sunny1000
06-25 05:12 PM
Please call the congressman's office and request your friends, family and colleagues (including U.S citizens) to call as well to make this campaign a success.
Thanks.:)
Thanks.:)
wallpaper Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
zoooom
03-13 05:05 PM
I am in almost exactly the same situation as you... I wonder if this can be done as well... On the other hand, as long as AC21 and EAD are prevalent (as long as we can indeed get 3 yr EAD) it is atleast not as bad for us...
I pity the poor guys who could not file in july for whatever reason and are stuck in EB3 with a later PD
Yeah agreed...atleast we r lucky in that sense. But looks like now EB3 is not going anywhere. I might be wrong but till I dont see some good movement in EB3 category I choose to remain pessimistic...
I pity the poor guys who could not file in july for whatever reason and are stuck in EB3 with a later PD
Yeah agreed...atleast we r lucky in that sense. But looks like now EB3 is not going anywhere. I might be wrong but till I dont see some good movement in EB3 category I choose to remain pessimistic...
ianlock
09-17 04:49 PM
oh.... i see....thats how it works...
got it
thanks.
I just wonder how long it will be untill EB3 ROW is current. ???
got it
thanks.
I just wonder how long it will be untill EB3 ROW is current. ???
2011 Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
kopra
04-18 03:26 PM
I also came with Fragomen filing my H1B case with one of below mentioned US company in ERP, and they started my GC only after 2.5 years of service with them. 2 Years was the norm, but another 6 months will pass to get the experience letters from previous companies with the exact format and tools they want etc...Finally filed in 2008 jan, but after the filing, it has been smooth for the labour, 140 so far...
HP, Cisco, TCS, Deloitte, IBM, SAP, ORCL....I am going to add one more so called big firm BEARINGPOINT (formerly known as KPMG consulting).
I know that Fragomen specifically guides and runs the visa/GC related matters of Bearingpoint. They charge 10,000 dollars for a GC case and give clear cut instrucation to Bearingpoint that do not file GC till the very last moment. I left Bearingpoint (16000+ employees and offices in 43 countries...sounds great doesn't it?) because of my immigration issues caused by Fragomen. I joined a desi consulting company with 2 employess. This desi company manager took my GC file in his hand, drove to attorney office and asked him to file it ASAP. No waiting period, no nothing....
Big corporation + Fragomen is a deadly/toxic combination. Stay away from it if you can.
HP, Cisco, TCS, Deloitte, IBM, SAP, ORCL....I am going to add one more so called big firm BEARINGPOINT (formerly known as KPMG consulting).
I know that Fragomen specifically guides and runs the visa/GC related matters of Bearingpoint. They charge 10,000 dollars for a GC case and give clear cut instrucation to Bearingpoint that do not file GC till the very last moment. I left Bearingpoint (16000+ employees and offices in 43 countries...sounds great doesn't it?) because of my immigration issues caused by Fragomen. I joined a desi consulting company with 2 employess. This desi company manager took my GC file in his hand, drove to attorney office and asked him to file it ASAP. No waiting period, no nothing....
Big corporation + Fragomen is a deadly/toxic combination. Stay away from it if you can.
more...
bharol
06-30 04:58 PM
No its I-485 I just cut and pasted the two emails I received, first at 10am then the second at 3 pm check online and the system had same messages. If its true I am having a party wow man thanks I did come to US in 1997. I do have a labor which was approved under RIR PD date 2004 but the employer refused to file I-140. Then again filed PERM in 2007 under EB2 and filed I-140/I-485 based on this PERM
Congrats.
Not to scare you but USCIS Can make mistakes.
In our company we have an immigration chat alias and my colleague' friend's
wife's GC was approved and after a couple of months she got a mail saying that
her GC was approved by mistake and it is being revoked!
She hadn't event applied for EAD renewal since her GC was approved.
Now I am not making it up.
I don't have any more details about this case but I read this on our alias.
Congrats.
Not to scare you but USCIS Can make mistakes.
In our company we have an immigration chat alias and my colleague' friend's
wife's GC was approved and after a couple of months she got a mail saying that
her GC was approved by mistake and it is being revoked!
