[Blogger’s note: Reports in traditional and social media have highlighted the new focus of U.S. Customs and Border Protection inspections officers who question applicants for admission to the United States at international ports of entry and preclearance sites abroad. My colleague, Raha Torabi, and I have co-authored this post that addresses the specific concerns
Samuel Herbert, Her Majesty’s Home Secretary from 1931-32 (the British equivalent of the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security), could well have been speaking about two recent immigration-related events when he quipped that “bureaucracy” is “a difficulty for every solution.”
One is an October 30 Settlement Agreement between Indian It consulting giant, Infosys, and the
Much has been written since April 17 when the bipartisan Gang of Eight senators introduced S. 744, a brobdingnagian immigration reform bill that overlays 844 pages of turgid text on top of the already gargantuan and complex Immigration and Nationality Act. The Migration Policy Institute, the National Immigration Law Center, and the American
[Blogger’s note: This article is reprinted with permission from the February 22, 2012 edition of The New York Law Journal. ©2010 ALM Properties Inc. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited. The authors thank the Journal for permission to reprint this article.]
By Angelo
At least when it comes to India, Yogi Berra had it wrong. It’s not déjà vu all over again.
Blogging this weekend from my hotel room in Mumbai, I vividly recall my first trip to India in 1993. Invited as part of an American Bar Association delegation, I spoke in New Delhi on “Nonimmigrant Visa Options for Computer
The sage of the current age, Wikipedia, defines the term “nonmaleficence” — from the Latin primum non nocere — as a principle of medical ethics, one that in my view is equally applicable to the immigration sphere. The princple holds that “given an existing problem, it may be better not to do something, or
