close
  • Feb 05, 2020Ray Lahoud to Speak at New York Asylum & Immigration Law Conference

    Raymond G. Lahoud, a Member of law firm Norris McLaughlin, P.A., and Chair of its Immigration Law Practice Group, will moderate “Intro to Asylum Law” on Friday, February 28, at the 5th annual Asylum & Immigration Law Conference hosted by the New York Law School Asylum Clinic and the Federal Bar Association Immigration Law Section.

    About the Presentation

    “Seeking asylum protection, like anything related to the American immigration system, is complicated. The smallest error could cause the most devastating consequences, so it is essential that anyone seeking asylum protection or other forms of immigration protection, relief, or benefits, seeks the counsel of a competent and experienced immigration attorney, which is why programs like this are so important to ensure that those attorneys are well-educated,” said Lahoud, who will be joined by Professor Raquiba Huq; Amy Gell, Esq.; and Ray Fasano, Esq. for the panel discussion, 9:15 – 10:45 a.m.

    The event, 8:30 a.m. – 6:30 p.m. at New York Law School, provides advanced, basic/beginner, and children tracks and is offering up to 7.5 New York CLE credits, including ethics and diversity, inclusion, and elimination of bias credits. Other discussion topics include protected class claims, litigation, and the latest in state and federal immigration law and policy. For more information and to register, visit Eventbrite.

    About Ray Lahoud

    Lahoud focuses his practice exclusively on immigration law and deportation defense for individuals, families, small to large domestic and multinational businesses and corporations, employers, international employees, investors, students, professors, researchers, skilled professionals, athletes, and entertainers, in every type of immigration or deportation defense matter—whether domestic or foreign. His immigration practice is broad, ranging from areas of corporate and employment immigration and related compliance to immigration litigation before agencies and courts across the United States, for corporations and individuals alike.

    Lahoud’s experience includes immigrant and non-immigrant visas, visa overstays, immigrants who entered without inspection or authorization, EB-5 investor visas (serving investors, regional centers, and project developers), citizenship and naturalization claims, deportation and removal litigation at the immigration court and all appellate levels, PERM Labor Certification, Family Petitions, Adjustment of Status, Marriage Petitions, Asylum, VAWA applications, and Immigration Waivers. His immigration litigation practice includes deportation defense of thousands of individuals, at the Immigration Court, the Board of Immigration Appeals, the Administrative Appeals Office, and federal district and circuit courts. In state and federal trial and appellate courts, Lahoud seeks post-conviction relief for the underlying crime that led to the removal proceedings and serves as immigration counsel to non-citizens accused of removable crimes. His ability to understand each interaction of criminal law with immigration law has made him a leading expert on issues of “crimigration” before state and federal courts reviewing post-conviction relief claims.

    Lahoud received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 2009 and his B.A., English, summa cum laude, from Lehigh University in 2006.

    Posted in: Immigration, News, Raymond G. Lahoud | Tags: ,

  • Dec 27, 2019Norris McLaughlin Welcomes Ameena Ibrahim as New Immigration Associate

    The law firm of Norris McLaughlin, P.A., is pleased to welcome Ameena Ibrahim as an Associate of the firm. She joins the firm’s Immigration Law Practice Group.

    “We are very excited to add Ameena to the team and I can’t wait to see what she is capable of,” said Raymond G. Lahoud, a Member of the firm and Chair of its Immigration Law Practice Group.

    Ibrahim added, “I am honored to have the opportunity to practice law in the United States, especially alongside Ray, who has been an inspiration to me. I look forward to learning from him and everyone at Norris McLaughlin.”

    About Ameena Ibrahim

    Ibrahim actively assists individuals and corporate clients in all facets of immigration law including, employee immigrant visas, employee non-immigrant visas, I-9 compliance matters, import/export matters, family immigration, deportation defense, criminal investigation, administrative agency immigration appeals, and federal immigration appeals.

    Prior to joining the firm, Ibrahim was a Public Service Fellow with the Health Initiatives department of Community Society Services New York, where she was a primary case handler, managing a large volume of cases in Health Law.

    Ibrahim received her LL.M. from Brooklyn Law School, Master of Laws, in 2018. She received her B.A. and B.L., with honors, from Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University, School of Excellence in Law in 2011, where she participated in several prestigious National Moot Court Competitions. Ibrahim won the United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees National Moot Court and the Best written arguments award.