She hadn't event applied for EAD renewal since her GC was approved.
Now I am not making it up.
I don't have any more details about this case but I read this on our alias.
eb3_nepa
07-05 10:31 AM
I called USCIS and she said based on the information she got from his authorities, she said all the 485 application packets will be rejected with a note saying that , please apply after oct 1st if your PD is current.
I also asked her if you dont send us back by oct 1st what sould we do, she said if I dont receive by August mid, then take infopass and go to local uscis office and request for my application back.
I think all the customer service agents are aware of the issue and got informed what to answer for our questions.
I BEG to differ. I called USCIS today morning and the rep told me VERY CLEARLY that ANY application received on July 2 will be ACCEPTED as July 2 is the cutoff.
A few min later my spouse called and they told her, Everything would be rejected.
USCIS customer service center, currently cant differentiate their A** from a hole in the ground!!
I also asked her if you dont send us back by oct 1st what sould we do, she said if I dont receive by August mid, then take infopass and go to local uscis office and request for my application back.
I think all the customer service agents are aware of the issue and got informed what to answer for our questions.
I BEG to differ. I called USCIS today morning and the rep told me VERY CLEARLY that ANY application received on July 2 will be ACCEPTED as July 2 is the cutoff.
A few min later my spouse called and they told her, Everything would be rejected.
USCIS customer service center, currently cant differentiate their A** from a hole in the ground!!
more...
needhelp!
02-13 04:44 PM
Things are going to start heating up if you try to overtake me.
Thank you abhijitp, waiting4gc and needhelp! These are some great pointers, and my chances sound better already. I am going to see what I can do :) Things have picked up a little on my numbers today, happy to say at 163 now!
Thank you abhijitp, waiting4gc and needhelp! These are some great pointers, and my chances sound better already. I am going to see what I can do :) Things have picked up a little on my numbers today, happy to say at 163 now!
2010 Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
qvadis
03-21 04:48 AM
Allow me to emphasize a different section of the text:
Snips from Nov 05 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html)
The AC21 removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available.
>> As per my understanding, When there are no per country limits, It can be assigned to any one with oldest PD. Not that it is working like that with USCIS. As I said, before in my previous post, we can imagine these visa numbers tagged with the category name beside them. <<
The way I read this is that this particular AC21 rule only applies if there are no cut-off dates in any category (for that calendar quarter). This is clearly not the case in this bulletin, where the cut-off date for EB3 is set to July '05. Hence, the new interpretation seems different.
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply ...] This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
>> I have spoken with an attorney and he expressed above similar opinion where we might not have noticed how numbers were overflowing and NOT overflowing to demand or lack of demand. Either way, This is not a panacea for the problem at hand as there is no clarity what so ever in either procedures. <<
Maybe I'm misreading above statement, but it sounds to me that because of higher demand (of ROW), AC21 wouldn't apply anymore, and instead of 47k in '05, India had only received 10k in '06.
Note that I think the immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed. By changing their interpretation, they are only taking away visas from one group and give it to another group. I can certainly see why people who are affected by this would be biased. No harm intended.
Snips from Nov 05 Bulletin (http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_2712.html)
The AC21 removed the per-country limit in any calendar quarter in which overall applicant demand for Employment-based visa numbers is less than the total of such numbers available.
>> As per my understanding, When there are no per country limits, It can be assigned to any one with oldest PD. Not that it is working like that with USCIS. As I said, before in my previous post, we can imagine these visa numbers tagged with the category name beside them. <<
The way I read this is that this particular AC21 rule only applies if there are no cut-off dates in any category (for that calendar quarter). This is clearly not the case in this bulletin, where the cut-off date for EB3 is set to July '05. Hence, the new interpretation seems different.
During FY due to anticipated heavy demand, the AC21 provisions are not expected to apply ...] This will mean an Employment per-country limit for FY-2006 of approximately 10,650.
To illustrate the effect of the reduced per-county limitation during FY-2006 on the oversubscribed countries, it should be noted that during FY-2005 India used approximately 47,175 Employment numbers.
