Dream Act stays only a DREAM!!!!

It is with disappointed and great regret that I inform my readers that once again Dream Act has failed to pass.  Despite the passage in the House several weeks earlier, the Senate, on Saturday, December 18, failed to get enough votes to pass the anticipated Dream Act. Development, Relief and Education of Alien Minors (DREAM) Act would have provided a conditional gateway to legal permanent residence for some unauthorized young people who were brought to the United States as children if they follow certain guidelines, including but not limited to: completing high school; having good moral character; and completing at least two years of higher education or serving for at least two years in the military. 


Thousands of supporters of the Dream Act flooded Congress with phone calls and letters asking that they support the Act.  However, despite all of the efforts, Senate did not get enough votes.  Senate needed 60 votes in order to move this bill forward, however, even though the majority of the Senate voted in favor of the bill (55 in favor and 41 oppose), that was not enough to pass the Act. 


Although the Dream Act is still only a dream for now, it is not forgotten by any means.  It will be brought up back to the floor again for a vote next session, and, I have a feeling that it will keep coming back to Congress for a vote until it finally passes.... Yes, I do believe it will pass. It's an ACT that makes sense, if you take out all of the distortion and myths that are going on about the Act, and look at the facts and at the big picture... it is the only thing that makes great sense for this Country. I will continue to keep you updated on the Dream Act, and hopefully, will, eventually bring you the good news concerning this very important piece of legislation. 

Holocaust Fund Defrauded

I am sure that by now we have all heard about the Holocaust Survival Fund being defrauded. After a long debate with myself, I finally decided to post about this matter on my blog.Prior to voicing my opinion, and I have a very strong opinion on this matter, let me start by giving a brief background on this story.
On November 9, 2010, 17 people were charged with participating in a $42.5 MILLION fraud on an organization which makes reparations to victims of Nazi Persecution. Apparently employees who worked for the Claims Conference, a not-for-profit organization which provides assistance to victims of Nazi persecution, participated in fraudulent activities, by not following guidelines, by letting applications go that did not meet the criteria that was needed to receive the benefit of the fund, etc.  There are 2 separate funds that exist, Hardship Fund and Article 2 Fund. The Hardship Fund pays a one-time payment to victims of Nazi persecution who evacuated cities where they lived and were forced to become refugees. The payment of this fund was usually around $3,600.  Article 2 Fund  makes monthly payments of approximately $411 to survivors of Nazi persecution who fit a certain criteria.  Apparently 4,957 Hardship Fund applications were filed fraudulently between 2000 and 2009, resulting in a loss of approximately $18 Million.   Article 2 Fund is said to have processed about 658 application from approximately 1993 through 2009 and is said to have lost around $24.5 Million. Now for the kicker... how did it get done?  Well, as I said previously, it was not without the help of the employees who worked at the Claims Conference, although, the master mind behind this, were, for the most part, Russians who reside in Brighton Beach. These people submitted fraudulent applications for people who, in reality were not eligible for the fund. False identification was submitted, birth certificates and passports were altered and submitted with applications.  Horrific stories of the Holocaust were made up in order to receive monetary compensation.  Some of the people for whom applications were submitted were not even alive during the Holocaust, and some were not even Jewish.  It is further said, that the conspirators recruited people who would give personal information and on whose behalf those applications would be filed.  The recruiters, in turn, would keep approximately 90% of the payment and the alleged "victims" would get approximately 10%.
Indictments that are pending for those that were charged with this fraud, are generally that of conspiracy and mail fraud and carry a penalty of up to 20 years in prison and a fine of $250,000.  I say... give them the maximum.  As you guessed... this is where I give my opinion... so if you are on the side of those criminals... you should probably not read what I have to say, since you will not like it.  First of all, as an attorney, I must say  that laws are here in order for them to be enforced and if someone breaks the law, that person knows that there will be consequences.  Yes, we, as attorneys, defend clients in all types of situations, and we do so to the best of our abilities.  Although I am not a criminal attorney, I still must say that if I was one, and one of those defendants walked into my office, I would ask them to leave and would not want to represent those individuals.  I know some are thinking... for the right retainer, you would represent them... NO.... I would not.  I have developed a very low tolerance for people who do not know when to stop and who cross the line.  It is one thing to defend a business partner, who perhaps conducts his business in a less than "up and up" manner, or who perhaps does not live up to his fiduciary duty to his partner, it is a complete separate thing to represent people who STEAL from a fund that was created for victims of the most horrific genocide that we remember. The conspirators involved in this scheme should be ashamed of themselves.  If they are not given the maximum penalties, it is my personal belief, that these people will again surface, with perhaps another scheme.  As they have clearly showed, there is nothing that they hold sacred, not Holocaust, not religion or nationality. As a member of the Russian community, in Brooklyn, New York, I take pride in my background, my religion and my nationality.  As a result, I take personal offense anytime a group of Russians commit such acts and must say that it is not a reflection on the Russian community as a whole.  For the most part, Russian immigrants are highly educated, professional people who abide by the laws and contribute to their community.