    Ibrahim is admitted to practice law in India, where she has represented clients in consumer courts and in the High Court on civil litigation matters.

    About Norris McLaughlin

    Norris McLaughlin’s immigration practice is broad in scope, with extensive national and global capabilities, to serve individuals and families; small, mid-size, and large businesses; national and international corporations; non-profits, hospitals, universities, colleges, and research institutions; manufacturers, importers, exporters, investors, and others, to allow for ease in clients’ global mobility.

    Posted in: Ameena Ibrahim, Immigration, News | Tags: ,

  • Nov 27, 2019Ray Lahoud and Rich Somach to Speak at Pennsylvania Bar Real Estate Institute

    Raymond G. Lahoud, a Member of law firm Norris McLaughlin, P.A., and Chair of its Immigration Law Practice Group, and Richard Brent Somach, a Member of the firm, will present at the Pennsylvania Bar Institute’s Real Estate Institute on Thursday, December 5, at The CLE Conference Center Wanamaker Building in Philadelphia.

    About the Presentations

    “With the rapidly increasing number of immigrants in Pennsylvania who seek homeownership and real estate investment opportunities to the growing interest of foreign investors in Pennsylvania real estate development projects, immigration law has become increasingly relevant in the real estate industry. Given this, it is necessary that we continue to educate the real estate industry and others affected by today’s immigration climate, as well as the potentially lucrative means of the intersection of real estate and immigration law” said Lahoud. He will speak on “The (Hidden) Lucrative Intersections of Immigration Law and the Real Estate Industry,” 1:00 – 2:00 p.m., in the West Room.

    “There is a myriad of local rules and practices associated with sheriff’s sales and real estate tax sales. I look forward to participating once again for the PBI to answer questions and clarify misconceptions about buying properties at these sales,” said Somach. He will co-present “Advanced Sheriff Sale Jeopardy,” 1:00 – 2:00 p.m., in Room A.

    The two-day event is being held Thursday, December 5, and Friday, December 6, 8:30 a.m. – 4:30 p.m. Each day will offer sixteen courses. For more information and to register, visit pbi.org.

    About the Presenters

    Ray Lahoud

    Lahoud focuses his practice exclusively on immigration law and deportation defense for individuals, families, small to large domestic and multinational businesses and corporations, employers, international employees, investors, students, professors, researchers, skilled professionals, athletes, and entertainers, in every type of immigration or deportation defense matter—whether domestic or foreign. His immigration practice is broad, ranging from areas of corporate and employment immigration and related compliance to immigration litigation before agencies and courts across the United States, for corporations and individuals alike.

    Lahoud’s corporate immigration practice includes representing businesses of all sizes, in all corporate immigration and employer immigration compliance matters. He has served nearly every industry, including healthcare, education, manufacturing, global and domestic employment/talent recruitment, warehousing and distribution, pharmaceutical, economic development, local, county, and state government agencies, non-profit, religious, information technology, marketing, entertainment, sports, and real estate development and EB-5 investor financing. His experience includes EB-5 investor visas serving investors, regional centers, and project developers.

    Lahoud received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 2009 and his B.A., English, summa cum laude, from Lehigh University in 2006.

    Rich Somach

    Somach focuses his practice on real estate, commercial law, and creditors’ remedies, representing real estate development companies, shopping centers, and local banks. He has represented real estate owners, developers, and investors in a broad range of real estate transactions, including zoning matters, residential subdivisions, and shopping center development.

    A licensed title insurance agent, Somach is president of the title insurance and settlement company ABE Settlement Services. He is legal counsel to the Greater Lehigh Valley REALTORS®, and serves as Assistant Lehigh County Solicitor, advising the Sheriff’s Office, the Tax Assessment Office, and the Tax Claim Bureau.

    Somach frequently writes and lectures on real estate matters, sheriff’s sales, and real estate tax sales. He received his B.A., with honors, in 1971 from Lehigh University, and his J.D. in 1974 from Hofstra University Law School.

    Posted in: Immigration, News, Raymond G. Lahoud, Real Estate & Finance, Richard B. Somach | Tags: , , ,

  • Oct 15, 2019Triple Play REALTOR® Convention & Trade Expo

    Norris McLaughlin is proud to have Raymond G. Lahoud, Chair of the firm’s Immigration Practice Group, present “What to Know About the EB-5 Real Estate Investor Visa Program” at Triple Play REALTOR® Convention & Trade Expo.