>> I have spoken with an attorney and he expressed above similar opinion where we might not have noticed how numbers were overflowing and NOT overflowing to demand or lack of demand. Either way, This is not a panacea for the problem at hand as there is no clarity what so ever in either procedures. <<
Maybe I'm misreading above statement, but it sounds to me that because of higher demand (of ROW), AC21 wouldn't apply anymore, and instead of 47k in '05, India had only received 10k in '06.
Note that I think the immigration system is broken and needs to be fixed. By changing their interpretation, they are only taking away visas from one group and give it to another group. I can certainly see why people who are affected by this would be biased. No harm intended.
more...
alok_msh
05-19 03:44 PM
50 $
Receipt ID: 2164-6311-7563-7909
Merchant Contact Information
Immigration Voice
donations@immigrationvoice.org
850-391-4966
Receipt ID: 2164-6311-7563-7909
Merchant Contact Information
Immigration Voice
donations@immigrationvoice.org
850-391-4966
hair Wallpapers · Games Call of
seeniraj
06-24 12:51 PM
When i request the staffer that i want to talk to some one who handles immigration bills,she immediately asked whether its to support the bills HR5882, HR6039 and HR5921.She told me that they are getting lots of calls on this
more...
chanduv23
09-21 04:43 PM
I would say - lets not discuss these anymore. For a lot of people - this could be an eye opener.
We will get more people now, so lets not continue this thread
We will get more people now, so lets not continue this thread
hot Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2
GCBy3000
11-08 10:39 AM
SInce democrats gained the contorl on house, they will wait till the next congress starts to pass releif to immigration issue. THis way, they can take the credit for it and campaign it for their next election. Republicans are stuck now. They neither want to pass it nor want it to supress. They dont want the democrats to gain the credit whatsoever. If republicans cannot pass it this year they will do everything to stop it in next congress session if they have majority in senate. It is vey comlicated and sensitive issue and we have to wait to see how the business people push the lawmakers. None other then business tycoons can make some impact with this kind of power split in senate / congress with a lame duck president for next two years.
I heard Nancy say she would get started with some legislation that both parties and president agrees and she mentioned CIR. I think, if the republicans are smart they will quickly pass a version of it that they still can control - during the lame duck session when the old house returns for a few days.
But the biggest new problem will be suedo retrogression due to bottlenecks at Service centers! so near yet so far!
I heard Nancy say she would get started with some legislation that both parties and president agrees and she mentioned CIR. I think, if the republicans are smart they will quickly pass a version of it that they still can control - during the lame duck session when the old house returns for a few days.
But the biggest new problem will be suedo retrogression due to bottlenecks at Service centers! so near yet so far!
more...
house Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
indiandude
10-19 05:41 PM
Hi eb2_immigrant,
Thank you for your information.
Can anyone share their experience applying PIO in CGI Houston ?
Thanks !
Thank you for your information.
Can anyone share their experience applying PIO in CGI Houston ?
Thanks !
tattoo call of duty modern warfare
seeniraj
06-24 12:51 PM
When i request the staffer that i want to talk to some one who handles immigration bills,she immediately asked whether its to support the bills HR5882, HR6039 and HR5921.She told me that they are getting lots of calls on this
more...
pictures call of duty modern warfare 2
bekugc
06-04 08:15 PM
still waiting for an answer to my earlier qn...anybody else in same boat with an answer.?
************************************************** *****
when 485 pending pple r requesting AP to travel out and return back.
the question: 3 on page 3 of the I-131 applicatin - "If the travel document will be delivered to an overseas office, where should the notice to pick up the document be sent:"
in part 7 of the application --> can it be left empty???
since we r expecting to AP approval to arrive by mail to our mailing address, can we leave this question 3 on page3/part 7 EMPTY?
************************************************** *****
thanks
************************************************** *****
when 485 pending pple r requesting AP to travel out and return back.
the question: 3 on page 3 of the I-131 applicatin - "If the travel document will be delivered to an overseas office, where should the notice to pick up the document be sent:"
in part 7 of the application --> can it be left empty???
since we r expecting to AP approval to arrive by mail to our mailing address, can we leave this question 3 on page3/part 7 EMPTY?
