Live data from Hacker News

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

news.ycombinator.com

151–160 of 345 posts

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

#151
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There is a solution to this. You can become a US citizen.

Didn't realise it was that easy. Why don't all the illegal immigrants just do that?

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

#152
post #7

Could you please help with any insights about the social media vetting rules? This has been a blackbox to the visa applications - started with student visas, now being forced on work visas too from Dec 15th.

Based on news, it seems like if you like Donald Trump you may get in. If you don't like him you don't. You may also be jailed for two months for not liking Trump - that's happened a few times and that's why tourism fell off a cliff.

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

#154
post #78

hey peter, Im on an h1b visa (year 10, have approved i140 and pending gc application). Ive never done an h1b stamping as I was paranoid about being denied. Will doing the stamping now trigger the 100k h1b fee?

No since the underlying H-1B petition was filed and approved before this $100K payment provision went into effect.

thank you!

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

#155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can they deny you admission when you are a US citizen?

They can not. Neither US Citizens or Green Card Holders can be denied entry. Sources: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter... https://www.aclunc.org/our-work/know-your-rights/know-your-r...

[deleted]

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

#156
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Foreign countries have no obligation to admit you within their borders. There’s many points you could make about the United States and immigration, but I don’t think this is one of them.

> Foreign countries have no obligation to admit you within their borders. That doesn't sound relevant. Nobody said that they were obliged to admit you, they complained that the reasons for declining admittance were unfair. Unless you think "no obligation to admit" means carte blanche to decline for any reason, and to treat you however they like? If so, then that is unreasonable. It is a much stronger condition than "…

Yes, "no obligation to admit" means they don't have any obligation whatsoever, and that includes doing so for any reason they see fit and not having to disclose those reasons (if any) to you.

It is exactly the same as "I don't have to let you in".

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

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't really get your point, there's high unemployment outside the US too in many places?

[flagged]

> Why is the US an open economic zone

Do you know of the fable of a goose that laid a golden egg once a day?

You are proposing to kill the goose to see if you can get multiple golden eggs at once.

> country with an identity

Like it or not, the identity is 'land of opportunities' and not 'land of anglo-saxons who emigrated before ~1850'

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

#159
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CBP actually made me give them my facebook password when entering on a J1 visa in 2017, so I'm surprised to hear so much talk about this. Is it more that the practice of checking social media is more widespread now?

I think the only bit that surprises me is they don't have a back door into Facebook.

Who says they don't?

And who says that asking for your password is to gain entry?

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

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Foreign countries have no obligation to admit you within their borders. That doesn't sound relevant. Nobody said that they were obliged to admit you, they complained that the reasons for declining admittance were unfair. Unless you think "no obligation to admit" means carte blanche to decline for any reason, and to treat you however they like? If so, then that is unreasonable. It is a much stronger condition than "…

Yes, "no obligation to admit" means they don't have any obligation whatsoever, and that includes doing so for any reason they see fit and not having to disclose those reasons (if any) to you. It is exactly the same as "I don't have to let you in".

No, it isn't.

For example, I do not have an obligation to let people into my house. I can choose to let them in or decline them entry. But there are certain preconditions I cannot apply. I cannot, for example, say "you may come into my house only if you murder my neighbour". That's because I'm legally bound not to induce people to commit murder. It would obviously be disingenuous to say this means I have an "obligation to admit" them.

It's the same with immigration. They actually are legally bound in certain ways - an immigration official can't assault you for instance. It's not hard to imagine them being legally bound not to search people's phones. That doesn't mean "they have to admit people".

Post reply on HN