New Administration is considering implementing travel restrictions for the citizens of as many as 43 countries, it has been reported.
A draft list of recommendations has been drawn up by security officials, placing the countries into three different categories — red, orange and yellow — according to The New York Times, citing unnamed U.S. officials.
The red list comprises 11 countries whose citizens would face a complete ban, while the other two lists of countries would face various degrees of visa restrictions, according to the newspaper.
An official told The New York Times that the draft list is subject to change and had not yet been approved by the Trump administration, including by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Read more here:  We will publish the updates when the final document is released.

As of today, the draft lists the following countries:

Red List

The draft memo lists 11 countries on the red list whose citizens would be completely banned from entering the U.S. These countries include:

• Afghanistan
• Bhutan
• Cuba
• Iran
• Libya
• North Korea
• Somalia
• Sudan
• Syria
• Venezuela
• Yemen

Orange List

The draft orange list includes 10 countries whose citizens would face additional restrictions, but not an entire ban from entering the U.S.
Affluent business travelers could be permitted entry, but not individuals traveling on immigrant or tourist visas, according to The New York Times. Citizens from these countries would also be required to undergo mandatory in-person interviews.
Countries on this list include:

• Belarus
• Eritrea
• Haiti
• Laos
• Myanmar
• Pakistan
• Russia
• Sierra Leone
• South Sudan
• Turkmenistan

Yellow List

The draft yellow list includes 22 countries, which would have 60 days to address deficiency concerns or risk being moved to another category.
Some of the issues these countries would have to address include failing to share information about incoming travelers with the U.S., inadequate security practices for issuing passports, and selling citizenship to people from banned countries.

The lists will be updated. These is just a draft and not the law yet.

On June 24, 2022, USCIS updated its Policy Manual. New policy is intended to make it easier for people to obtain a green card without having to apply for an inadmissibility waiver.

Purpose

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is issuing policy guidance in the USCIS Policy
Manual on inadmissibility under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act
(INA), specifically, the effect of returning to the United States during the statutory 3-year or 10-
year period after departure or removal (if applicable).

Under this new policy guidance, a noncitizen who again seeks admission more than 3 or 10 years after the relevant departure or removal, is not inadmissible under INA 212(a)(9)(B) even if the noncitizen returned to the United States, with or without authorization, during the statutory 3-year or 10-year period.

Background

In 1996, Congress provided specific grounds of inadmissibility related to a noncitizen’s accrual of
unlawful presence in the United States, including inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(9)(B).

A noncitizen is inadmissible under INA 212(a)(9)(B) if the noncitizen accrues more than 180 days of
unlawful presence, departs or is removed (whichever applies), and again seeks admission within 3-
years or 10-years, respectively, after the departure or removal. This INA provision does not speak to
the effect of returning to the United States during the statutory 3-year or 10-year period without first
obtaining a waiver of inadmissibility.4 There are neither regulations, precedent federal court
decisions, nor published5 administrative decisions on the issue. However, more recently, two federal
district courts have issued decisions on this issue, concluding that the statutory 3-year and 10-year
periods run from the date of departure or removal (whichever applies) without interruption. 

USCIS is issuing this guidance to explain the effect of returning to the United States during the statutory 3-year or 10-year period after departure or removal (whichever applies) on inadmissibility determinations under INA 212(a)(9)(B). USCIS has not previously issued guidance on this specific issue in a policy memorandum, the Adjudicator’s Field Manual, or the Policy Manual.7 USCIS is now issuing this policy guidance to memorialize clear, express, and public-facing policy guidance in the Policy Manual regarding the impact of returning to the United States during the statutory 3-year and 10-year periods of inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(9)(B). This policy guidance, which is consistent with two recent district court decisions and an unpublished BIA decision on this issue, will ensure efficient and consistent adjudication in such cases, and enable the government to preserve significant resources.

