Week of November 22–28, 2024

November 26 , 2024-What’s Past is Prologue: Employment-Based Immigration in the Second Trump Administration

make this article into 250 words "

Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign promises mass deportation, ending birthright citizenship, and sealing the southern border. While these proposals mainly target undocumented individuals, they could also affect employers who petition for and employ foreign nationals. This article discusses potential impacts on California employers in employment-based immigration during a second Trump administration.

Although significant changes to immigration law are unlikely, the Trump administration will likely alter how immigration laws are enforced. Immigration agencies will likely shift their approach, complicating the already complex process for employers, foreign workers, and their lawyers. Past changes, such as the withdrawal of USCIS’s deference to prior decisions, suggest that future adjudications may be stricter. Petitions previously approved may now face Requests for Evidence or Denial Notices.

Employers should also expect regulatory changes. The Trump administration may alter the H-1B visa program, previously restricting third-party worksite placements and narrowing educational qualifications. Additionally, expect a broader Public Charge rule, requiring immigrants to prove financial independence and possibly providing immigration officers more discretion in determining public charge status.

These regulatory changes will likely take longer to implement than cultural shifts, but they will bring significant challenges for employers. The process may become more unpredictable, slow, and costly, with increased scrutiny and higher attorney fees. As a result, California employers should prepare for more challenges when securing work visas and dealing with changes in immigration processing. CDF Labor Law LLP’s Immigration Practice Group can help navigate these issues in 2025.

Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign promises mass deportation, ending birthright citizenship, and sealing the southern border. While these proposals mainly target undocumented individuals, they could also affect employers who petition for and employ foreign nationals. This article discusses potential impacts on California employers in employment-based immigration during a second Trump administration.

Although significant changes to immigration law are unlikely, the Trump administration will likely alter how immigration laws are enforced. Immigration agencies will likely shift their approach, complicating the already complex process for employers, foreign workers, and their lawyers. Past changes, such as the withdrawal of USCIS’s deference to prior decisions, suggest that future adjudications may be stricter. Petitions previously approved may now face Requests for Evidence or Denial Notices.

Employers should also expect regulatory changes. The Trump administration may alter the H-1B visa program, previously restricting third-party worksite placements and narrowing educational qualifications. Additionally, expect a broader Public Charge rule, requiring immigrants to prove financial independence and possibly providing immigration officers more discretion in determining public charge status.

These regulatory changes will likely take longer to implement than cultural shifts, but they will bring significant challenges for employers. The process may become more unpredictable, slow, and costly, with increased scrutiny and higher attorney fees. As a result, California employers should prepare for more challenges when securing work visas and dealing with changes in immigration processing. CDF Labor Law LLP’s Immigration Practice Group can help navigate these issues in 2025.

November 25 , 2024-Immigration Policy Solutions to Shortages in Critical Sectors of the U.S. Economy

The U.S. economy faces critical labor shortages in key sectors, worsened by an aging workforce and industrial policies that create targeted positions. These shortages, particularly in construction, healthcare, transportation, and food production, threaten affordability in housing, medical care, and groceries. The domestic birth rate, declining since the 2008 financial crisis, exacerbates this issue, with fertility rates now below the replacement rate. To address these challenges, increased immigration is essential.

Immigrants play a vital role in the U.S. economy, benefiting all Americans by filling necessary positions and driving growth. Their contributions make the country more globally competitive, enhancing its ability to provide affordable necessities. This report challenges the argument that immigration reduces resources for U.S. residents, asserting instead that immigrants generate more benefits than costs.

Despite the critical need for labor, U.S. immigration policy remains largely unchanged since its last reform nearly 40 years ago. The labor market has cooled but is still understaffed in essential sectors. To mitigate the impact on affordability and prevent further inflationary pressures, U.S. policymakers must focus on increasing immigration. The labor shortages cannot be resolved without this change, which will support economic growth and ensure a higher standard of living for all Americans. Therefore, lifting barriers to immigration is a key strategy for addressing both short-term and long-term workforce needs.