************************************************** *****
thanks
dresses Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2
eb3_nepa
06-25 05:23 PM
mirage,
Sometimes i believe in conspiracy theory but not this time. They just approved it fast because of improved processing in Texas - i'm also scared if they approve mine fast and i wont get 2 year as well.
Why - Because once you pay 340 from next time onwards its FREE. why they would increase load without any money :)
No it is NOT free from there on.
Btw I just got "screwed over" by the USCIS ;). I "missed" the June 30th deadline by 5 days. Our EADs got appoved today. If only the USCIS was as effieicient with 485s as it is with monetary screw overs :rolleyes:
Sometimes i believe in conspiracy theory but not this time. They just approved it fast because of improved processing in Texas - i'm also scared if they approve mine fast and i wont get 2 year as well.
Why - Because once you pay 340 from next time onwards its FREE. why they would increase load without any money :)
No it is NOT free from there on.
Btw I just got "screwed over" by the USCIS ;). I "missed" the June 30th deadline by 5 days. Our EADs got appoved today. If only the USCIS was as effieicient with 485s as it is with monetary screw overs :rolleyes:
more...
makeup Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2
Kodi
06-26 08:36 AM
I hope someone will keep us updated as the the senate proceeds.
girlfriend call of duty 4 modern warfare
dvb123
01-11 11:00 PM
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:YQ8A5L4qUTMJ:www.shsu.edu/~kmd007/documents/WinFSHD2Userskmd007ArticlesDouglas-NationalOriginsSystem-1.pdf+supreme+court+national+origins+quota+1924&hl=en&gl=us&sig=AHIEtbT24Qc157BZXxEE8b4o6Fcrv-YXTw
Consequences of the
National Origins Act
The goal of the National Origins Act was to control
both the quantity and quality of U.S. immigrants in an
effort to prevent further erosion of the ethnic composi-
tion of U.S. society. The law accomplished this goal
using three mechanisms: capping the overall number of
immigrants allowed into the United States in a given
month and year; favoring immigrants from certain
countries; and screening out otherwise qualified immi-
grants as unsuitable to the United States during the visa
screening process. The sorting mechanism heavily
favored northern and western European countries. The
temporary formula of 2% of the foreign-born of each
nationality in the 1890 census gave 85% of the quotas
to northern and western European nations. The national
origins system fully implemented in 1929 continued
the trend of both overall restriction and nation bias.
Indeed, the act virtually halted all immigration from
southern and eastern Europe. Thus, European immigra-
tion dropped from more than 800,000 in 1921 to less
than 150,000 by the end of the decade.
In addition to controlling the volume of immigra-
tion from Europe, the National Origins Act also
allowed a mechanism for selection of immigrants as
well. In its creation of consular offices abroad, the act
provided a frontline screening mechanism for select-
ing out those deemed unsuitable for the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001981----000-.html
� 1981. Equal rights under the law
How Current is This? (a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_IX.html
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER IX > � 2000h–2Prev | Next � 2000h–2. Intervention by Attorney General; denial of equal protection on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin
How Current is This? Whenever an action has been commenced in any court of the United States seeking relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws under the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, the Attorney General for or in the name of the United States may intervene in such action upon timely application if the Attorney General certifies that the case is of general public importance.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_I.html
PART THREE
ORGANISATIONS TO CONTACT - IV CORE PLs endorse this so that a few members will help me. OTHER MEMBERS CAN FORM GROUPS AND CONTACT THESE OFFICES.