What Does Immigration Through Investment Really Mean?

After reading an article on yahoo this morning, which can be found at http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/111069/citizenship-for-sale, and more importantly after reading the comments which followed the article, I decided that I must shed some light on the whole situation concerning investors and their road to US citizenship. Let me first start by saying that it is not "easy" to qualify for an investment visa (known as the EB5).  Not only must an individual contribute a large sum of money (not less than $500,000) into the economy, but they must also create a certain number of jobs. What is all the complaining about then?  Isn't that great for our economy? I mean let me lay this out in layman terms:  We get smart, educated people, who have, most likely, worked very hard to earn their money, which by the way they now want to invest into OUR economy AND which will in turn provide more jobs in the  US, which will provide more revenue and income, and thereby creating more taxpaying residents. Considering our economic situation, I say... bring it on, and the more the better. We need smart, savvy business people in our Country.  I would much rather see people of such caliber, who have achieved something and are able to support our economy coming to this country, then those who cross the border and soon or a later will likely become a drain on our economy. 

I truly hope that someday, people will attempt to educate themselves, prior to posting comments which make them look less than knowledgeable and unaware of all the facts. I mean, one person wrote a comment, and I quote  "How about opening up more opportunity for Americans to open businesses...".  Who is stopping him from opening his own business?  It is comments like that which make me, not only angry that someone, who obviously has no idea about... well, anything, has a right to comment on such an important topic, which is obviously out of his league.  Perhaps, prior to being able to post a comment to some serious news article, one should take a short survey to evaluate his overall competency and education level.  Ok, I may be going to far with that, but why should we have to read such garbage? I am all for debates and controversy, but only when there is merit to them.

As an attorney, let me say this to all of those out there who believe that those with money can "buy" citizenship: It is not that easy and it involves a lot of hard work on the part of the individual who is considering investing money into the economy.  Nonetheless, with perseverance, it is doable, and last year we had a just less than 1,000 investor visas approved. I truly hope that we will see an increase in this number in the coming year, as I believe America can only benefit from those people. 

Vaccine Litigation Reaches Supreme Court

Those of us who have children, and perhaps even those that do not, have certainly heard about the disputes as to whether or not vaccines lead to autism in some kids.  These discussions have been going on for several years, and to date, I am still not convinced there is conclusive evidence linking certain vaccines to development of autism. Although, I must admit that such discussions have made me very skeptical and cautious when it comes to vaccinating my own child, and I await more conclusive evidence on the matter. 