November 22 , 2024-Most Americans say undocumented immigrants should be able to stay legally under certain conditions

Americans hold divided opinions on the status of undocumented immigrants. While about three-quarters of U.S. adults express concern about illegal immigration, many also believe that undocumented immigrants should have a path to legal status if specific requirements are met. A Pew Research Center survey from August found that 64% of Americans support this idea, down from 75% in 2020. However, the percentage of people who believe undocumented immigrants should not be allowed to stay has risen from 24% to 35%.

Support for a pathway to legal status varies across different demographics. Majorities of Hispanic, Black, and Asian Americans favor such a path, while white Americans are more divided. Younger adults, especially those aged 18-29, are more likely to support this option compared to older generations. Additionally, those who supported Kamala Harris in the 2020 election were more likely than Trump supporters to advocate for allowing undocumented immigrants to stay.

Among those who support allowing undocumented immigrants to stay, security background checks (79%) and employment (52%) are the most widely supported conditions. Fewer support fines (25%) or other requirements.

The unauthorized immigrant population in the U.S. grew from 10.2 million in 2019 to 11 million in 2022, with over 3 million having temporary protection from deportation. Despite these increases, many Americans argue that undocumented immigrants should not be rewarded for breaking the law or taking resources from legal residents.

November 27 , 2024-Why Immigration Policy Matters for the National Debt

Immigration will be a key driver of U.S. population growth and labor force changes in the coming decades, with significant fiscal impacts. Immigrants, both legal and illegal, affect federal spending and revenues, but most contribute more in taxes than they receive in benefits. In 2022, immigrants paid an estimated $383 billion in federal taxes, which helped finance programs like Social Security. Immigrants typically contribute more in payroll taxes than they claim in Social Security benefits, and those who retire outside the U.S. lose eligibility for benefits.

Federal spending on immigration-related services, including Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, totals about 0.5% of total federal spending. However, fees immigrants pay for visas and other services offset a significant portion of these costs. Immigration laws restrict the benefits immigrants can claim, with many foreign-born workers needing to be legal residents for at least five years to access federal programs. Immigrants also tend to claim fewer public benefits than native-born citizens.

Economically, immigrants complement the skills of native workers, filling labor shortages in sectors like agriculture, construction, and technology. Their contributions boost overall wages and federal tax collections. However, competition may reduce wages for some lower-skilled U.S. workers. The U.S. faces a significant backlog in green card applications, which, if addressed, could increase GDP by $4 trillion over ten years. Overall, immigration is projected to have a positive impact on economic growth, helping reduce federal deficits and supporting Social Security solvency.

November 25 , 2024-Think Immigration: Making Connections through AILA’s Interest Groups

This blog post highlights the ways AILA members can engage, build community, access resources, and enhance their overall experience within the organization. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor’s words about the interconnectedness of individuals resonate deeply in the context of AILA's mission, especially in light of recent political shifts impacting immigration law and policy.

AILA, with over 16,000 members, provides a unique platform for professionals to connect through Interest Groups. These groups, which span various identities, backgrounds, and practice areas, offer members an opportunity to exchange ideas, expand their networks, and enhance their leadership skills. There are currently 27 Interest Groups, such as the Asian Interest Group (ASIG), Hispanic/Latin American Interest Group (HLIG), and Nonprofit Interest Group (NPIG), each fostering collaboration within specific areas of interest.

Joining an Interest Group is simple and free with AILA membership. Members can join groups via the "My AILA" profile and participate in listserv discussions, in-person meetings at AILA events, and virtual gatherings. Additionally, members can petition AILA to create new groups that align with their interests.

Personal experiences, like the author’s role as a Co-Leader of the Women in Immigration Law Interest Group (WMIG), demonstrate the value of these connections in fostering professional and personal growth. Engagement in AILA’s Interest Groups, Committees, and Chapters can lead to mentorships, business opportunities, and meaningful professional relationships, enhancing both individual success and the collective impact of AILA members.

November 25 , 2024-Employers and Immigration Under Trump: What You Need To Know

With President-elect Trump returning to the White House, many employers are focusing on how his administration may impact immigration policies and their workforce. While there is some uncertainty, previous actions during his first term provide insight into potential changes.

Employers filing for employment-based immigration benefits should be aware of likely shifts, such as the cessation of USCIS deference to previously approved applications, requiring “de novo” reviews of all petitions. National Interest Waiver (NIW) petitions, previously favorable, may now face more stringent adjudication. Additionally, adjustment of status applications for employment-based green cards may require in-person interviews, leading to longer processing times. There may also be disruptions in visa processing, particularly for foreign national employees outside the U.S. seeking re-entry in 2025.

Employers may consider filing applications promptly, potentially upgrading pending petitions to premium processing to avoid delays. Maintaining communication with foreign national employees about travel plans is crucial, as international travel could lead to visa processing delays. Reviewing green card solutions and alternative paths may be wise before policy changes take effect.

On immigration enforcement, large-scale worksite raids and increased audits of Form I-9 records are expected. Employers should stay compliant by avoiding questions about national origin or citizenship during recruitment, ensuring proper documentation for I-9 forms, and consulting with legal counsel before acting on immigration-related tips.

Given these possible changes, employers should seek guidance from experienced counsel to navigate the evolving immigration landscape effectively.

On Election Day, voters across the U.S. decided on key ballot measures affecting immigration, integration, and noncitizen voting. While some states passed restrictive measures, others voted in favor of pro-immigrant initiatives.

In Arizona, Proposition 314, or the Secure the Border Act, raised concerns due to its potential harm to immigrant communities and the state's economy. The measure would make it a state crime to enter Arizona between ports of entry and require employers to use E-Verify to check immigration status. While marketed as a safety measure, Proposition 314 perpetuates harmful stereotypes by linking immigration to crime, despite research showing that immigrants commit fewer crimes than U.S.-born residents. The passage of this measure with a 25% margin is seen as a setback for Arizona's immigrant communities.

Eight states also passed measures restricting non-citizen voting, despite research debunking the myths surrounding this issue. These measures reinforce the notion that only U.S. citizens can vote, although the federal government already addresses this issue. These efforts could risk disenfranchising naturalized citizens and even remove U.S.-born citizens from voter rolls.

On a positive note, several cities passed inclusive ballot measures. Denver codified the Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, while Dallas’ Proposition H allowed better representation for immigrant communities in local government. In New York, the Equal Rights Amendment added protections against discrimination based on ethnicity and national origin.

Looking ahead, many states are expected to continue introducing welcoming immigration policies, demonstrating the resilience of immigrant communities.

Starting Dec. 1, North Carolina law mandates that all county sheriffs cooperate with federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) under House Bill 10. This bill, passed after a veto override by Gov. Roy Cooper, also allocates $463.5 million for private school vouchers. The immigration enforcement component, years in the making, applies to individuals charged with crimes from Dec. 1 onward.

Previously, most sheriffs cooperated voluntarily with ICE, helping to enforce immigration laws based on detainers, or immigration holds. Under HB 10, sheriffs must hold anyone with a detainer for up to 48 hours to allow ICE to take them into custody. This applies to immigrants charged with felonies or serious misdemeanors, such as homicide, sex offenses, and human trafficking.

The bill primarily targets undocumented immigrants charged with serious crimes, though experts warn that nonviolent offenders may still face risk. Immigration advocates criticize the law, arguing it exacerbates racial profiling and undermines community trust in law enforcement. It revives concerns about programs like 287(g), which have historically been accused of unfairly targeting Latino and Mexican immigrants.

Though some sheriffs oppose the bill, fearing additional burdens and constitutional issues, it remains in effect, with potential legal challenges on the horizon. Governor-elect Josh Stein and Attorney General Jeff Jackson have expressed opposition, though it’s unclear if they will take legal action. The law reflects ongoing political tension over immigration enforcement in North Carolina, especially in Democratic-majority counties.

Immigration policy is poised to be a major topic at Oklahoma's Capitol during the upcoming legislative session. With President-elect Donald Trump pushing for federal crackdowns, Oklahoma Republicans have unveiled their plans to expel undocumented immigrants quickly. Governor Kevin Stitt introduced "Operation Guardian" to deport undocumented immigrants from correctional facilities, costing taxpayers about $36,000 per day to house 526 undocumented individuals.

Rep. Justin Humphrey has proposed legislation to create a new charge for undocumented immigrants committing crimes, carrying the option of life imprisonment or deportation. He believes the bill will save taxpayer money by addressing the costs of education and welfare for undocumented immigrants. However, critics, including Nicole Maldonado of LULAC, argue that these proposals are extreme and performative, designed to gain attention rather than solve meaningful issues.

Stitt’s previous creation of the Oklahoma State Work Permits and Visa Task Force, which aimed to offer visas and work permits to immigrants, was abandoned, raising questions about his immigration consistency. Critics like Cindy Nguyen from the ACLU argue that proposals like Humphrey’s would create fear within immigrant communities and strain the already overcrowded prison system, further burdening taxpayers.

Oklahoma's past anti-immigration bill, HB 4156, which criminalized unauthorized entry, is tied up in legal challenges, with federal lawsuits and opposition from the ACLU blocking its implementation. Despite these challenges, Oklahoma continues to pursue stringent immigration measures.

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) maintains records, known as "a-files," which detail noncitizens’ immigration histories, including green card applications and encounters with immigration enforcement. Every year, noncitizens and their attorneys submit tens of thousands of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for these records, which are crucial for defending against deportation or applying for immigration benefits.

However, reports from immigration lawyers indicate that USCIS is not adhering to its own policies when it comes to searching for immigration records. Specifically, the agency is not conducting the reasonable searches that FOIA mandates before determining that records cannot be located. Furthermore, USCIS is failing to process requests that are remanded for further searches after a successful appeal of an initial inadequate search. This failure to follow procedure violates FOIA and creates significant delays for noncitizens and their attorneys, preventing them from obtaining necessary records to stay in or immigrate to the U.S.

These issues with USCIS processing delays are hindering the ability of individuals to present their cases effectively, causing unnecessary obstacles for those seeking to remain in the country or obtain immigration benefits. This disregard for FOIA guidelines and the lack of timely action exacerbates the challenges faced by noncitizens navigating the U.S. immigration system.

In response to the re-election of Donald Trump and his plans for mass deportations, California is preparing to defend its immigrant communities through legal challenges. Under Trump’s first term, the state passed a “Sanctuary State” law that limited cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. With Trump’s promise to initiate the largest deportation campaign in U.S. history, California advocates are gearing up for new legal battles, especially targeting non-citizens with past criminal convictions.

Among those at risk is Chanthon Bun, a legal permanent resident who spent 23 years in prison for a robbery committed at age 18. Despite his release in 2020, Bun lives in constant fear of deportation, a threat that has intensified with Trump’s re-election. Immigration experts warn that people with past convictions, even from decades ago, are at high risk, particularly in areas near the U.S.-Mexico border.

California, which has the largest immigrant population in the country, has already enacted laws to protect immigrants, but these laws have been weakened in certain areas, such as allowing state prisons to share information with ICE. Governor Gavin Newsom has called a special legislative session to defend the state’s values and prepare for the challenges ahead.

Advocates like Naureen Shah of the ACLU believe that states, particularly California, will play a critical role in opposing Trump’s mass deportation plans. They are looking to the state for leadership in protecting immigrants from what they describe as ICE’s terror.

Following the November presidential election, many are speculating about the future of immigration under a second Trump administration, with particular attention on its impact in Minnesota. Professor Ana Pottratz Acosta, a seasoned immigration lawyer, has shared her insights in several media discussions.

President-elect Trump has announced plans for mass deportations and intends to appoint former ICE director Tom Homan as border czar, a new executive role. Pottratz Acosta, drawing on her legal expertise, explains the logistics of mass deportations and the potential expansion of expedited removal. This fast-track process, which previously targeted immigrants near the border who have been in the U.S. for under two years, could be extended to the interior of the country, as was proposed during Trump’s first term.

The prospect of mass deportations, particularly through expedited removal, raises concerns for immigrant communities nationwide, including in Minnesota. As the administration takes a harder stance on immigration, local authorities and legal experts like Pottratz Acosta are bracing for the logistical and legal challenges that could arise, potentially affecting thousands of immigrants and their families across the state.

