (whatever it is) that legitimizes or overturns the lists, not the other way around.
From the perspective of someone asking about immigration law, this doesn't pose the question "to what degree should I do things that the people around me like," it raises the question, "to what degree does my perception of the preferences of the current administration take precedence, due to personal risk, over what the people around me would like me to do for them."