Although, I am not sure when we will be able to get more conclusive evidence on the matter, I do know, that Today, October 12, 2010, Supreme Court of the United States will hear arguments as to the safety and implications of vaccines and how such claims shall be decided.  This case will challenge the law which passed in 1986, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. This act was established to safeguard manufacturers from potential lawsuits involving vaccines. In essence, all cases involving claims made against the manufacturer, for injuries which were allegedly suffered as a result of certain vaccines were to proceed in an alternative legal system known as the "vaccine court".  Moreover, the only claims that could proceed in "vaccine court" were those where injuries sustained were among those that were officially recognized as being caused by a particular vaccine. In essence, what that meant was that if a child, after receiving vaccine became paralyzed, and paralysis was not one of the recognized causes by a particular vaccine which that child received, no claim can be brought against the manufacturer. Parents of injured children faced a lot of hurdles that they had to overcome to bring such an action.  I have to admit, I am appalled that it took 24 years to challenge this Act.  As a mother, it is disgusting to know that our children were not being protected and instead of doing everything we can to safeguard our little ones and provide for them a safe environment (which includes safe medications and vaccines), the system turned its back on no one else but our children, leaving them vulnerable and unprotected. As an attorney, I think it is shameful that our legal system, which shall be equal for all is anything but equal.  We protect huge manufacturing companies at the expense of our children. The argument that was made when the Vaccine Act was passed, and the one that is still being made today by the supporters of the Act, is that if manufacturers are held accountable for each and every incident involving vaccines, it would not be economically feasible for them to continue to make the vaccines and litigation would spin out of control.  Do I agree?  Well, yes and no. I agree that in today's world, people often look for others to blame and if they see an opportunity to receive compensation, they will likely go for it.  And I do not believe that manufacturers should have to pay for something that would have happened despite their medication.  There are some children who would have developed autism or perhaps some other disability despite getting a particular vaccine.  However, parents often refuse to accept that fact and find all possible ways to blame something external for such misfortune.  It is part of human nature.  However, manufacturers shall not be dragged in and out of court as a result of such a coincidence. On the other hand, if parents, with the help of medical experts can establish that the vaccine was absolutely the cause of autism, or some other disability, then by all means such case shall proceed to trial.  Moreover, if it can be established that manufacturer knew about the possible hazards and side effects of their medications, they should be responsible for punitive damages as well, to compensate for their gross-negligence. 

I await the decision from the Supreme Court about this very serious issue, that affects a lot of parents.  However, even more important than this pending case, is the research that is being conducted to determine the cause and effect of various vaccines on our children.  Once the research proves conclusively one way or another, it will likely in and of itself solve a lot of problems from the legal standpoint. 

To read more about this go to: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/12/health/12vaccine.html?_r=1&ref=business

Immigration Attorneys Arrested in California

3 California attorneys were arrested and sentenced to prison as a result of immigration fraud. The attorneys are said to have orchestrated hundreds of false asylum claims. They mostly dealt with people of Romanian and Indian descent and filed hundreds of asylum applications containing fictitious stories of persecution, including false arrests, detention, torture, and even rape. Applications were also, oftentimes, supported by fraudulent and counterfeit medical records and affidavits. Some of the same stories were used and reused for various people.

For those of you who do not know, to be eligible for asylum, a person must show a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country.  And those attorneys, basically "created" those fears for them in order, to make money and file their asylum claims.

I have to say to all those who ever asked me why so many asylum claims get denied... This is WHY... because of people, sometimes even attorneys, who file hundreds of petitions based on fraudulent evidence.  That is exactly why all asylum applications are heavily scrutinized and it has become more and more difficult to get asylum status. As a result of instances like that, individuals, who do in fact suffer in their home countries are often denied asylum status, or in the alternative, must meet such an extraordinary high standard in order to prove that they were in fact a victim of persecution in their home country.

These attorneys were financially fined and sentenced to prison, with terms ranging from 30 months to 108 months.

Maryland Man pleads guilty to immigration scheme

A 29 year old man, Robert Fred Majia, from Maryland, pleaded guilty to an immigration scheme that he and a co-conspirator had going from approximately, December 2007 until June 2009.  It appears that Majia and a conspirator charged people for immigration services which they never provided. Some instances consisted of individuals bringing Majia and his conspirator $5,000 or more for assistance with immigration documents. Mejia and co-conspirator completed immigration documents, even went as far as taking their fingerprints, however, they never actually filed any documents on behalf of their clients. Moreover, to make it seem even more real and to entice people into their scheme, Majia dressed as an ICE employee, even drove a vehicle that was similar to a police car.  As a result of this scheme, approximately 50-250 victims lost between $400,000-$1million. 

I have to say that I am not surprised at this story.  In fact, I am surprised that more people are not caught doing similar schemes.  Perhaps, this man went a little beyond what I have seen and heard from clients and colleagues by impersonating ICE officials, but all in all, this seems to be a very common scheme.   A lot of paralegal services offer immigration assistance and assistance in obtaining divorces to individuals.  They even have ads in the paper advertising their services.  I believe, I even spoke about this in one of my previous posts.  When clients call them, they give them a much cheaper price than an attorney would give for the same services.  However, these people often do not know what they are doing, they collect money from these clients and then they disappear, allowing their clients to think that everything has been done and everything is good.  Then when clients get an NTA notice and attempt to contact the individual whom they paid and who was suppose to provide them with immigration services, those people are nowhere to be found.  And when finally, they seek help from an attorney and the attorney does some research, it comes to light that nothing was ever done for these people and they are now in deportation proceedings. Sometimes, however, those services do provide immigration assistance, however, sometimes, it is best if they did not.  Because of their lack of legal knowledge, they always make mistakes, which often makes things worse for their clients, sometimes those errors are irreversible.   

I cannot say this often enough, how important it is to make sure you get assistance for  immigration issues, or any other legal issues which you may be faced with from a licensed attorney, knowledgeable in that area. Perhaps you may pay a little more for such services than you would to someone who is not an attorney, but at least you will know that things will get done correctly. Because even if you do save money at first by going to a paralegal service or some other non-attorney who offers to help you with your situations, 9 out of 10 times, you will still end up seeking services from an attorney due to ineffective or lack of assistance that you get from such individuals, in which situations, you are likely to pay much more money to fix a problem, then you would have if you had done things properly in the first place. After all, it is your livelihood that is on the line... it is not the time or place to start looking for the cheapest answer. 

Dream Act

Yesterday, September 21, 2010, the Dream Act, yet again, failed to pass. Senate, voted 56-43 against the Dream Act, despite hundreds of thousands of calls, faxes and emails to the Senate.  This act is alleged to have an impact thousands of youths.  If,  and when it passes it would enable undocumented immigrants who entered the US when they were younger than 16 years old, who have lived in the country for more than five years, and who have a high school diploma or a GED, a chance to become an American citizen.  People who meet these requirements will have to complete two years of military service or earn a college degree in exchange for their green card.  Additionally, these individuals must demonstrate good moral character. 

It has been years since Dream Act was first proposed and it keeps getting the cold shoulder from the Senate. Why?  Obama promised to push this through and as is evident, has failed to do so. A lot of people are waiting for this reform and are getting disappointed. It keeps them from moving on with their lives.  This false hope that they are living with and the thought of "well maybe one day".... is not necessarily good.  As a result, we have people who are living out of status in this country and are not returning home in hopes that this Act will be passed.    Although, I have read comments of those that oppose this bill, but for the most part, such comments come from the less educated, who do not fully understand the immigration process and what this Act can do for the US.
The supporters of this Act are not giving up and are more united than ever! They are convinced that this Act will eventually pass.  I say... Way to Go... and Hope that the Act Passes as well, as I think it will serve the United States well. 

Interesting Matrimonial Case

A very interesting case was just recently decided by Justice Robbert Bruno, a New York Court Judge... in fact so interesting that I could not hold myself back and not share this case. A woman was seeking a divorce on the ground of constructive abandonment, claiming that her husband refused to have sex with her since their honeymoon in 1979.  Wait, before we all start feeling bad for the lady... it gets better.... miraculously however, this woman, despite her claim of not having sex with her husband in nearly 30 years... just happened to be the mother of 2 kids which she has had way after he honeymoon in 1979.  OOPS.  After the attorney reminded her that she has 2 kids with the husband, Plaintiff quickly changed her story and said the last time she had sex with the defendant was in 2001 .  However, her story changed one more time, when defense attorney cross-examined her and asked when was the last time she had sex with her husband, she stated it was "over three (3) years".... OOOPS again!  Didn't she just say last time she was intimate was in 2001... wouldn't that be more like over 7 years!!!  Not quite sure who prepped her for her testimony...but lady... get your story straight.  Wait.. it gets EVEN BETTER!!!! Imagine that.  A brief background on the law of constructive abandonment:  the person who is pleading constructive abandonment must prove that despite repeatedly requesting sexual relations from the other spouse, she/he was refused such relations, such refusal was unjustified, willful and continued for more than 1 year.  The key point here is that a request must have been made and declined.  Ok... so now that we all brushed up on the law... here is the kicker: when asked how often she asked her spouse to have sexual relations with her during that time, the Plaintiff simply admitted that she never requested her husband to have sexual relations with her.  UMMM ok... so what was the problem here????
I think I do not need to give my two cents on the sophistication of this particular Plaintiff, however... we must wonder who prepared her for the inquest. I mean... isn't it our duty as attorneys to explain to our clients what the law is... and guide them appropriately?  If a woman comes into an office seeking a divorce on the ground of constructive abandonment, isn't it our job to explain what constructive abandonment is??? And more importantly, isn't it also our job to advise the client how important it is to tell the truth and not perjure herself??? Why else do clients hire attorneys???? Not just to pay us a retainer... I presume, but rather to give some legal advice.  Seems reasonable enough, right? And I know sometimes, even with my own client, no matter how much you explain to them the law, and prepare them for depositions or trial, so that they know what to expect.... they sometimes baffle us and start saying things, you never heard before, which were never disclosed to you before, and you sit there with you head in your hands thinking... OMG (among other pleasantries that come to mind) and then scold the client about not disclosing the information, making up facts and lying under oath.  I admit all of that happens, and it happened to me... where you are sitting there looking like you, as the attorney are the idiot, when in fact, the client just started blurting out things you never even knew about or discussed.    I truly hope this is the case here, otherwise, I would suggest her attorney take some brush up courses on the law, ethics and proper client preparation.

To read the opinion go to: http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=14276577943439993992&hl=en&as_sdt=2&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

9th Anniversary of September 11

I want to start by giving my deepest condolences to all of the victims of the horrific events surrounding September 11, 2001 and their families.  No matter how much time passes from that unfortunate day in history, we will never forget what happened, where we were, who we were with, what we saw and what we heard on that dreadful day 9 years ago.

As may be expected, I also want to throw my two cents as to the controversy surrounding ground zero. As an attorney, I always try to look at both sides of the coin, so here it is.  This Country is a melting pot, full of immigrants from all over the world.  If we really dig deep down in history, most of the people living in this Country are a product of immigrants, whether it be first generation, second generation or 10th generation, but somewhere there was a great great grandfather, who came here from another Country many years ago.  If this Country decided, long ago, that it will open its doors to different nations and accept and welcome immigrants from all over the world, it must do so without discrimination. Therefore, if this Country decided to allow people of Muslim descent to settle here, then by all means, we should treat them with respect and equally as we would any other immigrant who settles here. We should allow them to practice their religion as we would any other nationality. And if they want to build a mosque, so be it.  But what about building a mosque next to ground zero?  Well, that's where my other side of the coin comes in.

We all know the details surrounding the 9/11 attacks, who was behind it and how it was orchestrated, so lets not review the known facts. Why do Muslims want to build their mosque near the location, where those with their same belief, thought it was OK to kill thousands of innocent people and destroy thousands of lives? In my opinion, that is insensitive and has a much deeper purpose than what one Imam said was to unite the religions.  It was mentioned that the Center would include a recreation center to be used by all and have a place for all religions.  Do you really think Jews, Christians, Catholics, or other religions would go to the Muslim Center to pray?  I doubt it.  It is just inappropriate on so many levels. It is a recipe for disaster, including riots and protests, and doubtfully they will all be peaceful.Even now, before anything is even built, the talk of it is causing such tension, and in a way is dividing this Country. Perhaps intentionally so, don't you think?  Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said, in his response to Giuliani, that if he knew that the plans of building a mosque would cause such tension, he never would have put his plan into action.  I mean come on, don't insult us.  Is he seriously trying to say that he thought that when New Yorkers would hear that a mosque is going to be build near the place of tragedy that was caused at the hand of Muslim extremists, it would go over well?  I don't believe it.

I am for all religions, and in my practice as an immigration attorney, I believe that all should be treated equally and fairly.  But there is a time and place for everything.  And ground zero is not the place for a mosque. Muslims can built a mosque anywhere they want, but building it near ground zero, is much more than freedom of religious, it is nothing less than a bold statement  and perhaps even a spit in the face to the victims and all those that oppose it.

Again... just my two cents.

