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

301–310 of 345 posts

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

#301

Post by trollbridge »

raddan wrote: post #194
trollbridge wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the latest tricks is that if you have social media accounts yet no social media apps or accounts are loaded on your phone, or your phone appears to be a burner phone, they'll ask you why you didn't bring your main, primary phone. So your "burner phone" needs to be your primary phone, which is something that is hard to go back in time to fix.

This sounds like a rumor to me. Plenty of people (including me) have no social media presence (unless you count HN as social media). How do you know that the person on whatevergram with the same name is me?

Because the ad networks associated with social media are really good at ascertaining identity.

People with no social media presence at all have been denied entry.

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

#302

Post by trollbridge »

smcin wrote: post #271
trollbridge wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the latest tricks is that if you have social media accounts yet no social media apps or accounts are loaded on your phone, or your phone appears to be a burner phone, they'll ask you why you didn't bring your main, primary phone. So your "burner phone" needs to be your primary phone, which is something that is hard to go back in time to fix.

It's in general possible to only access social media via browser, not apps.

Which makes no difference since they’ll just ask you for your social media handles.

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

#303

Post by nasaeclipse »

fantod wrote: post #269
proberts wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make any sense. I'd need to know all the facts to advise. Please send me an email to schedule a call (proberts@robertsimmigration.com). Which Consulate is she applying through?

Isn't 1-2 year wait time standard for spousal immigration?

No. My spouse and I came here together and we applied for her green card in Japan. It took about 2 months.

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

#304

Post by LightBug1 »

zerkten wrote: post #81

What if you have deleted social media accounts? It's possible to state that you had them with whatever identifiers, but do you have to prove their existence in some way so they can check an archive (assuming it was Twitter)?

Are those "Donald Trump is a rancid, orange Turnip" posts coming back to haunt you? Me too.

I'd brave it out and stick to your guns.

After all, facts are facts.

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

#306

Post by filleduchaos »

mcny wrote: post #288
filleduchaos wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, you didn't just overstate, you flat out just made it up. The opposite of "illegal alien" is not "citizen".

Instead of citizens, we would say People who are legally authorized to remain in the United States? Is there a word for that?

Technically not a word, but the US government uses "lawfully present individuals" in its policy docs. In addition to US citizens, this covers lawful permanent residents, people with valid non-immigrant visas/visa waivers, some country-specific exceptions (e.g. Canadian citizens visiting for short-term business and pleasure), and various humanitarian categories (refugees, people seeking asylum who have filed the proper paperwork, etc).

In short, an unfortunately very wide field of people for ICE to chew through without touching any citizens (even if one takes the most uncharitable interpretation, i.e. only 70% of arrests have been of unlawfully present individuals)

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

#307

Post by booleandilemma »

RedRaven7 wrote: post #98
ponector wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At $22/h you are actually competing with offshore workers in remote low COL locations. How would you justify it's you should get the work/money, not imigrant worker? The fact your parents immigrated earlier than they should justify it in your opinion?

22/hr for offshore work? Where, India? The fact that I'm American justifies it. If Americans flooded into say, Somalia, bought up all the houses, took up all the jobs etc, you'd be horrifically offended. Americans have no where else to go. This is my home and I will not abandon it. You can't just drop 50 million extra workers into a country and expect people to just take it.

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I and other Americans completely agree with what you're saying and I'm sorry your question is getting downvoted. There are lots of bleeding hearts on this site. Anyway, I wanted to let you know to not give up, don't believe the gaslighters - Americans do deserve American jobs. I'll sacrifice a few HN points to say this so others don't have to. Keep fighting.

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

#308

Post by bubblethink »

skobes wrote: post #299
bubblethink wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What has Chevron got to do with EB-1A adjudication? The Kazarian step 1 step 2 stuff is hokey. It is ultimately a subjective evaluation that will remain under the executive.

Wouldn't this fall under Auer deference (agency's interpretation of its own regulation)? There is some uncertainty about whether Auer deference survives after Loper Bright.

But this isn't an ambiguous area of law. The statute is pretty clear in the text here - that the EB1-A criteria are necessary but not sufficient. That's what the step1 (necessary) and step2 (sufficient) boil down to. You can litigate on what qualifies as necessary if the agency is doing something weird, but ultimately it is a subjective evaluation. The court isn't going to adjudicate on the merits, USCIS is.

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

#309

Post by SR2Z »

lrvick wrote: post #294
globalnode wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes sure you can come into america, straight into a holding cell until you hand over your pins/passwords or go back home.

Unlikely, but if that did happen an army of lawyers would be willing to help pro bono for such a constitutionally critical case. Never comply with such nonsense.

An army of lawyers will not make the jail cell more comfortable when ICE has decided to make you suffer. The Supreme Court has seen to that.

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

#310

Post by eduction »

stevenwoo wrote: post #38
miotintherain wrote: post #11

Hi Peter, thanks for the AMA! I work for an American company and I am based in Europe. I visit the US for work every now and then. I heard a lot of horror stories regarding border entries. If I am ever in a situation where the border police asks for access to my personal phone and pin code, what are my options? Can I refuse and what happens then?

Border Patrol can wait longer than you want to wait at the airport, you should not bring your personal phone if you don't want them going through all the contents, they can hold your device for an inconvenient amount of time if you are an American citizen. If you say no and are not an American citizen you can be denied entry at the airport and sent home.

Is your name peter?
Post reply on HN