The discussions surrounding the new immigration policies underscore the uncertainty and fear that many immigrants may face under the incoming administration, as well as the need for continued advocacy and legal support for those at risk.

Rosa, a long-time undocumented Mexican immigrant in Whitewater, Wisconsin, initially paid little attention to the Nicaraguan asylum-seekers who arrived in her town. They lived in the same trailer park, attended public schools, and worked in the same factories. However, she grew frustrated when she realized these new arrivals were eligible for work permits and driver’s licenses—privileges that had long been unavailable to undocumented immigrants like herself.

Her resentment intensified as she saw the government provide these benefits to asylum-seekers, while longstanding immigrants such as her received little support. This frustration echoed across the country, especially among Latino immigrants who felt overlooked by the Democratic Party. Many of them, including Rosa, turned to Donald Trump, who promised tougher immigration policies.

In Whitewater, Trump’s rhetoric resonated with residents, especially those who felt that new arrivals were receiving unfair advantages. Stories like that of Valadez, an undocumented mother, illustrated this sense of injustice. Valadez, who cleans houses and drives without a license, found a purse containing a Nicaraguan work permit and driver’s license—symbols of the benefits denied to her.

Despite Biden's promise of immigration reform, many Latino voters were disillusioned by the lack of progress on issues like regularizing the status of long-term immigrants. This dissatisfaction has contributed to Trump’s growing support among Latinos, signaling a shift in the political landscape as some long-time Democratic supporters turn to the Republican Party, hoping for a path to citizenship.

President-Elect Donald Trump has promised the largest mass deportation in U.S. history, which will affect many U.S. employers, particularly those in manufacturing, agriculture, and hospitality industries that rely on a non-professional workforce. Employers must prepare for intense immigration enforcement and the loss of workers due to audits or raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Since 1986, employers have been required to verify the work authorization of new hires using Form I-9, but documents can easily be faked. To address this, many employers have turned to E-Verify, a government system for validating documents. However, counterfeit documents can still pass through this system. Employers may not knowingly hire illegal workers but might ignore red flags, such as payroll mismatches or employee identity issues. This opens the door for government enforcement.

ICE can conduct audits (silent raids) by issuing Notices of Inspection, demanding historical records, and assessing I-9 forms. Penalties for incomplete forms or hiring unauthorized workers can range from $300 to $30,000 per worker, with additional sanctions. In severe cases, ICE may perform "raids with force," arresting unauthorized workers, seizing company files, and potentially prosecuting employers for criminal charges.

To prepare for such events, employers should audit I-9 forms, enroll in E-Verify, and ensure proper document handling and tax compliance. Legal compliance policies and response plans should be in place, and employers should work with experienced counsel to navigate potential raids and investigations.

Federal immigration authorities are working to expand immigrant detention capacity in New Jersey in preparation for mass deportations planned by President-elect Donald Trump. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) uncovered these plans through records obtained after suing for information on contract solicitations issued by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

The expansion involves at least three New Jersey facilities run by private prison companies, with a combined capacity of about 2,500 detainees. These include the Albert M. “Bo” Robinson Treatment Center in Trenton, the Elizabeth Detention Center, and Delaney Hall. These facilities have faced criticism for past abusive conditions, including overcrowding and medical neglect.

The expansion efforts come amid a state law banning immigrant detention centers in New Jersey, which is currently in legal limbo due to challenges from private prison companies. Advocates, including ACLU-NJ’s Ami Kachalia and the New Jersey Alliance for Immigrant Justice’s Amy Torres, are urging state lawmakers to pass the Immigrant Trust Act to protect immigrant communities and prevent New Jersey from becoming complicit in deportations.

Gov. Phil Murphy has expressed concerns over federal detention plans but has not yet provided a clear stance on how the state will respond. New Jersey lawmakers have also voiced opposition, with most of the state's congressional delegation urging the Biden administration to halt the expansion of detention centers. Advocates are pushing for stronger protections to prevent the use of state resources for these plans.