    Triple Play REALTOR® Convention & Trade Expo is tailored to meet the professional needs of serious real estate professionals in the tri-state area. Combining education, networking, and fun, this premiere event is a must-attend. Brought to you by the New Jersey, New York & Pennsylvania Association of REALTORS®.

    Course Description

    This program will provide an overview of the EB-5 program, including a background of the EB-5 program; entry into the program; legal, financial, and practical requirements; project vetting; investment structures; business plans; and examples of qualifying direct and regional center projects. Ray will also discuss the benefits and obligations that the EB-5 program offers local, regional, and state economies, as well as residential and commercial realtors and brokers, economic development professionals, real estate developers, and real estate investors.

    When: Wednesday, December 11, 2019

    9:00 – 11:00 a.m.

    Where: Atlantic City Convention Center

    1 Convention Boulevard
    Atlantic City, NJ 08401

    For more information and to register, please click here!

    Posted in: Events, Immigration, Raymond G. Lahoud, Real Estate & Finance | Tags: , ,

  • Sep 19, 2019Ray Lahoud to Speak at 2019 Lehigh Valley Business HR Symposium

    Raymond G. Lahoud, a Member of law firm, Norris McLaughlin, P.A., and Chair of its Immigration Law Practice Group, will present “Is Your Business Struggling with Immigration Compliance?” at the 2019 Lehigh Valley Business HR Symposium on Wednesday, September 25.

    About the Presentation

    The firm is a proud presenting sponsor of the event, to be held 8:00 – 10:30 a.m., at ArtsQuest at SteelSacks in Bethlehem. Lahoud will discuss how critical it is for local businesses to be prepared, as immigration enforcement is om the rise.

    “Employers must be reminded that immigration compliance is now a critical component in the management of all businesses, regardless of size or industry, including taking preventive measures on a continual basis. I feel it is my responsibility as an employment immigration compliance attorney to get in front of as many business owners and HR professionals as possible to really urge the importance of this legal immigration issue,” said Lahoud.

    Panel discussions will also address company culture, overtime law, and other topics of interest to the Greater Lehigh Valley business community. For more information, click here.

    About Ray Lahoud

    Lahoud focuses his practice exclusively on immigration law and deportation defense for individuals, families, small to large domestic and multinational businesses and corporations, employers, international employees, investors, students, professors, researchers, skilled professionals, athletes, and entertainers, in every type of immigration or deportation defense matter—whether domestic or foreign. His immigration practice is broad, ranging from areas of corporate and employment immigration and related compliance to immigration litigation before agencies and courts across the United States, for corporations and individuals alike.

    Lahoud’s experience includes immigrant and non-immigrant visas, visa overstays, immigrants who entered without inspection or authorization, EB-5 investor visas (serving investors, regional centers, and project developers), citizenship and naturalization claims, deportation and removal litigation at the immigration court and all appellate levels, E Visas, E-3 Visas, H-1B Visas, H-2B Visas, L Visas, O Visas, P Visas, Q Visas, R Visas, TN Visas, Exceptional Ability Immigrant Visas, Extraordinary Ability Immigrant Visas, Physician and Nursing Visas, K-1 Visas, K-3 Visas, Multinational Manager/Executive Immigrant Visas, Outstanding Professor/Researcher Immigrant Visas, PERM Labor Certification, Family Petitions, Adjustment of Status, Marriage Petitions, Asylum, VAWA applications, and Immigration Waivers, such as the Visa Waiver Program, National Interest Waivers, Hardship Waivers, and J Waivers.

    Lahoud received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 2009 and his B.A., English, summa cum laude, from Lehigh University in 2006.

    About Norris McLaughlin

    Norris McLaughlin’s immigration practice is broad in scope, with extensive national and global capabilities, to serve individuals and families; small, mid-size, and large businesses; national and international corporations; non-profits, hospitals, universities, colleges, and research institutions; manufacturers, importers, exporters, investors, and others, to allow for ease in clients’ global mobility.

    The Norris McLaughlin labor and employment attorneys counsel private and public sector clients on a wide range of issues, including workforce counseling; labor and employee relations; corporate and workforce compliance; review and updating employment policies and procedures; employment litigation; unfair competition and trade secrets; privacy and e-discovery issues; employment training; employee benefits and tax issues; wage and hour compliance; immigration; and government contracts.

