Week of November 1–7, 2024

This alert provides updates on global immigration policies and procedures, including specific changes in Canada, Quebec, the Republic of Ireland, Italy, South Africa, Thailand, the Netherlands, and the UK.

Canada's 2025-2027 Immigration Levels Plan reduces permanent resident targets and introduces controlled targets for temporary residents, especially international students. Notable changes include new restrictions on the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TFWP) and a reduction in international student permit caps. Temporary relief measures were also announced for Lebanese citizens affected by the crisis in Lebanon.

Quebec's 2025 Immigration Plan halts applications for its Skilled Worker and Graduate Programs until June 2025. Meanwhile, Ireland transitioned to online renewal for Irish Residence Permits across most counties, and Italy introduced biometric requirements for national visa applications and digitalization of work permits.

South Africa's new points-based system for work visas requires applicants to accumulate 100 points through qualifications, experience, and employment offers. Thailand expanded its e-visa program, while the Netherlands highlighted stricter monitoring for companies sponsoring foreign workers.

The UK faces significant delays due to a change in visa appointment providers, leading to shortages of available appointments for various visa categories, causing disruptions for applicants and businesses. Applicants are advised to plan ahead due to processing delays and limited expedited options.

These updates emphasize the importance of reviewing immigration requirements carefully and considering potential delays and changes when planning international travel or relocation.

A Gallup poll reveals that the economy is the most significant issue for U.S. voters in determining their presidential vote, with 21% mentioning it, especially among Republicans (35%) compared to Democrats (7%). Immigration follows at 13%, notably more important to Republicans (25%) than Democrats (3%). Democrats prioritize abortion (16%) and preserving democracy (14%), while 6% mention maintaining the rule of law. Candidate-specific factors like ethics, character, and competency also influence Democratic voters.

The poll further shows that voters believe Kamala Harris would be better at promoting national unity, protecting democracy, and preserving the American dream for future generations, while Donald Trump is preferred for keeping the U.S. safe from foreign threats. However, neither candidate has a clear advantage in areas like strengthening the middle class or reducing global conflict.

Regarding campaign satisfaction, 53% of voters are satisfied with Harris’ campaign, compared to 43% for Trump, though both candidates’ satisfaction levels are lower than in previous elections. A majority of Republicans and Democrats are satisfied with their party’s campaigns, with Republican satisfaction similar to 2020.

Additionally, over 90% of voters have decided whom to support, with Republicans (93%) and Democrats (95%) showing strong commitment. This indicates that the election will likely hinge on issues like the economy, immigration, and democracy, with Harris winning due to perceptions of her leadership and campaign, while Trump’s success will depend on voters’ confidence in his handling of key issues.

ProPublica focuses on in-depth coverage of critical issues shaping the upcoming election, avoiding typical horse race reporting. The nonprofit investigative newsroom highlights topics such as abortion, immigration, health care, the economy, extremism, and education, all of which are top concerns for voters.

ProPublica's reporting on abortion examines the impact of Roe v. Wade's reversal, covering cases where women have been denied necessary medical care due to state bans. This includes stories from Tennessee, Georgia, and Texas, where restrictive laws have led to tragic outcomes for pregnant women.

On immigration, ProPublica delves into the rising number of migrant encounters, showing how these differ from past surges. The newsroom explores the role immigrants play in filling labor shortages and how small towns across the U.S. are grappling with increased arrivals. It also highlights the challenges businesses face in advocating for immigration reform in today's political climate.

Regarding the economy, ProPublica investigates inflation's effects, such as high prices for goods like car tires, and the role of algorithms in housing price hikes. It also reports on the political challenges Democrats face in industrial states hit hard by economic shifts.

In education, ProPublica covers the growing debate over school vouchers, highlighting resistance in rural areas and the impact on public school funding. The newsroom also examines the ongoing challenges in health care, from insurance denials to the crisis in mental health treatment.