This guidance contained in Volume 8 of the Policy Manual is effective immediately and applies prospectively to USCIS inadmissibility determinations made on or after June 24, 2022. The guidance contained in the Policy Manual is controlling and supersedes any prior related guidance on the topic. In addition, some noncitizens may be eligible to file a motion to reopen8 their previously denied application with USCIS using a Notice of Appeal or Motion (Form I-290B).

For more information, see the Unlawful Presence and Inadmissibility webpage.

Policy Highlights

• Explains that USCIS does not consider a noncitizen who has accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence and has departed or been removed (whichever applies) inadmissible under INA 212(a)(9)(B) unless the noncitizen again seeks admission to the United States within the statutory 3-year or 10-year period after departure or removal (whichever applies) following accrual of the requisite period of unlawful presence.

• States that the statutory 3-year or 10-year period begins to run once the noncitizen departs or is removed (whichever applies) and continues without interruption from that date until 3 or 10 years after such departure or removal.

• States that a noncitizen’s location during the statutory 3-year or 10-year period and the noncitizen’s manner of return to the United States during the statutory 3-year or 10-year period are irrelevant for purposes of determining inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(9)(B). 

Untimely Motions to Reopen for Certain USCIS DenialsOn June 24, 2022 USCIS published new policy guidance in the USCIS Policy Manual concerning the effect of returning to the United States during the statutory three-year or 10-year period after departure or removal. Under this policy guidance, a noncitizen who again seeks admission more than three years or 10 years after the relevant departure or removal is not inadmissible under INA 212(a)(9)(B), even if the noncitizen returned to the United States, with or without authorization, during the statutory three-year or 10-year period.
Generally, under 8 CFR 103.5(a)(1)(i), a motion to reopen filed by an applicant or petitioner must be filed within 30 days of the decision that the motion seeks to reopen. However, on or before December 27, 2022, you may file an untimely motion to reopen your previously denied application with USCIS on Form I-290B, Notice of Appeal or Motion, and in accordance with the form instructions and filing fee, if:

• You returned to the United States during the statutory three-year or 10-year period;
• You filed your application with USCIS after the expiration of the statutory three-year or 10-year period; and
• We denied your application on or after April 4, 2016, solely based upon inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(9)(B) and your return to the United States during the statutory three-year or 10-year period.

You should write “Return to United States during three-year or 10-year statutory period” to assist with identification and to prevent rejection for untimely filing. We will accept untimely motions to reopen that meet the requirements above. Any individual in litigation on this basis may work through the government’s representative in litigation. If your case is reopened, it will be adjudicated under the new policy guidance
Read more here. 

More Information about Unlawful Presence and the BarsYou can find more information on unlawful presence in AFM Chapter 40.9.2 (PDF, 1017.74 KB). You can also find additional information about grounds of inadmissibility in the USCIS Policy Manual.
Read here.

Whether an unlawful presence ground of inadmissibility applies to you depends on the immigration benefit you are seeking.
​Depending on the immigration benefit you are seeking, the law may exempt you from the ground of inadmissibility.
If you are inadmissible due to one or more of the unlawful presence grounds of inadmissibility, you generally cannot obtain a visa from the U.S. Department of State, enter the United States at a port of entry, or obtain an immigration benefit such as adjustment of status (Green Card) in the United States without first obtaining a waiver or another form of relief (such as consent to reapply for admission).
You can find information about some of the waivers or forms of relief on the following form pages:

• Form I-192, Application for Advance Permission to Enter as a Nonimmigrant
• Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility
• Form I-601A, Application for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver
• Form I-212, Application for Permission to Reapply for Admission into the United States After Deportation or Removal

​Read new policy at USCIS website. 

Conditional or permanent bars to GMC good moral character can result in the denial of your application for Naturalization, N-400, and also other applications for immigration benefits.

For example, a VAWA self-petitioner or applicant for naturalization (citizenship) will generally fail to establish that they possess good moral character if they were engaged or continue to be engaged in prostitution or gave false testimony. It can also bar a person from adjusting their status to the status of a lawful permanent resident in the United States.