American Immigration Council
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005-3141
Tel.: 202-507-7500
Fax: 202-742-5619
Carl Shusterman
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
600 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel (213) 623-4592 Fax (213) 623-3720
National Origin, Immigration and Language Rights Program
The Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center
600 Harrison Street, Suite 120
San Francisco, CA 94107
Telephone (415) 864-8848
Fax: (415) 864-8199
TTY/TDD Line: (415) 593-0091
Email: info@las-elc.org
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004 USA
Phone: (212) 344-3005
URL: http://www.aclu.org/
Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO)
14 Pidegon Hill Drive, Suite 500
0 Sterling, VA> 20165 USA
Phone: (703) 421-5443
Fax: (703) 421-6401
E-Mail: comment@ceousa.org
URL: http://www.ceousa.org/
Primary Contact: Linda Chavez, President
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
1801 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20507
Phone: (202) 663-4900
URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Phone: (410) 521-4939
URL: http://www.naacp.org/
E-Mail: members@naacp.org
PART TWO
LEGAL RESEARCH - EVERYBODY CAN CONTRIBUTE ABOUT COURT CASES, PRECEDENTS ETC AND I WILL TRY TO CONSOLIDATE ALL THE REPLIES HERE
Different Supreme Court Decisions
http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/race-discrimination/race-discrimination-history.html
Gratz v. Bollinger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1
Bakke vs Regents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakke_v._Regents
Supreme Court Opinions
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/20.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/30.html
Articles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-04-20-supreme-court_N.htm
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/racial-discrimination#constitutional-protection-against-racial
PART ONE
This is an old topic but I thought I would post some interesting info that I found. Give me green before someone drowns me in red.
Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection)
The Supreme Court has defined these levels of scrutiny in the following way:
Strict scrutiny (if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right): the law is unconstitutional unless it is "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest. In addition, there cannot be a "less restrictive" alternative available to achieve that compelling interest.
In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race not as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic.
In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in Grutter, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny.[30]
One law firm I found dealing with Federal Litigation. There maybe many.
http://www.vblaw.com/PracticeAreas/Federal-Litigation-Appeals.asp
Should we not look at this option when Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-LT-Mexico-US-Migration.html
Antis are ahead of us in taking lawsuits to supreme court
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/tech-workers-take-h-1b-case-supreme-court-024
OPINION JULY 1, 2009 The Supreme Court Says No To Quotas
Residents in a burning building want competent firefighters. They don't care about the race of those whose job it is to save them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640586803076705.html
VERY INTERSTING ARTICLES ABOUT THIS PER COUNTRY QUOTAS
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846255,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula
The 1921 Emergency Quota Act restricted immigration to 3% of foreign-born persons of each nationality resident in the United States in 1910.
The Immigration Act of 1924 provided that for three years immigration will be restricted to 2% based on the census of 1890, and that after June 30, 1927, total immigration from all countries will be limited to 150,000 based upon national origins of white inhabitants as shown by the census of 1920.
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses
http://homepage3.nifty.com/ubiquitous/Japanese-Americans_E/Page05.htm
Consequences of the
National Origins Act
The goal of the National Origins Act was to control
both the quantity and quality of U.S. immigrants in an
effort to prevent further erosion of the ethnic composi-
tion of U.S. society. The law accomplished this goal
using three mechanisms: capping the overall number of
immigrants allowed into the United States in a given
month and year; favoring immigrants from certain
countries; and screening out otherwise qualified immi-
grants as unsuitable to the United States during the visa
screening process. The sorting mechanism heavily
favored northern and western European countries. The
temporary formula of 2% of the foreign-born of each
nationality in the 1890 census gave 85% of the quotas
to northern and western European nations. The national
origins system fully implemented in 1929 continued
the trend of both overall restriction and nation bias.
Indeed, the act virtually halted all immigration from
southern and eastern Europe. Thus, European immigra-
tion dropped from more than 800,000 in 1921 to less
than 150,000 by the end of the decade.
In addition to controlling the volume of immigra-
tion from Europe, the National Origins Act also
allowed a mechanism for selection of immigrants as
well. In its creation of consular offices abroad, the act
provided a frontline screening mechanism for select-
ing out those deemed unsuitable for the United States.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001981----000-.html
� 1981. Equal rights under the law
How Current is This? (a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_IX.html
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER IX > � 2000h–2Prev | Next � 2000h–2. Intervention by Attorney General; denial of equal protection on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin
How Current is This? Whenever an action has been commenced in any court of the United States seeking relief from the denial of equal protection of the laws under the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution on account of race, color, religion, sex or national origin, the Attorney General for or in the name of the United States may intervene in such action upon timely application if the Attorney General certifies that the case is of general public importance.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sup_01_42_10_21_20_I.html
PART THREE
ORGANISATIONS TO CONTACT - IV CORE PLs endorse this so that a few members will help me. OTHER MEMBERS CAN FORM GROUPS AND CONTACT THESE OFFICES.