Finally, ProPublica provides insightful coverage of U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas and the U.S. government's response.

President-elect Donald Trump has promised significant changes to U.S. immigration policy, building on measures from his first term. Key aspects of his agenda include mass deportations, workplace raids, expanding the border wall, and using the military for enforcement. Trump intends to deport millions of undocumented immigrants, claiming it will benefit American workers, despite warnings of potential economic instability. His proposal to deploy federal troops for immigration enforcement raises concerns about the militarization of domestic policy and its impact on civil liberties.

Trump also aims to expand workplace raids to target industries employing undocumented workers, which he believes will deter illegal immigration. Additionally, he plans to construct more border wall sections, leveraging military funding and bypassing congressional appropriations. Critics argue that the wall is a misallocation of resources and a flawed solution to immigration issues.

Trump has promised to reinstate the “remain in Mexico” policy and hire more Border Patrol agents, although the latter may require congressional approval. He also aims to end birthright citizenship by issuing an executive order and will push for ideological screenings for immigrants, including reinstating the travel ban on Muslim-majority countries.

These proposals, which include targeting immigrants' rights and increasing restrictions on who can enter the country, have sparked debates over their legality and the potential harm they could inflict on communities and families. Trump’s hardline immigration stance has been central to his political platform, with implications for U.S. immigration law and society.

Since 2016, U.S. administrations have used various tactics to prevent people from seeking asylum at ports of entry (POEs) along the U.S.-Mexico border. A significant ruling in October by the Ninth Circuit declared these tactics, known as "turnbacks," illegal, stating that the metering policy, which limited asylum processing, violated immigration law.

Metering, in place from 2017 to 2021, involved U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) turning away asylum seekers attempting to present at POEs. This policy led to abuse and coercion, and left migrants without official records, often forcing them to wait on informal lists in Mexico. CBP justified metering by citing limited processing capacity, but a 2020 report from the Department of Homeland Security found these claims were exaggerated.

While metering is no longer an official policy, turnbacks continue, subjecting vulnerable migrants, including families and children, to dangerous conditions in northern Mexico. Many face violence, exploitation, and a lack of basic needs. The court ruling affirmed that asylum seekers stopped at the border have a right to apply for asylum under U.S. law, and CBP’s actions violated this right.

Although the policy is no longer in effect, legal challenges to CBP’s practices continue. Organizations like Al Otro Lado and Haitian Bridge Alliance are pushing back against new barriers to asylum seekers. These policies, designed to deter asylum claims, paradoxically push migrants to cross the border irregularly, undermining the government's commitment to orderly migration. The Ninth Circuit’s ruling offers a potential path for better protecting migrants, though political will remains a critical factor.

The Fall 2024 edition of the AILA Law Journal brings important insights and perspectives on U.S. immigration issues, highlighting the need for comprehensive reform. Editor-in-Chief Cyrus Mehta discusses the critical challenges in the current immigration system, including anti-immigrant rhetoric, illegal asylum restrictions, and the dangers of mass deportation. Reform, rather than punitive measures, is necessary to address the pressure on the U.S. Southern border. The journal’s articles delve into various aspects of immigration law, offering practical advice and new perspectives.

Ted Bromund and Sandra Grossman’s updated article examines how to challenge an INTERPOL Red Notice, a tool often misused to target asylum seekers and noncitizens. Kristen Hommel’s piece discusses the diminishing power of the U.S. passport and compares the U.S. Visa Waiver Program to those of Singapore and the UAE, advocating for a more open global approach. Yuu Shibata provides a detailed exploration of the Schengen Visa Scheme and EU immigration law, suggesting how a similar system could unite North and Latin America.

Nicole Dillard reflects on the troubling history of immigration manipulation, using the 2022 Martha’s Vineyard incident to illustrate the painful echoes of past discriminatory tactics. Craig Shagin and Maria Vejarano propose straightforward fixes to illogical provisions in immigration laws to reduce delays and costs.

This edition of the AILA Law Journal aims to spark conversations and advocate for meaningful change, pushing for an immigration system that better serves both America and its newcomers.

Employers are expected to encounter significant challenges in accessing foreign talent during President-Elect Trump's second term. Anticipated entry restrictions, including travel bans and more intense security screenings, are likely to be implemented swiftly, potentially beginning on Inauguration Day.

Immigration and labor enforcement, which have been strong under the Biden administration, are expected to intensify at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Labor (DOL), and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Employers should prepare for increased administrative hurdles, including additional procedural requirements, more government requests for evidence, slower processing times, and higher rates of case denials. These changes could delay the entry, onboarding, and resumption of employment for foreign workers.

President-Elect Trump has signaled plans to restrict immigration across multiple areas after his inauguration on January 20, 2025. While the U.S. immigration system will continue to operate, employers and foreign nationals will face more challenges. Trump’s focus will likely be on increased immigration enforcement, scrutiny of foreign nationals, and "Hire American" policies aimed at limiting foreign talent access. Additionally, sweeping deportation efforts targeting undocumented individuals are anticipated.

Some of these policies can be quickly implemented through executive orders and regulatory changes. Key actions could include stricter entry restrictions, "extreme vetting" policies, and the suspension of Biden-era programs, particularly in areas like humanitarian protections and pro-STEM immigration policies. Although many of these initiatives may face legal challenges, recent Supreme Court rulings could allow for faster implementation, increasing the urgency for employers to review immigration policies and compliance strategies.

Keeping Families Together: Parole in Place

In 2024, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) introduced the Keeping Families Together process, granting parole in place to up to 500,000 undocumented spouses of U.S. citizens. This initiative provides temporary protection from deportation, work authorization, and a path to lawful permanent residency, impacting 2 million family members, including 50,000 undocumented children.

Applications opened on August 19, 2024, though processing has been delayed due to legal challenges. Eligible individuals must be married to U.S. citizens, have lived in the U.S. for over ten years, and meet specific legal requirements. Protections extend to their children, with a $580 application fee. Decisions are case-by-case, and those with certain criminal records or security risks may be denied.

Recipients could gain work permits lasting three years, supporting industries facing labor shortages. Nearly 500,000 eligible spouses already contribute $13.5 billion annually in spending power. If granted permanent residency or citizenship, their economic impact could rise by $6.6 billion annually.

Parole in place also addresses barriers to adjusting status caused by strict immigration reentry laws. By allowing individuals to apply for legal residency without leaving the U.S., it reduces backlogs and administrative burdens while keeping families together.

While this program is a critical step, comprehensive immigration reform remains essential. Parole in place reflects a long-standing legal authority aimed at strengthening families and the economy, marking significant progress in supporting mixed-status American households.

Immigrants’ Economic Contributions in Wisconsin: A Dual Role

Immigrants, regardless of legal status, are vital to Wisconsin’s economy and workforce. A report by Upwardly Global and the American Immigration Council highlights their significant contributions, revealing that immigrants in Wisconsin paid $3 billion in taxes in 2022 and held $3.3 billion in spending power. Immigrants accounted for 17.9% of the state’s population growth from 2010 to 2022, offsetting declines in rural areas and mitigating workforce shortages caused by an aging population.

Comprising 5.9% of the workforce, immigrants are heavily represented in agriculture (11%), entrepreneurship (5%), and STEM fields (9.5%). Their role in sustaining small- and medium-sized businesses is crucial to local economic growth, generating jobs for native-born workers.

Undocumented immigrants, who number around 70,000 in Wisconsin, also play a critical role. Despite being excluded from social safety nets, they paid $240 million in taxes in 2022. Approximately 47,000 undocumented individuals are employed, with significant representation in manufacturing (23%), construction (10%), and agriculture (10%). They perform 70% of the labor on Wisconsin dairy farms, a cornerstone of the state’s economy and identity.