    Norris McLaughlin is a full service, mid-sized regional law firm of 130+ attorneys with main offices located in Bridgewater, NJ; New York, NY; and Allentown, PA. For more information, including a full practice area listing and attorney biographies, please visit www.norrismclaughlin.com.

    Posted in: Immigration, Labor & Employment, News, Raymond G. Lahoud | Tags: , ,

  • Sep 18, 2019Ray Lahoud to Speak at Lehigh Valley Schools

    Raymond G. Lahoud, a Member of law firm, Norris McLaughlin, P.A., and Chair of its Immigration Law Practice Group, will speak at Moravian Academy and Muhlenberg College on Friday, September 20.

    About the Presentations

    First, Lahoud will speak on imperialism and immigration to the “Latinos in the Lehigh Valley” class at Moravian Academy, 11:00 a.m. – noon. He will discuss his experience working with the immigration process, student and work visas, and the residency/citizenship process, as well as his personal journey as a child of Lebanese immigrants. The purpose of the class is to give the students information to help dispel any erroneous stereotypes and misconceptions they may have about the immigration process and those who are part of it.

    Lahoud will then present “Borders, Nationalisms, Identities: The Ethics of Global Citizenship” program for the Muhlenberg College Center for Ethics. This panel discussion, open to the public, will take place 2:00 – 3:30 p.m. in Miller Forum of Moyer Hall. Theresa Cardinal Brown from the Bipartisan Policy Institute will also participate in the discussion, to be moderated by Ross Dardani, Assistant Professor of Political Science.

    “In a time when immigration is at the forefront of the American political debate, it is important that education facilities open their campuses to discussions on today’s immigration system, not only to answer the concerns raised by students and faculty about current immigration enforcement measures but also to provide an intellectual forum to discuss today’s immigration laws and the future of America’s immigration policies,” said Lahoud.

    About Ray Lahoud

    Lahoud focuses his practice exclusively on immigration law and deportation defense for individuals, families, small to large domestic and multinational businesses and corporations, employers, international employees, investors, students, professors, researchers, skilled professionals, athletes, and entertainers, in every type of immigration or deportation defense matter—whether domestic or foreign. His immigration practice is broad, ranging from areas of corporate and employment immigration and related compliance to immigration litigation before agencies and courts across the United States, for corporations and individuals alike.

    Lahoud’s experience includes immigrant and non-immigrant visas, visa overstays, immigrants who entered without inspection or authorization, EB-5 investor visas (serving investors, regional centers, and project developers), citizenship and naturalization claims, deportation and removal litigation at the immigration court and all appellate levels, E Visas, E-3 Visas, H-1B Visas, H-2B Visas, L Visas, O Visas, P Visas, Q Visas, R Visas, TN Visas, Exceptional Ability Immigrant Visas, Extraordinary Ability Immigrant Visas, Physician and Nursing Visas, K-1 Visas, K-3 Visas, Multinational Manager/Executive Immigrant Visas, Outstanding Professor/Researcher Immigrant Visas, PERM Labor Certification, Family Petitions, Adjustment of Status, Marriage Petitions, Asylum, VAWA applications, and Immigration Waivers, such as the Visa Waiver Program, National Interest Waivers, Hardship Waivers, and J Waivers.

    Lahoud received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center in 2009 and his B.A., English, summa cum laude, from Lehigh University in 2006.

    About Norris McLaughlin

    With more than 30 years of experience, Norris McLaughlin’s higher education attorneys have represented colleges and universities in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York with a broad range of legal needs. The firm also provides a full-service immigration practice whose trained professionals have extensive experience in the field of immigration law.

    Norris McLaughlin is a full service, mid-sized regional law firm of 130+ attorneys with main offices located in Bridgewater, NJ; New York, NY; and Allentown, PA. For more information, including a full practice area listing and attorney biographies, please visit www.norrismclaughlin.com.

    Posted in: Higher Education, Immigration, News, Raymond G. Lahoud | Tags: , ,

  • Aug 28, 2019New Immigration Rule’s Approach to Public Aid Is Not New

    By: Raymond G. Lahoud

    The U.S. Department of Homeland Security recently announced a final rule amending the department’s regulations on determining whether a prospective immigrant to the U.S. will likely become a “public charge” — a finding that would, in nearly all circumstances, prevent one from immigrating to the United States.[1] The announcement, yet again, brought the implementation and enforcement of federal immigration law to the forefront of political debate.

    The public charge concept, however, is anything but novel in the practice of federal immigration law. It has long been one of several statutorily required points of consideration when federal officials determine whether a foreign national has established eligibility to immigrate to the United States.

    Central to the public charge question is whether the prospective immigrant will, through receipt of certain public benefits, likely require U.S. taxpayer funded financial support, thereby rendering the prospective immigrant a “public charge” and ineligible to immigrate to the United States. The public charge rule is a centuries old question of admissibility that has been reviewed, debated, reenacted and amended time and again, and in 1996 toughened by legislation that provides the very premise of the final rule that the department now publishes.

    The Immigration and Nationality Act requires that foreign nationals seeking to immigrate to the United States meet several requirements. The burden to establish “admissibility,” or the ability to enter and remain in the United States, rests solely with the person seeking to immigrate, absent any constitutional or statutory right of entry into the United States for non-U.S. Citizens.

    One such requirement that the prospective immigrant establish they are not likely to become a “public charge.” Since the 1880s, the U.S. has restricted the entry of foreign nationals on this public charge ground.

    In the 1907 Immigration Act, Congress specifically barred from entry into the U.S. a “[p]erson likely to become a public charge,” within the same provision that prevented the admission of “paupers and professional beggars, … idiots, persons dangerously diseased, persons certified by the examining surgeon to have a mental or physical defect of a nature to affect their ability to earn a living, convicted felons, [and] prostitutes.”[2]

    Federal courts interpreted the 1907 Immigration Act’s “person likely to become a public charge” clause to include “one who for some cause is about to be supported at public expense by reason of poverty, insanity and poverty, disease and poverty, idiocy and poverty.”[3]

    In 1952, Congress overhauled federal immigration law when enacting the INA. In the original INA, Congress excluded from entry into the U.S., “[a]liens who, in the opinion of the consular officer at the time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of the Attorney General at the time of application for admission, are likely at any time to become public charges.”[4]
    Rather than define “public charge,” Congress left any interpretation to the executive branch:

    Since the elements constituting likelihood of becoming a public charge are varied, there should be no attempt to define the term in the law, but rather to establish the specific qualification that the determination of whether an alien falls into that category rests within the discretion of the consular officers or the [Immigration] Commissioner.[5]

    Pursuant to their authority under the INA, federal immigration officials and U.S. Department of State consular officers adopted a totality of the circumstances review when evaluating whether one is likely to become a public charge, with a focus on “an alien’s work history, age, capacity to earn a living, health, family situation, affidavits of support, and other relevant factors in their totality.”[6]

    The Immigration Act of 1990 removed the words “paupers, beggars, and vagrants” from the INA, deeming these grounds sufficiently covered by the public charge exclusion ground.

    In 1996, former President Bill Clinton signed into law the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, or IIRAIRA, which toughed federal immigration law and codified very specific factors that must be considered when determining whether is likely to become a public charge:

    Any alien who, in the opinion of the consular officer at the time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of the Attorney General at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible.

    In determining whether an alien is inadmissible under this paragraph, the consular officer or the Attorney General shall at a minimum consider the alien’s—

    1. age;
    2. health;
    3. family status;
    4. assets, resources, and financial status; and
    5. education and skills.[7]

    Moreover, IIRIRA provided that a consular officer or the U.S. Attorney General may “also consider any affidavit of support” submitted on the prospective immigrant’s behalf by a lawful permanent resident or U.S. citizen who agrees to sponsor the prospective immigrant by agreeing, in a contract with the U.S. government, to reimburse any public agency that actually provides the prospective immigrant certain public benefits.

    Congress failed to define age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education or skills in IIRIRA. Rather, IIRIRA left the determination within the discretionary review of federal immigration officials and U.S. State Department consular officers.

    IIRIRA specifically provided that any “public charge” finding shall be made “in the opinion of the consular officer … or, in the opinion of the Attorney General.”[8] When making public charge determinations, the consular officer or the attorney general “shall at a minimum consider the alien’s age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills.” [9]

    The public charge ground of inadmissibility remains unamended since IIRIRA. Since 1996, federal law has required a review of one’s age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education and skills when a federal immigration official or State Department consular officer is making “public charge” determination.

    Moreover, the burden has remained with the prospective immigrant to establish that there is no likelihood of becoming a public charge if permitted to immigrate to the United States.

    With great confusion as to what IIRIRA meant in enumerating the statutory factors noted, in 1999 the department, then known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service, published a final rule that defined a “public charge” as an alien likely to become “primarily dependent on the government for subsistence, as demonstrated by either (i) the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or (ii) institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.”[10]

    In addition, the final rule required prospective immigrants to submit a completed “Form I-864, Affidavit of Support,” that requires a lawful permanent resident or citizen of the U.S. to “demonstrate that they are able to maintain the sponsored alien at an annual income of not less than 125% of the federal poverty level.”[11]

    The affidavit of support was legally enforceable against the financial sponsor, allowing the federal government to seek reimbursement from the financial sponsor should the prospective alien receive any public benefits.[12]

    While required, the Affidavit of Support did not supplant the enumerated statutory factors in IIRIRA, which federal immigration officials and State Department consular officers are required to consider.”[13] The 1999 final rule simply limited the phrase “public charge” to either “(i) the receipt of public cash assistance for income maintenance or (ii) institutionalization for long-term care at government expense.”[14] It did not limit the review of an “alien’s age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, and skills,” but mandated the Affidavit of Support requirement — something that only made one’s ability to establish no likelihood of becoming a public charge even more difficult for those who had limited relatives, friends or others in the U.S. willing to assume a substantial contractual agreement with the U.S. government.

    It is important to note that the 1999 final rule, like IIRIRA, failed to define “age, health, family status, assets, resources, financial status, education, or skills,” leaving the same to the very broad discretion of individual federal immigration officials and State Department consular officers.

    Practice has established that, in the last two decades, many have indeed been refused permission to immigrate to the United States as a result of one or more of these factors, or for failing to have a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident of sufficient means willing to enter into a long-term contract with the U.S. government.

    This has been the result of legislation that, time and again, worked its way through the legislative process to the desk of the president then serving, who would sign the public charge inadmissibility provision into law, notwithstanding what many would argue are broad, personal and unnecessary factors for review.

    Neither political party has ever introduced in Congress legislation that would amend, limit, or, if the will of the people wish, eliminate the public charge inadmissibility provision.

    While the Department’s recently announced final rule brought immigration to the forefront of political debate, it only defined already enacted requirements. The final rule does indeed expand the definition of “public benefits” to include not only cash benefits for income maintenance, but also the potential for receipt, or certain durations of prior receipt, of benefits from the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program, Medicaid, premium and cost-sharing subsidies for Medicare Part D, Section 8 housing assistance under the Housing Choice Voucher Program, and Section 8 project-based rental assistance.[15]

    The final rule, however, also outlines relatively straightforward factors, none of which is outcome determinative, as well as guidance on those factors for federal immigration officials and State Department officers to consider when assessing the statutorily required age, health, family status, assets, resources and financial status, and education and skills, and the impact of any or all of these, on whether the prospective immigrant will likely become a public charge.

    To many in the practice of federal immigration law, the final rule provides clarity to a statute that that lacked any guidance on implementation or interpretation. Moreover, while the final rule will require prospective immigrants to provide more information when seeking to enter the United States, it is unlikely that there will be any significant increase in public charge determinations, given that the factors that the final rule further outlines have long been an integral part of federal immigration law. In other words, very little has changed.

    This article was originally published by Law360.

    The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the firm, its clients, or Portfolio Media Inc., or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.

    [1] Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds, 83 FR 51114-01.
    [2] Gegiow v. Uhl , 239 U.S. 3, 10, 36 S. Ct. 2, 3, 60 L. Ed. 114 (1915).
    [3] Matter of Harutunian , 14 I. & N. Dec. 583, 587–88 (BIA 1974).
    [4] Matter of Martinez-Lopez , 10 I. & N. Dec. 409, 424 (BIA 1962).
    [5] Harutunian, 14 I. & N. Dec. at 588 (quoting Omnibus Report of the Senate Judiciary Committee, S. Rep. 1515, 81st Cong., 2d Sess., April 20, 1950, p. 349.).
    [6] Matter of A- , 19 I&N Dec. 867-869 (Comm’r 1998).
    [7] 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(4).
    [8] Id.
    [9] Id.
    [10] See Field Guidance on Deportability and Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds, 64 FR 28689-01.
    [11] Id.
    [12] Id.
    [13] Id.
    [14] Id.
    [15] See Inadmissibility on Public Charge Grounds, 83 FR 51114-01.

    Posted in: Immigration, Raymond G. Lahoud |

Categories