American Immigration Council
1331 G Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20005-3141
Tel.: 202-507-7500
Fax: 202-742-5619
Carl Shusterman
Law Offices of Carl Shusterman
600 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1550, Los Angeles, CA 90017
Tel (213) 623-4592 Fax (213) 623-3720
National Origin, Immigration and Language Rights Program
The Legal Aid Society - Employment Law Center
600 Harrison Street, Suite 120
San Francisco, CA 94107
Telephone (415) 864-8848
Fax: (415) 864-8199
TTY/TDD Line: (415) 593-0091
Email: info@las-elc.org
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004 USA
Phone: (212) 344-3005
URL: http://www.aclu.org/
Center for Equal Opportunity (CEO)
14 Pidegon Hill Drive, Suite 500
0 Sterling, VA> 20165 USA
Phone: (703) 421-5443
Fax: (703) 421-6401
E-Mail: comment@ceousa.org
URL: http://www.ceousa.org/
Primary Contact: Linda Chavez, President
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
1801 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20507
Phone: (202) 663-4900
URL: http://www.eeoc.gov/
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
4805 Mt. Hope Drive
Baltimore, MD 21215
Phone: (410) 521-4939
URL: http://www.naacp.org/
E-Mail: members@naacp.org
PART TWO
LEGAL RESEARCH - EVERYBODY CAN CONTRIBUTE ABOUT COURT CASES, PRECEDENTS ETC AND I WILL TRY TO CONSOLIDATE ALL THE REPLIES HERE
Different Supreme Court Decisions
http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/race-discrimination/race-discrimination-history.html
Gratz v. Bollinger
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gratz_v._Bollinger
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1
Bakke vs Regents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakke_v._Regents
Supreme Court Opinions
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/20.html
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment14/30.html
Articles
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/judicial/2009-04-20-supreme-court_N.htm
http://www.enotes.com/everyday-law-encyclopedia/racial-discrimination#constitutional-protection-against-racial
PART ONE
This is an old topic but I thought I would post some interesting info that I found. Give me green before someone drowns me in red.
Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_protection)
The Supreme Court has defined these levels of scrutiny in the following way:
Strict scrutiny (if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right): the law is unconstitutional unless it is "narrowly tailored" to serve a "compelling" government interest. In addition, there cannot be a "less restrictive" alternative available to achieve that compelling interest.
In Bakke, the Court held that racial quotas are unconstitutional, but that educational institutions could legally use race as one of many factors to consider in their admissions process. In Grutter and Gratz, the Court upheld both Bakke as a precedent and the admissions policy of the University of Michigan law school. In dicta, however, Justice O'Connor, writing for the Court, said she expected that in 25 years, racial preferences would no longer be necessary. In Gratz, the Court invalidated Michigan's undergraduate admissions policy, on the grounds that unlike the law school's policy, which treated race not as one of many factors in an admissions process that looked to the individual applicant, the undergraduate policy used a point system that was excessively mechanistic.
In these affirmative action cases, the Supreme Court has employed, or has said it employed, strict scrutiny, since the affirmative action policies challenged by the plaintiffs categorized by race. The policy in Grutter, and a Harvard College admissions policy praised by Justice Powell's opinion in Bakke, passed muster because the Court deemed that they were narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest in diversity. On the other side, it is argued that the purpose of the Equal Protection Clause is to prevent the socio-political subordination of some groups by others, not to prevent classification; since this is so, non-invidious classifications, such as those used by affirmative action programs, should not be subjected to heightened scrutiny.[30]
One law firm I found dealing with Federal Litigation. There maybe many.
http://www.vblaw.com/PracticeAreas/Federal-Litigation-Appeals.asp
Should we not look at this option when Mexico's ambassador to the United States said Friday he expects immigration reform is unlikely to pass in that country in 2010 because of unemployment and midterm elections?