Asylum Denial Rate Drops

According to the Justice Department data, the Asylum denial rate is the lowest it has been in 25 years. Some of the explanations that are given in such a drastic decline may include a decrease in asylum requests being filed and  tendency of asylum seekers to be represented by an attorney.  Records show that approximately 91% of those seeking asylum are represented by an attorney, as opposed to a merely 51% who retained counsel 25 years ago. Therefore, having a competent attorney representing an asylum applicant will likely lead to a better outcome as opposed to those who attempt to go through the process on their own. Despite the aforementioned, there is a great disparity between judges in their asylum rulings. For instance, in New York Immigration Court, you have one judge who denies about 6% of asylum case and another judge who denies approximately 70% of asylum cases.

What do we take away from this story?  Basically, it is a good sign that asylum denial rates are dropping and that more and more people are represented by attorneys.  However, in my practice, I see a lot of "services" offering help to foreigners, who, for the most part are not familiar with the immigration rules and regulations, and oftentimes, these services do more harm than good. I have clients who come to me after spending thousands of dollars paying such services, be it paralegal services, or just individuals who advertise such services.  For the most part, the applications are completed incorrectly, are incomplete or otherwise inadequate. Moreover, when my clients attempt to contact these people after they have received a notice to appear in court, these people either disappear or refuse to offer any additional help, claiming they have done everything they could to help them.  And since these people are not licensed professionals,chances are there are no retainers and no obligation that they carry out their job with due diligence and zealousness as is required from a licensed attorney. It is usually better to pay a little more to a licensed attorney, then be in a position to pay twice, as most of my clients who have gone with such services are now doing.

Cancellation of Removal appeal granted

Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted an appeal from an Immigration Judge's (IJ) decision denying cancellation of removal to native of Mexico and a Permanent Resident (PR) of the US based on prior convictions.  PR appealed to the BIA, BIA acknowledged that PR has had 3 criminal convictions in Illinois, one for unlawful possession of firearm, one for possession of cocaine and one for resisting arrest.  PR also had several arrests, which did not lead to a conviction. Moreover, BIA acknowledged that his work and tax history were not so great either. Nonetheless, his application for cancellation of removal is strongly supported by his connections to the US. BIA indicates that he came to the US as an infant and lived here almost his entire life, has been married to a US citizen for several years and has 4 US daughters, who he presently visits regularly and supports financially. Mother of the daughters and PR's soon to be ex-wife, testified very favorably for the PR. Furthermore, PR presently resides with his father who is also a permanent resident, and has 5 siblings, all of whom are US citizens.  All in all, BIA decided that PR's ties to this Country are substantial and decided to give him a final chance to stay in the US, thereby, reversing the IJ's decision.  Although, the BIA did point out that this will be his last chance, and if he gets into any more trouble with the law he will be deported.

As to my thoughts on this matter: I have to agree with the BIA. In this particular case, PR has very strong ties to the US and despite his criminal convictions, the hardships that will be suffered by his family here in the US who are US citizens, outweighs his less then perfect background. This is also a good example which shows that just because an IJ makes an unfavorable ruling, there is still hope.  There is always the process of appeal and the possibility of reversal of the IJ's decision.

Immigration News

On August 20th ICE had issued  a new policy  which  calls for an expedited adjudication for cases involving a detained alien whose application is currently pending before USCIS.  USCIS shall adjudicate such cases within 30 days of receiving the file. In cases where an alien is in removal proceedings but is not detained, such cases shall be adjudicated within 45 days by USCIS. Further, the memo calls for dismissal of certain cases in removal proceedings where an alien appears eligible for relief from removal. 

This is great news for immigration attorneys as well as their clients, as it will free up the court system, and cases that are in some circumstances being scheduled as far as 2 years from now, will be able to get adjudicated much faster. 

Introduction

Hello to all.
I just recently joined the wonderful world of blogging. I am very new to this, so please bare with me while I get the hang of this whole thing.
First off, I would like to briefly introduce myself to all who may be reading my posts. I am an attorney, practicing in the Greater New York and New Jersey area. My firm mainly concentrates on business law, immigration  law and health care law. I welcome any and all question, however, must disclaim, that by no means am I establishing an attorney-client relationship via this blog or any other web source.
I intend to share the news with my readers as it relates to my areas of practice, together with FAQ that I get from clients and/or potential clients.  If there is something that you wish me to discuss, please feel free to throw an idea out there.