Lawmakers about to pass path to legal residency and citizenship for residents without status

4/16/2013
In the US congress today, it was announced that there has been a deal between lawmakers for a new immigration reform bill. the details have not been released as of yet, but it appears that the preliminary reports show that:

1. There is a path to legal permanent resident status and eventually citizenship.
2. The law will affect those persons who can show that they were present in the US prior to 2012.
3. A fee will be assessed as a penalty, and there will be a lengthy application form requiring a significant amount of evidence proving that the immigrant is in compliance with the law in all other aspects, including not being convicted of any major crimes.
Immigration Law Santa Rosa

Contact this office to discuss your case with an Attorney. We will be offering attorney services for a low flat rate to help with the application process.

Read More

What Immigration Reform May Mean for California -kqed radio

What Immigration Reform May Mean for California

Immigration Law Santa Rosa

04-04-2013

Federal lawmakers are putting the finishing touches on several competing immigration reform bills — some of which may debut next week. One way or another, they’re all expected to include some kind of path to citizenship for an estimated 11 million people already in the country illegally. Reporter: Rachael Myrow

Stream the entire broadcast online:

 

Rachael Myrow, Host: Federal lawmakers are putting the finishing touches on several competing immigration reform bills, and we should see one or more of them debut next week. One way or another they’re all expected to include some path to citizenship for an estimated 11 million people already in the country illegally. While that political drama unfolds in Washington, D.C., we turn to a man in Fresno with a strong sense of what those reforms could mean on the ground level for California. Don Riding spent nearly 40 years with what was called the INS and what we now call the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Agency. Thank you, Don Riding, for talking with us.

Don Riding: You’re welcome!

Myrow: What did you like about the amnesty program of 1986?

Riding: What I liked about it is the fact that people who had been working here for many years were finally able to come forward. A lot of people don’t understand that the reason the amnesty program was needed was because of a 1976 change in the law. It used to be, prior to Jan. 1, 1977, that if anyone from the Northern Hemisphere — primarily Mexico — was here and had a child born in the U.S., they could immigrate almost immediately. They didn’t have to wait 21 years for the child to petition for them. So prior to ’77, if someone came here illegally with a family and they had a child born here they could immigrate. When that stopped in ’77, all of the sudden all of those people could no longer immigrate. And by ’86 we had a couple million people who previously — not all of them because they didn’t all have children born here but many of them — would have qualified under the old rules. Prior to ’77 there was no limit on how many people from Mexico could immigrate. Congress changed the rules in ’77 and then got surprised when there were unexpected consequences.

Myrow: Unexpected consequences like what?

Riding: By placing a numerical limit on how many people can immigrate from Mexico, it took 10 years for the Mexicans who filed petitions to immigrate in ’77 — the first year of the new law — it took them 10 years for all of them to immigrate. These are people who legally immigrated, who qualified, who all of a sudden had to wait their turn. So, you can imagine: What about the people who applied in, you know, in ’79, ’80, ’81, even longer. As it is today, in the category of brothers and sisters of Mexicans, there are approximately 750,000 approved visa petitions for Mexicans in that category. If you do the math for how many are allowed each year, the waiting time is 163 years, four months!

Myrow: What do you think of the new proposals being floated in Washington, D.C.?

Riding: They’re not bad. To say that they’re perfect — no, they’re not. But you’re not going to deport 11 or 12 million people. Now there needs to be some requirements, and they’re trying to put the requirements in. A lot of people don’t understand, they say, “Well, these people have to pay their taxes.” Most of them already are. When I first came to California in 1984, I went around to the various immigrant communities and asked, “How many of you get paid in cash under the table?” Everybody raised their hands. By 2011, when I retired, I asked the same question and everybody raised their hands and said they get paid with checks. What happened is that part of the amnesty program included employer sanctions. Employer sanctions forced people to get counterfeit documents.  So even though they might have got paid in a different name, everybody today is being paid with a check. Which means that employers are taking out money for Social Security. They are taking out money for state and federal taxes.  They are taking out money for all the things they’re supposed to. So when these reformers say, “Well they have to pay the back taxes,” they’re already paying them, almost all of them.

Myrow: What do you think would happen to the Central Valley’s $26 billion farm economy if federal lawmakers required farmers to clean house before importing any workers.

Riding: This basically happened in Washington and Oregon following the amnesty program. There was supposed to be a replenishment agriculture worker program that would allow people to harvest the crops illegally and the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Labor together were to determine how many workers we needed in agriculture those years. Well, the problem was, to determine how many workers were needed they went to the state unemployment offices and asked, ‘how many workers have farmers come and asked for?’  Farmers don’t go the unemployment office to ask for workers. They came back with a report, ‘we need zero agriculture workers.’ And boysenberries and crops like that rotted on the vines in Southern Washington 

 Courtesy California Report, KQED

Read More

Qué reforma migratoria puede significar para California

¿Qué reforma migratoria puede significar para California

Cortesía del informe de California

Stream en línea todo el programa de audio:

04/04/2013
Los legisladores federales están dando los toques finales a varios proyectos de ley de reforma migratoria que compiten – algunos de los cuales pueden debutar la próxima semana. De un modo u otro, todos son espera que incluya algún tipo de camino hacia la ciudadanía para los aproximadamente 11 millones de personas que ya están en el país ilegalmente. Periodista: Rachael MyrowImmigration Law Santa Rosa

Rachael Myrow, Host: los legisladores federales están dando los toques finales a varios proyectos de ley de reforma migratoria en competencia, y deberíamos ver una o más de ellas debut la próxima semana. De un modo u otro están todos espera que incluya algún camino a la ciudadanía para un estimado de 11 millones de personas que ya están en el país ilegalmente. Mientras que el drama político se desarrolla en Washington, DC, pasamos a un hombre en Fresno con un fuerte sentido de lo que esas reformas podrían significar en la planta baja de California. Don Riding pasó casi 40 años, con lo que se llamó el INS y lo que ahora llamamos la Ciudadanía de los EE.UU. y la Agencia de Servicios de Inmigración. Gracias, Don Riding, para hablar con nosotros.
Don Riding: No hay de qué!
Myrow: ¿Qué te gusta del programa de amnistía de 1986?
Riding: Lo que me gustó es el hecho de que las personas que habían estado trabajando aquí durante muchos años por fin pudieron presentarse. Mucha gente no entiende que la razón era necesario el programa de amnistía fue a causa de un cambio en la ley de 1976. Lo que solía ser, con anterioridad al 1 de enero de 1977, que si alguien desde el Hemisferio Norte – principalmente México – estaba aquí y tenía un niño nacido en los EE.UU., podrían emigrar casi de inmediato. Ellos no tuvieron que esperar 21 años para que el niño a pedir por ellos. Así que antes de 77, si alguien vino aquí ilegalmente con una familia y tuvieron un hijo nacido aquí podían inmigrar. Cuando que se detuvo en el 77, todos de la repentina de todas aquellas personas ya no podía emigrar. Y al ’86 tuvimos un par de millones de personas que antes – no todos ellos, ya que no todos los niños han nacido aquí, pero muchos de ellos – se hayan beneficiado de las viejas reglas. Antes del ’77 no había límite de cuántas personas podrían emigrar de México. Congreso cambió las reglas en el 77 y luego se sorprendió cuando hubo consecuencias inesperadas.
Myrow: consecuencias inesperadas como qué?
Equitación: Al colocar un límite numérico de la cantidad de personas pueden inmigrar de México, que tomó 10 años para los mexicanos que presentaron solicitudes para emigrar en el 77 – el primer año de la nueva ley – que les tomó 10 años para todos a emigrar. Estas son personas que inmigraron legalmente, que se clasificó, que de repente tuvo que esperar su turno. Por lo tanto, se puede imaginar: ¿Qué pasa con las personas que solicitaron, ya sabes, en el ’79, ’80, ’81, incluso más tiempo. Como lo es hoy, en la categoría de los hermanos y hermanas de los mexicanos, hay aproximadamente 750.000 solicitudes de visa para los mexicanos aprobados en esa categoría. Si usted hace la matemáticas para cuántos se les permite cada año, el tiempo de espera es de 163 años, cuatro meses!
Myrow: ¿Qué piensa usted de las nuevas propuestas que se flotaban en Washington, DC?
Equitación: No son malos. Decir que eres perfecto – no, no lo son. Pero no vamos a deportar a 11 ó 12 millones de personas. Ahora es necesario que haya algunos requisitos, y están tratando de poner los requisitos pulg Muchas personas no entienden, ellos dicen: “Bueno, esta gente tiene que pagar sus impuestos”. La mayoría de ellos ya son. Cuando llegué por primera vez a California en 1984, di la vuelta a las diversas comunidades de inmigrantes y preguntó: “¿Cuántos de ustedes se les paga en efectivo bajo la mesa?” Todos levantaron la mano. En 2011, cuando me retiré, me hizo la misma pregunta y todos levantaron la mano y dijeron que se les paga con cheques. Lo que pasa es que parte del programa de amnistía incluidas sanciones a los empleadores. Las sanciones a empleadores obligaban a la gente a obtener documentos falsos. Así que a pesar de que puede ser que tenga pagado en un nombre diferente, todo el mundo hoy en día se está pagando con un cheque. Lo que significa que los empresarios están sacando dinero de la Seguridad Social. Están sacando dinero de los impuestos estatales y federales. Están sacando dinero por todas las cosas que se supone que. Así que cuando estos reformadores dicen: “Bueno, ellos tienen que pagar los impuestos atrasados”, que ya están pagando, casi todos ellos.
Myrow: ¿Qué crees que pasaría a la economía del Valle Central granja $ 26 mil millones si los legisladores federales requieren a los agricultores a limpiar la casa antes de importar cualquier trabajador.
Equitación: Básicamente, esto sucedió en Washington y Oregon siguiendo el programa de amnistía. No se supone que es un programa de trabajadores agrícolas reposición que permita a la gente para cosechar los cultivos de manera ilegal y el Departamento de Agricultura y el Departamento de Trabajo en conjunto habrían de determinar cuántos trabajadores se necesitan en la agricultura esos años. Bueno, el problema era determinar cuántos trabajadores se necesitan acudieron a las oficinas estatales de desempleo y preguntó: “¿Cuántos trabajadores han llegado a los agricultores y pedí?” Los agricultores no ir a la oficina de desempleo para pedir a los trabajadores. Volvieron con un informe, “necesitamos cero los trabajadores agrícolas. ‘Y moras y cultivos como el que se pudría en los viñedos en el sur de Washington

Traducción cortesía de Google Translate

Read More

5 rumors about the 2013 immigration act: questions, answers, and the real program explained

There has been a lot of speculation and anticipation about the new Obama Immigration law for 2013.  Here are some myths, facts and general information.  Note: the law has not become final as of the date of this article, 02/21/2013.

 

1. RUMOR: The immigration act would allow illegal immigrants to get legal green cards.  TRUTH:  The memo leaked to USA today in February provided for a new class of visa that could make current illegal residents legal, with a four year expiration. An extension for another four years would be available, and after that, an opportunity to apply for a green card would be available. Immigration Lawyer Office

2. RUMOR: Illegal immigrants would have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to apply for the 2013 Obama Immigration program.  TRUTH: To apply for the program as described in the leaked document, Illegal immigrants would have to pay back taxes on earnings. However, many illegal residents already pay income and payroll taxes for both California and Federal Tax.

3. RUMOR: The new immigration reform is just a deportation program designed to get the names of illegal immigrants. TRUTH: The 2012 Obama Deferment Program for juveniles promised that the USCIS and Department of Homeland Security would not use the information that was collected about the applicant’s family to initiate deportation proceedings.  To this Lawyer’s knowledge, the DHS and USCIS has made good on this promise, so there is no reason to think that they would not do the same for any new Immigration program.

4. RUMOR: If an illegal immigrant has been arrested, if they apply for the new Immigration program, they will be denied and deported.  TRUTH:  There will assuredly be requirements in any new reform law that will disqualify illegal immigrants if they have been arrested multiple times or for serious offenses. It will be VERY IMPORTANT for anyone sebastopol-larkfieldwikiup-attorney.jpgconsidering applying for any immigration program who has ever been arrested to consult with an immigration attorney to discuss their particular situation.

5. RUMOR: Once an illegal resident is approved for the 2013 program, they can bring their whole family to the US from their home country.  TRUTH: There is a provision allowing for some sort of pathway to bring one’s family here, according to the leaked memo. However, since the law has not been finalized as of today, we simply do not know how this would work  Stay tuned.

-Sean Ramsey, Immigration Attorney in Sebastopol, CA.

Read More