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/08/world/AP-LT-Mexico-US-Migration.html
Antis are ahead of us in taking lawsuits to supreme court
http://www.infoworld.com/d/adventures-in-it/tech-workers-take-h-1b-case-supreme-court-024
OPINION JULY 1, 2009 The Supreme Court Says No To Quotas
Residents in a burning building want competent firefighters. They don't care about the race of those whose job it is to save them.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640586803076705.html
VERY INTERSTING ARTICLES ABOUT THIS PER COUNTRY QUOTAS
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,846255,00.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_Act_of_1924
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula
The 1921 Emergency Quota Act restricted immigration to 3% of foreign-born persons of each nationality resident in the United States in 1910.
The Immigration Act of 1924 provided that for three years immigration will be restricted to 2% based on the census of 1890, and that after June 30, 1927, total immigration from all countries will be limited to 150,000 based upon national origins of white inhabitants as shown by the census of 1920.
http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/limiting_the_huddled_masses
http://homepage3.nifty.com/ubiquitous/Japanese-Americans_E/Page05.htm
hairstyles Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
srkamath
07-17 07:28 PM
I was also told that there is new law which requires that the PERM fees should be paid by the employer (around 5-6k). Most desi consultancies used to ask the employees to pony up the labor fees. wonder how this will affect the conversion process.
It is ILLEGAL for the foreign applicant to pay for the PERM fees or the I-140 fees or lawyer expenses pertaining to either steps. The Employer MUST bear all expenses for this process. If you have evidence of wrongdoing, pls report it to DOL.
We should not be supportive of such violations of law - as a group it is not in our best interests.
The foreign applicant may pay all I-485 related expenses - or a generous employer can cover those expenses too.
It is ILLEGAL for the foreign applicant to pay for the PERM fees or the I-140 fees or lawyer expenses pertaining to either steps. The Employer MUST bear all expenses for this process. If you have evidence of wrongdoing, pls report it to DOL.
We should not be supportive of such violations of law - as a group it is not in our best interests.
The foreign applicant may pay all I-485 related expenses - or a generous employer can cover those expenses too.
logiclife
02-12 06:46 PM
Ok guys, take it easy.
sanju
04-10 08:37 AM
Dear Bigheart Sanju
3. You seem to be under the impression that IV got the visa-bulletin reversed??? Moses, wake up and smell the roses. The massive class-action lawsuit being pursued by AILA, the Silicon Valley lobby pressuring Zoe Lofgren, almost all immigration lawyers asking people to join the class action .. what about all of that? Do think your 25 bucks on the flower campaign is what got the bulletin reversed?
SERIOUSLY??
Thanks chanakya, I do have a big heart. But I understand where you are coming from. You joined this forum in Jun-08. You were not here in July-07. So did not see how things unfolded and what actually happened. I am in no mood to narrate and spoon feed it to you. If you think aila did something for you, then why are u arguing here on this forum and why do u want access to some donor forum. Why don't you go and join aila? If noone is even doing anything here, why do u want access to some useless forum. You don't think anyone has done anything or anyone is doing anything, right? Maybe you need to go to in the next annual convention of aila. Good bye.
.
3. You seem to be under the impression that IV got the visa-bulletin reversed??? Moses, wake up and smell the roses. The massive class-action lawsuit being pursued by AILA, the Silicon Valley lobby pressuring Zoe Lofgren, almost all immigration lawyers asking people to join the class action .. what about all of that? Do think your 25 bucks on the flower campaign is what got the bulletin reversed?
SERIOUSLY??
Thanks chanakya, I do have a big heart. But I understand where you are coming from. You joined this forum in Jun-08. You were not here in July-07. So did not see how things unfolded and what actually happened. I am in no mood to narrate and spoon feed it to you. If you think aila did something for you, then why are u arguing here on this forum and why do u want access to some donor forum. Why don't you go and join aila? If noone is even doing anything here, why do u want access to some useless forum. You don't think anyone has done anything or anyone is doing anything, right? Maybe you need to go to in the next annual convention of aila. Good bye.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment