I recently had the pleasure of writing an article or two for use in the AILA Paralegal Handbook. For informaton on ordering or learning more, go here: Paralegal Manual. For an overview of material covered by the book, go here: Table of Contents.
An area I covered for the book included Q visas. This handy visa is an excellent work-around for finding a legitimate means to bring over a foreign worker for a short duration work experience. I've included an excerpt below.
There are two forms of exchange visas issued by the United States. The first, and most common, is the J visa. Less common is the Q. This under-used visa category offers unique opportunities for the immigration advocate to bring foreign aliens into the US in a manner that allows them to work, as well as learn, for a period of 15 months.
In a Q visa, the definition of cultural exchange is much broader than that of the J. 8 CFR 214.2(q)(3)(iii)(A) - (C) describes the requirements of a "cultural" engagement under Q. Essentially, this includes a requirement that the cultural aspects of the visitor be displayed to the general public (museums, schools, parks, or other public forums), and that the cultural aspects themselves include things such as (a) cultural heritage of the alien's home country, (b) structured instruction on particular aspects of the alien's country, (c) language, (d) history and heritage, etc.
Section 214.2(q)(3)(i) and (ii) explain the requirements for an employer to be involved in the program. These include the creation and maintenance of an exchange program (usually a program which shows the connections outlined in this section), and accessibility of the program to the public (214.2(q)(3)(iii)(A)).
The Q visa is uncommon, largely because it is unknown. However, the clever practitioner will recognize that almost any educated foreigner can be presented as a cultural exchange ambassador. With some thought, and creative sponsorship, it is possible to bring individuals to the US who may work, present on their home country, and remain in the country legally for 15 months. Finally, there is no bar from converting from the Q visa to another status.
Do you need help getting "legal" in the US, or determining how to come to the US to work? Contact us! It is often much cheaper to fix a problem before it happens. Like many visas, a "Q" visa requires a sponsor and proper planning. However, with a little forethought, you can work and operate legally in the US. Further, you can convert into a Q visa if you are already here. A consultation may be just the ticket to avoiding illegal overstay or finding the perfect segway into employment with a qualified organization.
http://www.hanoverlawpc.com
703-402-2723
Sean R. Hanover, Esq.
Principal Attorney
The Hanover Law Firm is located in Washington, DC and Fairfax, VA. We practice
in both state and federal courts in VA, MD, and DC.
We are trial lawyers working in the VA, MD, DC region. This blog shares ideas and concepts related to the practice of law. Have a question? Ask us!
Showing posts with label illegal entry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label illegal entry. Show all posts
Monday, November 11, 2013
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Clarification on Double EWI -- follow on to the post from June 2012
I was contacted by a fellow practioner today regarding double EWI's. She had an excellent question, and I thought I would display my answer here.
You are right about the need to accrue 1 year unlawful presences before you’re really “in the soup” with a double ewi. The catch-22 is that if you cannot prove the time you entered and left, the presumption is that you did accrue the requisite time and the double ewi becomes a bar. Fancy, eh? Wait until they pull that on you at court!
It usually goes like this…
Presumption is that between the first EWI in 2001 and the last known EWI in 2003, she has accrued more than a year and…poof.
The very absence of dates gives rise to the problem, and by definition, an EWI often does not have specific dates. Defense cannot rebut the presumption and client get’s nailed.
-- In terms of DACA, though, I would be less concerned. An 821D is a form of deferred disposition – that means that the government already knows that it has the right to bar or “toss out” all the applicants; it is choosing not to enforce the rules only in so much as it promises not to pursue those people who register and are approved (selective non-application of appropriate law). As such, full disclosure is in order (lest the state say you are lying), and it should be okay (presuming EWI’s are the only problem).
Outside the context of DACA, always presume a double EWI is terminal to almost all forms of relief (except asylum based) unless there is definitive proof it is not (catch and release; multiple EWI’s in a single day, or other bizarre non-normative operations).
It should be noted that frequently, there is little that is guaranteed in a double EWI case. Many clients like to know the "odds" of success -- a common, and perfectly acceptable question. In double EWI cases, the odds are not great, and often rely more on the disposition of the immigration judge and prosecutor then anything else. However, a good lawyer can develop a compelling narrative and ensure every possible opportunity to stay is developed.
Call us today to discuss your case. WE CAN HELP. However, the longer you wait, the riskier it becomes when you are finally brought before an immigration judge.
S
Sean R. Hanover, Esq
HanoverLawPC.com
Contact Us
You are right about the need to accrue 1 year unlawful presences before you’re really “in the soup” with a double ewi. The catch-22 is that if you cannot prove the time you entered and left, the presumption is that you did accrue the requisite time and the double ewi becomes a bar. Fancy, eh? Wait until they pull that on you at court!
It usually goes like this…
Client stopped by police for driving on expired tags (or whatever)
Asked when she came to the US – she says 2001.
ICE later interviews her and she tells them she has been going back and forth across the border “for years”.
The last time she crossed was in 2003 when she decided to “stay for good…too dangerous to make the crossing anymore.”
Uh oh.
Presumption is that between the first EWI in 2001 and the last known EWI in 2003, she has accrued more than a year and…poof.
The very absence of dates gives rise to the problem, and by definition, an EWI often does not have specific dates. Defense cannot rebut the presumption and client get’s nailed.
-- In terms of DACA, though, I would be less concerned. An 821D is a form of deferred disposition – that means that the government already knows that it has the right to bar or “toss out” all the applicants; it is choosing not to enforce the rules only in so much as it promises not to pursue those people who register and are approved (selective non-application of appropriate law). As such, full disclosure is in order (lest the state say you are lying), and it should be okay (presuming EWI’s are the only problem).
Outside the context of DACA, always presume a double EWI is terminal to almost all forms of relief (except asylum based) unless there is definitive proof it is not (catch and release; multiple EWI’s in a single day, or other bizarre non-normative operations).
It should be noted that frequently, there is little that is guaranteed in a double EWI case. Many clients like to know the "odds" of success -- a common, and perfectly acceptable question. In double EWI cases, the odds are not great, and often rely more on the disposition of the immigration judge and prosecutor then anything else. However, a good lawyer can develop a compelling narrative and ensure every possible opportunity to stay is developed.
Call us today to discuss your case. WE CAN HELP. However, the longer you wait, the riskier it becomes when you are finally brought before an immigration judge.
S
Sean R. Hanover, Esq
HanoverLawPC.com
Contact Us
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)