731–740 of 1001 posts
This is insane. I cannot fathom how I, nor educated and talented people I know, could have possibly stayed in the US back in the day if this requirement had been in place then. Applying for a greencard while working on an H, J or O-class visa is extremely common. Far from a loophole, applying from inside the US is the only reasonable way to apply for a greencard. Depending on the country of origin, there may not even…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a shame that I had to scroll past pages of invective and name-calling to get to your comment, which is the first one to substantively deal with the policy change. Like you, I tend to think this is a ham-handed move, but like one of the sibling comments, I also have to acknowledge that it’s common for other nations to require change-of-status applications happen outside the country. For example, Japan requires th…
I think one of the primary divergences of thought happening here is whether H1B is indeed a temporary visa or whether it was meant to be a stepping stone to a green card. H1B is only 36 years old. The Immigration Act of 1990 always meant it to be a temporary status, which is why it is so easily imperiled.
This is insane. I cannot fathom how I, nor educated and talented people I know, could have possibly stayed in the US back in the day if this requirement had been in place then. Applying for a greencard while working on an H, J or O-class visa is extremely common. Far from a loophole, applying from inside the US is the only reasonable way to apply for a greencard. Depending on the country of origin, there may not even…
The UK, the EU, Japan, and Australia all have identical rules to this policy.
Six weeks and 255 Euro later, it was in my hand. I have to “renew” it every ten years, but that’s only because the card needs to match my US passport number (and means I don’t have to carry that book around); there’s no interview or document gathering.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's completely illogical that a person must first stay in a country for 5 years to become eligible This is wrong. There is no minimum time in the country for a green card. You are thinking of citizenship. That is different.
> This is wrong. There is no minimum time in the country for a green card. You are thinking of citizenship. That is different. You are incorrect. What you said is technically true in that there is no statute that requires it, but in practice , OP is correct. It varies depending on the country of origin, but in the case of immigrants who hold citizenship from India, which is the country OP mentioned, you can likely ex…
Because it takes so long, in practice the issue is that for anyone to sponsor you, they want you working for them during that time, and so that's why it often looks like someone gets an H1B and then "graduates" to a green card.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s a shame that I had to scroll past pages of invective and name-calling to get to your comment, which is the first one to substantively deal with the policy change. Like you, I tend to think this is a ham-handed move, but like one of the sibling comments, I also have to acknowledge that it’s common for other nations to require change-of-status applications happen outside the country. For example, Japan requires th…
I think one of the primary divergences of thought happening here is whether H1B is indeed a temporary visa or whether it was meant to be a stepping stone to a green card. H1B is only 36 years old. The Immigration Act of 1990 always meant it to be a temporary status, which is why it is so easily imperiled.
Part of the noise around this topic is that the administration just announced something vague with no detailed guidance, which leaves the door open for bad-faith interpretations by everyone.
This is insane. I cannot fathom how I, nor educated and talented people I know, could have possibly stayed in the US back in the day if this requirement had been in place then. Applying for a greencard while working on an H, J or O-class visa is extremely common. Far from a loophole, applying from inside the US is the only reasonable way to apply for a greencard. Depending on the country of origin, there may not even…
It's always weird to me to see confusion/uncertainty such as this.
It's intentionally malevolent. Obviously. MAGA types hate immigration. They make a lot of noise about illegal immigration, but the fact is that they hate all kinds of immigration (unless you're white-looking and conservative enough). Anything they can do to make it harder for non-citizens to stay in the US is exactly the point for them.
And more the better if they can sow fear and threat of cruelty while doing it. That's their playbook. It's MAGA 101.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cruelty is the point. They want people to leave so they can refuse to allow them back in. That's the goal. It's not more complicated than that.
That isn’t cruelty. It’s immigration policy that the rest of the world already has
This is insane. I cannot fathom how I, nor educated and talented people I know, could have possibly stayed in the US back in the day if this requirement had been in place then. Applying for a greencard while working on an H, J or O-class visa is extremely common. Far from a loophole, applying from inside the US is the only reasonable way to apply for a greencard. Depending on the country of origin, there may not even…
I don't think it applies to folks on H or L visas. Wording from the site: "Nonimmigrants, like students, temporary workers, or people on tourist visas, come to the U.S. for a short time and for a specific purpose. Our system is designed for them to leave when their visit is over. Their visit should not function as the first step in the Green Card process. "
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The cruelty is the point. They want people to leave so they can refuse to allow them back in. That's the goal. It's not more complicated than that.
If you come to the U.S. on a visa that’s explicitly labeled a “nonimmigrant” visa for people who are “coming temporarily to the United States to perform services,” then it’s not “cruel” to actually enforce that. Those words are literally in the law.
And even if they were truly non-immigrant, who cares? If someone comes to the US, does good, useful work, and stays out of trouble, I want them to be given the opportunity to stay permanently. You may not, perhaps, but, well... I don't care.