Armando Ibarra of UW-Madison emphasizes the paradox of undocumented immigrants’ contributions: they fund systems they cannot access due to their status. Their labor and taxes uphold essential services, yet their contributions often go unacknowledged. Ibarra underscores the need to recognize their indispensable role in Wisconsin’s economy and communities, advocating for greater inclusivity and fairness.

Immigration in North Dakota: A Reflection of Faith, History, and Opportunity

North Dakota has a long history of immigration, with 34% of Dakota Territory’s population being foreign-born in 1870. By 1915, nearly 80% of North Dakotans were either immigrants or their children. This legacy persists as the state attracts diverse populations, including a rapidly growing Hispanic community.

North Dakota’s churches remain integral in helping immigrants adapt, just as they did for early settlers. Historic congregations used German, Norwegian, and Russian in services, preserving culture while aiding integration. Today, many churches support immigrants through African, Slavic, and Spanish-speaking fellowships, reflecting the state’s evolving demographics.

Immigrants play a crucial role in the state’s economy and culture. They open businesses, excel in academics and athletics, and enrich communities. However, outdated immigration policies often lead to family separations and prolonged reunification processes, creating unnecessary challenges.

This fall, 200 evangelical leaders, including those from North Dakota, called on presidential candidates to adopt balanced immigration policies emphasizing three key principles: recognizing every person’s dignity, securing borders, and protecting family unity.

North Dakotans’ values of self-reliance and community extend to supporting immigrant neighbors, who exemplify hard work and family loyalty. By fostering humane policies and respectful dialogue, the state can honor its heritage while building an inclusive future that reflects its faith and values. Immigrants are not only part of North Dakota’s history—they are vital to its ongoing success.

The Impact of the Loper Bright and Jarkesy Decisions on Immigration Litigation

The Supreme Court’s landmark rulings in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and SEC v. Jarkesy have created ripples across administrative law, with significant implications for immigration litigation and compliance. By overturning the Chevron doctrine, Loper Bright dismantled a long-standing precedent that allowed courts to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous statutes. This shift curtails agencies' discretion, paving the way for more challenges to immigration rulings on issues like visa classifications and asylum claims.

In Jarkesy v. SEC, the Court emphasized that cases involving significant penalties must be tried in federal courts with jury trials, invalidating administrative tribunals’ authority in some contexts. This decision raises questions about the legitimacy of immigration-related adjudications by bodies such as the Office of the Chief Administrative Hearing Officer (OCAHO), which handles I-9 compliance disputes.

These rulings have emboldened businesses and individuals to challenge agency determinations. For example, Walmart and SpaceX have recently contested OCAHO’s authority in immigration-related cases, citing constitutional concerns under Jarkesy. If these challenges gain traction, they could reshape how immigration disputes are resolved.

At the same time, the demise of Chevron deference introduces uncertainty for favorable administrative policies, such as STEM OPT work authorization and DACA. Future litigation may target these programs, potentially impacting employers and immigrant workers alike.

The decisions mark a turning point, offering opportunities to contest overreach while jeopardizing beneficial interpretations. As the implications unfold, stakeholders must adapt to this evolving legal landscape.

Summary:

Voters in Morgantown, West Virginia, expressed diverse priorities and concerns while casting their votes.

• Frederick Golden, a Republican voter, prioritized the presidential race, focusing on immigration and the economy, which he views as major issues. He criticized local policing and expressed a preference for Republican policies, stating he opposed Kamala Harris as a potential president.
• Michael Reynolds, another voter, chose Todd Forbes for Monongalia County Sheriff, citing his character. Forbes was the only Democrat Reynolds voted for.
• Asia Mooney emphasized local concerns like water quality, roads, public education, and sustainability. She expressed support for Kamala Harris due to her policies on health care, immigration, and women’s rights, highlighting her perspective as a Black woman in West Virginia.

The article reflects a range of perspectives shaped by personal values and experiences, from national issues to local governance.