Prostitution.

An applicant may not establish GMC if he or she has engaged in prostitution, procured or attempted to procure or to import prostitutes or persons for the purpose of prostitution, or received proceeds from prostitution during the statutory period.[39] The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) has held that to “engage in” prostitution, one must have engaged in a regular pattern of behavior or conduct.[40] The BIA has also determined that a single act of soliciting prostitution on one’s own behalf is not the same as procurement.[41]

Another ground is False Testimony: 

An applicant who gives false testimony to obtain any immigration benefit during the statutory period cannot establish GMC.[33] 
False testimony occurs when the applicant deliberately intends to deceive the U.S. Government while under oath in order to obtain an immigration benefit. This holds true regardless of whether the information provided in the false testimony would have impacted the applicant’s eligibility. The statute does not require that the benefit be obtained, only that the false testimony is given in an attempt to obtain the benefit.[34]
While the most common occurrence of false testimony is failure to disclose a criminal or other adverse record, false testimony can occur in other areas. False testimony may include, but is not limited to, facts about lawful admission, absences, residence, marital status or infidelity, employment, organizational membership, or tax filing information. 

​Good Moral Character requirement for Naturalization. 

There are many other conditional bars to good moral character listed in the USCIS Manual.

Permanent bars to good moral character are listed in the USCIS Manual here.

If in doubt, you should consult an immigration attorney, and have your case evaluated before applying for any immigration benefits.

In Russian:

Для многих иммиграционных заявлений требуется доказательство того, что заявитель не является аморальным человеком. В законе есть перечень условных оснований для отказа в заявлении и постоянных оснований для отказе в заявлении, на том основании, что человек считается "аморальным" (или у него/нее отсутствует "good moral character"). 

Например, проституция, дача ложных показаний и другие основания могут привести к отказу.

Если вы сомневаетесь, касается ли это вашей ситуации, проконсультируйтесь конфиденциально с адвокатом по вашему делу перед тем как подавать заявления в USCIS, а иногда и до того как начинать подготовку по делу, чтобы реально оценить ваши шансы и не терять время и ресурсы.

On January 20, 2021, President Biden signed a Presidential Proclamation titled “Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to the United States.”  This proclamation ends the travel restrictions under Presidential Proclamations 9645 and 9983 that had suspended entry into the United States of certain nationals, based on visa type, from Burma, Eritrea, Iran, Kyrgyzstan, Libya, Nigeria, North Korea, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tanzania, Venezuela, and Yemen.
Pursuant to President Biden’s proclamation, the State Department will undertake a review to ensure that individuals whose immigrant visa applications were denied on the basis of the suspension and restriction on entry imposed by P.P. 9645 or 9983 may have their applications reconsidered. This review will consider whether to reopen immigrant visa applications that were denied due to the suspension and restriction on entry imposed by P.P. 9645 or 9983; whether it is necessary to charge an additional fee to process those visa applications; and development of a plan to expedite consideration of those visa applications.
Pending the Department’s review, under current Department regulations Immigrant visa (IV) applicants who were previously refused) due to either P.P. 9645 or 9983 and were determined not to qualify for a waiver before January 20, 2020, must submit a new visa application (DS-260) and pay a new visa application processing fee.  IV applicants refused due to either P.P. 9645 or 9983 and whose eligibility for a waiver was still being evaluated, or who were determined not to qualify for a waiver within one year of January 20, 2021, and who also request their local embassy or consulate to resume processing on their case within one year of January 20, 2021 may be able to resume processing of their case without submitting a new application or paying a new visa application processing fee. Embassies and consulates will prioritize the adjudication of applications for those individuals who remain in the waiver process.
Nonimmigrant visa applicants who were previously refused due to either P.P. 9645 or 9983 and did not qualify for a waiver will need to submit a new visa application (DS-160) and pay a new visa application processing fee if they wish to reapply for a visa.  
Pursuant to President Biden’s proclamation, the Department can immediately process visa applications for individuals from the affected countries. Please note that the rescission of P.P.s 9645 and 9983 does not necessarily mean that your local U.S. embassy or consulate is able to immediately schedule all affected applicants for visa interviews.  The resumption of routine visa services during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, prioritized after services to U.S. citizens, will occur on a post-by-post basis, consistent with the Department’s guidance for safely returning our workforce to Department facilities.  U.S. Embassies and Consulates have continued to provide emergency and mission-critical visa services since March and will continue to do so as they are able.  Applicants, including those previously denied due to P.P. 9645 or 9983, should consult the website of their nearest U.S. embassy or consulate to determine if their case qualifies for expedited processing.  As post-specific conditions improve, our missions will begin providing additional services, culminating eventually in a complete resumption of routine visa services.  Please see here for more information on the phased resumption of visa services.

​Read more.

On Monday, June 22, 2020, the Trump administration said that it was extending a ban on Immigrant Visas aka "green cards" issued outside the United States until December 31, 2020, and adding many nonimmigrant and work visas to the ban, including those used heavily by technology companies and multinational corporations (H-1B, L) and also H-2B, J-1.

The administration explained this ban a way to free up jobs in an economy reeling from the coronavirus. The ban is in effect since April 23, 2020. Original ban was for 60 days. New ban is valid until December 31, 2020.

The ban on new visas applies to H-1B visas, which are used by major American technology companies, and their immediate families, H-2B visas for nonagricultural seasonal workers, J-1 visas for exchange students and L-1 visas for managers of multinational corporations. There will be exemptions for food processing workers, which make up about 15% of H-2B visas.

The administration is proposing a new way of awarding H-1B visas, which are capped at 85,000 a year. The administration wants to award them by highest salary instead of by lottery.

Text of the June 22, 2020 Proclamation is here.   

.........................
Section 1.  Continuation of Proclamation 10014.  (a)  Section 4 of Proclamation 10014 is amended to read as follows:
“Sec. 4.  Termination.  This proclamation shall expire on December 31, 2020, and may be continued as necessary.  Within 30 days of June 24, 2020, and every 60 days thereafter while this proclamation is in effect, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall, in consultation with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Labor, recommend any modifications as may be necessary.”
(b)  This section shall be effective immediately.
Sec. 2.  Suspension and Limitation on Entry.  The entry into the United States of any alien seeking entry pursuant to any of the following nonimmigrant visas is hereby suspended and limited, subject to section 3 of this proclamation:
(a)  an H-1B or H-2B visa, and any alien accompanying or following to join such alien;
(b)  a J visa, to the extent the alien is participating in an intern, trainee, teacher, camp counselor, au pair, or summer work travel program, and any alien accompanying or following to join such alien; and
(c)  an L visa, and any alien accompanying or following to join such alien.
Sec. 3.  Scope of Suspension and Limitation on Entry.  (a)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 2 of this proclamation shall apply only to any alien who:
(i)    is outside the United States on the effective date of this proclamation;
(ii)   does not have a nonimmigrant visa that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation; and
(iii)  does not have an official travel document other than a visa (such as a transportation letter, an appropriate boarding foil, or an advance parole document) that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation or issued on any date thereafter that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission.
(b)  The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 2 of this proclamation shall not apply to:
(i)    any lawful permanent resident of the United States;
(ii)   any alien who is the spouse or child, as defined in section 101(b)(1) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1101(b)(1)), of a United States citizen;
(iii)  any alien seeking to enter the United States to provide temporary labor or services essential to the United States food supply chain; and
(iv)   any alien whose entry would be in the national interest as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.
..........


​Read here.

Here and here.

Question/Вопрос:

Здравствуйте! Мой муж иммигрировал в США в декабре 2019 (воссоединение с сыном). В марте 2020 муж подал на воссоединение со мной(женой), и также ,,прицепом" по моей петиции идет моя назамужняя дочь которой 19,5 лет. Официально мы женаты 2 года. Есть ли у нас шанс воссоединиться в свете последних событий, в связи с указом Трампа, могут ли отменить воссоединение с гринкардхолдером, если так, то что будет с теми, кто уже подал петицию І-130? Заранее спасибо за ответ.
​
Answer/Ответ:

Добрый день!
Я понимаю, что сын вашего мужа американский гражданин. Сын подал петицию на отца, и ваш муж иммигрировал в США в декабре 2019. После получения грин карты он подал одну I-130 петицию на вас, и вы считаете, что ваша дочь включена в эту петицию.
Вашему мужу стоит проконсультироваться с адвокатом по поводу петиции на вашу дочь.
Что касается вашего вопроса об Указе президента и временном приостановлении иммиграции в США, включая вашу визовую категорию.
Этот запрет временный сроком на 60 дней. Когда этот период истечет, он может быть продлен. В любом случае, поданные петиции продолжают рассматриваться USCIS. Запрет на выдачу виз относится к посольствам и консульствам США, и пока является временным.
Всего доброго!
Мой овет опубликован тут 

On April 22, 2020, President signed the Executive Order limiting immigration. The order applies to those seeking permanent residence (green cards) in the United States and will last for 60 days, at which point it will be reevaluated and potentially extended. 

Effective Date. This proclamation is effective at 11:59 p.m. eastern daylight time on April 23, 2020.

The order applies only to foreign nationals outside the United States seeking an immigrant visa or a green card, it doesn't apply to those who applies for adjustment of status.

It applies only to certain immigrant visas. 

It includes an exceptions for essential workers, including medical workers, spouses and children of U.S. citizens, and "certain other aliens." The order would not apply to seasonal farm workers, who would seek seasonal guest-worker visas.

Sec. 2. Scope of Suspension and Limitation on Entry. (a) The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall apply only to aliens who:

(i) are outside the United States on the effective date of this proclamation;
(ii) do not have an immigrant visa that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation; and
(iii) do not have an official travel document other than a visa (such as a transportation letter, an appropriate boarding foil, or an advance parole document) that is valid on the effective date of this proclamation or issued on any date thereafter that permits him or her to travel to the United States and seek entry or admission.
​
(b) The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to:
(i) any lawful permanent resident of the United States;
(ii) any alien seeking to enter the United States on an immigrant visa as a physician, nurse, or other healthcare professional; to perform medical research or other research intended to combat the spread of COVID-19; or to perform work essential to combating, recovering from, or otherwise alleviating the effects of the COVID-19 outbreak, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees; and any spouse and unmarried children under 21 years old of any such alien who are accompanying or following to join the alien;
(iii) any alien applying for a visa to enter the United States pursuant to the EB-5 Immigrant Investor Program;
(iv) any alien who is the spouse of a United States citizen;
(v) any alien who is under 21 years old and is the child of a United States citizen, or who is a prospective adoptee seeking to enter the United States pursuant to the IR-4 or IH-4 visa classifications;
(vi) any alien whose entry would further important United States law enforcement objectives, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees, based on a recommendation of the Attorney General or his designee;
(vii) any member of the United States Armed Forces and any spouse and children of a member of the United States Armed Forces;
(viii) any alien seeking to enter the United States pursuant to a Special Immigrant Visa in the SI or SQ classification, subject to such conditions as the Secretary of State may impose, and any spouse and children of any such individual; or
(ix) any alien whose entry would be in the national interest, as determined by the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or their respective designees.

As of 11:59 PM on April 23, 2020, the ban blocks the issuance of all new immigrant (permanent) visas to people outside the United States, with some exceptions.

Specifically, the ban applies to:

• Parents of U.S. citizens (Immediate Relatives category)
• Adult children of U.S. citizens (Family Preference categories)
• Spouses and children (regardless of age) of lawful permanent residents.
• The diversity visa DV Visa program
• All employment-based immigrant visas, except EB-5 investor visas (and except those applying for adjustment of status)
• All other immigrant visas, unless specifically exempted.

Who Is Exempted from the Immigration Ban?

The ban does not apply to nonimmigrant (temporary) visas, such as students and H-1B high-skilled workers. It exempts any immigrant abroad who already has an immigrant visa or travel document in hand when it goes into effect. It also makes limited exceptions for:

• Spouses and minor children of U.S. citizens, as well as active duty troops and their families.
• People seeking EB-5 investor visas.
• Iraqi and Afghan translators who helped the U.S. military, as well as their families.
• Any person obtaining an employment-based immigrant visa as a doctor, nurse, health care worker, medical researcher, or other job that the Department of Homeland Security determines is essential to combating the coronavirus. Spouse and children of these people are also exempted.
• Anyone whose entry as an immigrant is determined to be in the “national interest” or that “furthers important law enforcement objectives.”

The ban also does not affect anyone seeking to gain a green card from inside the United States through “adjustment of status,” which does not require obtaining a visa from outside the country. Refugees, asylum seekers, and those currently holding lawful permanent resident status aren’t affected by the ban, but their ability to petition for family members abroad could be impacted.

How Long Does the Immigration Ban Last?

The ban will last 60 days. However, by the 50th day, the secretary of state is required to recommend to the president whether to extend the ban again.

If the supposed “90-day” Muslim Ban provides any history, this new ban will almost certainly get extended through the end of Trump’s first term in office. If the economy continues to struggle, the president will have an excuse to continue to block new immigrants.

In addition, the ban also requires the secretary of homeland security and the secretary of labor to review all non-immigrant visa programs within 30 days. This suggests that another ban may be in the works.

What Is the Long-term Effect of This Immigration Ban?

Routine visa services at consulates abroad are already suspended due to the coronavirus, so this ban does not change much in the short-term. However, the effect will likely be significant if the ban continues once those consulates reopen.

It is expected that all legal immigration would be cut by 33%.

While U.S.-citizen spouses are not affected, nearly two thirds of parents of U.S. citizens would get blocked. 93% of other family-based immigrants would as well. However, because a vast majority of those who obtain green cards through employment categories do so from inside the United States, employment-based immigration is largely unaffected.


Briefly in Russian:

22 апреля 2020, президент подписал Указ, ограничивающий иммиграцию в США. Про этот указ он впервые сказал в твите в понедельник, два дня назад. Этот указ относится к тем, кто обращается за иммиграционными визами в США и грин картами, но не относится к тем, кто приезжает в США по временным неиммиграционным визам. Дата вступления нового закона в силу 23 апреля 2020, и он останется в силе 60 дней. Этот срок может быть продлен президентом.
Указ относится только к иммиграционным визам через посольство и не относится к получению грин карты в США через USCIS как adjustment of status. 

Указ исключает из запрета несколько групп иммигрантов: в том числе, супругов и малолетних неженатых детей американских граждан до 21 года, вречей, медперсонал, тех у кого уже есть в паспорте иммиграционные визы, тех кто приезжает по неиммиграционным визам.

Read it here.

A federal court issued a ruling on Friday, December 7, 2018, that halts a Trump administration policy that blocked hundreds of lawful permanent residents from serving in the U.S. military.

Lawful permanent resident or green card holders can enlist and serve in the U.S. Military, and can apply for naturalization or U.S. citizenship through their military service.

Judge held that the Department of Defense likely violated the federal Administrative Procedure Act after it implemented a policy discriminating against lawful permanent resident enlistees. Judge's ruling finds that the Defense Department provided no rational justification for the policy change, stating that it provided no evidence indicating that lawful permanent resident enlistees posed more of a risk than U.S. citizens.

​Read more here.

Please note that in October 2017, the Department of Defense issued new policies that impact lawful permanent residents and other non-U.S. citizens in the military. The ILRC's practice advisory discusses how these policies affect those who seek to enlist, and those who currently serve in the military, including in the Reserve Components. 

The DoD policy changes will not affect MAVNI enlistees because the MAVNI program was suspended in October 2016. No one has been able to enlist in MAVNI since that time.

Before making a decision to enlist and to apply for naturalization, please review the practice advisory (dated 03/2018 - will be revised soon) and consider that under new rules "expedited" naturalization may not be much faster than a naturalization under a default rule.

(On August 9, 2018, USCIS published a final revised guidance which supersedes May 10th 2018 memorandum. Please refer to a new USCIS memorandum/guidance we published here).

On May 10, 2018, USCIS posted a policy memorandum changing how USCIS will calculate unlawful presence for students and exchange visitors in F, J, and M nonimmigrant status, including F-2, J-2, or M-2 dependents, who fail to maintain their status in the United States.  

This policy aligns with Trump’s Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States to enforce the immigration laws of the country and will go into effect on Aug. 9, 2018.

Individuals in F, J, and M status who failed to maintain their status before Aug. 9, 2018, will start accruing unlawful presence on that date based on that failure, unless they had already started accruing unlawful presence, on the earliest of any of the following:

• The day after DHS denied the request for an immigration benefit, if DHS made a formal finding that the individual violated his or her nonimmigrant status while adjudicating a request for another immigration benefit;
• The day after their I-94 expired; or
• The day after an immigration judge or in certain cases, the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), ordered them excluded, deported, or removed (whether or not the decision is appealed).

Individuals in F, J, or M status who fail to maintain their status on or after Aug. 9, 2018, will start accruing unlawful presence on the earliest of any of the following:      

• The day after they no longer pursue the course of study or the authorized activity, or the day after they engage in an unauthorized activity;
• The day after completing the course of study or program, including any authorized practical training plus any authorized grace period;
• The day after the I-94 expires; or
• The day after an immigration judge, or in certain cases, the BIA, orders them excluded, deported, or removed (whether or not the decision is appealed).

Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence during a single stay, and then depart, may be subject to 3-year or 10-year bars to admission, depending on how much unlawful presence they accrued before they departed the United States. Individuals who have accrued a total period of more than one year of unlawful presence, whether in a single stay or during multiple stays in the United States, and who then reenter or attempt to reenter the United States without being admitted or paroled are permanently inadmissible.

Those subject to the 3-year, 10-year, or permanent unlawful presence bars to admission are generally not eligible to apply for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status to permanent residence unless they are eligible for a waiver of inadmissibility or another form of relief.

This policy memorandum is updating Chapter 40.9.2 of the USCIS Adjudicator’s Field Manual.
​
USCIS is accepting comments on the policy memorandum. The 30-day public comment period begins today and closes on June 11, 2018. For complete information on the comment process, visit the Policy Memoranda for Comment page.

US Department of State 09/16/2017 cable provides guidance to U.S. consular posts, embassies and consulates abroad, on applying the new “90 day rule,” introduced on September 1, 2017. 

This new rule presumes that individuals have made a material misrepresentation on prior visa applications or in their applications for admission to the U.S. if they violate or engage in conduct inconsistent with their nonimmigrant status within the first 90 days of entry into the U.S.

SUMMARY: This cable advises posts on the application of INA section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) as it pertains to revised guidance at 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(g-h) regarding the 90 day rule, formerly known as the “30/60 day rule.” Interagency working groups agreed to a change in policy and expanded the 30/60 day timeframe to 90 days for aliens who enter the United States and engage in activity inconsistent with their nonimmigrant status before procuring a change or adjustment of status. 

The 90 day rule

The following revised guidance replaces the 30/60 day rule and applies to all adjudications that occur after September 1, 2017.

The guidance should not be applied retroactively.

As detailed in the revisions to 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(g-h), aliens who violate or engage in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status within 90 days of entry into the United States by:
1) engaging in unauthorized employment;
2) enrolling in a course of unauthorized academic study;
3) marrying a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident and taking up residence in the United States while in a nonimmigrant visa classification that prohibits immigrant intent; or
4) undertaking any other activity for which a change of status or adjustment of status would be required prior to obtaining such change or adjustment, may be presumed to have made a material misrepresentation.

You must give the alien the opportunity to present evidence to rebut the presumption that he or she made a willful misrepresentation on prior visa applications or in their applications for admission to the United States before you can find the applicant ineligible under 212(a)(6)(C)(i).

If the applicant is unable to overcome the presumption that he or she engaged in a willful misrepresentation, post must request an Advisory Opinion (AO) from the Visa Office of Advisory Opinions (CA/VO/L/A) per 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(h)(2)(b).

If an alien violates or engages in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status after 90 days of entry into the United States, there generally is no presumption of willful misrepresentation. However, if facts in the case give you a reason to believe that the alien misrepresented his or her purpose of travel at the time of the visa application or application for admission, you must request an AO from CA/VO/L/A.

You can see the text of the DoS cable here. Or download a pdf file here.

On September 24, 2017, the White House issued a Presidential Proclamation which replaced expiring portions of the President's March 6, 2017 Executive Order, Travel Ban 2.0, and expanded the list of the banned countries to eight. 

The following eight countries are now subject to travel restrictions (travel ban): Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Yemen, Somalia.

There was no clear explanation why the U.S. ally in Africa, Chad, was added to the list of the banned countries. 

Iraq and Sudan were removed from the travel ban list, but the Proclamation Travel Ban recommends “additional scrutiny” for nationals of Iraq and Sudan.

This travel ban applies differently to citizens of different banned countries:

** Citizens of North Korea are barred from all types of immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States;

** Citizens of Chad are only barred from entering on immigrant visas and on non-immigrant business (B-1), tourist (B-2), and business/tourist (B-1/B-2) visas; and

** Citizens of Iran are barred in all immigrant and nonimmigrant categories except for student (F and M) and exchange visitor (J) visas. Therefore, it is expected that visa issuance and entry in categories not subject to the ban will continue uninterrupted.

The Proclamation Travel Ban goes into effect on different dates for different countries.  

For foreign nationals already subject to the Travel Ban 2.0 and who do not have a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the US, the restrictions in the Proclamation Travel Ban went into effect immediately on September 24, 2017. For all nationals of the recently added countries, travel ban will apply on October 18, 2017.

Effective October 18, 2017, the proclamation appears to get rid of the “bona fide relationship” protection implemented by the Supreme Court under its temporary ruling on the EO Travel Ban 2.0, which exempted travelers with certain qualifying family and employment relationships in the US. Most likely, this issue will be litigated again.

Contrary to the Travel Ban 2.0, the new Proclamation Travel Ban has no expiration date.  Government agencies will be presenting reports every 180 days, and the Travel Ban 3.0 can be revised based on the reports and recommendations.

Additional countries may be added in the future. 

Countries may be removed if they are recommended for removal by the DHS, in consultation with US Department of State and other relevant US agencies.

The new Proclamation Travel Ban 3.0 does not apply to certain categories of travelers:

• Lawful permanent residents..
• Travelers who already hold a valid US visa.
• Dual citizens of the designated (banned) countries who are traveling on the passport of a non-designated country.
• People already granted asylum in the US or admitted to the US in refugee status, and those already granted withholding of removal, advance parole, or protection under the Convention Against Torture.
• People traveling with a document other than a visa valid on the effective date (for example, an advance parole document) that permits them to travel to the USA .
• Holders of diplomatic visas, NATA visas, UN C-2 visas, G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas;

​A case-by-case waiver may be issued by consular and border officers when determined to be appropriate. The waiver grant guidance is expected to be released soon by the US Department of State. The waiver guidance will consider the US national interest and potential security risks for each individual, among other categories.

Full test of the Presidential Proclamation is here.

​

On September 1, 2017, the U.S. Department of State (DOS) has published an updated policy guidance on inadmissibility under INA 212(a)(6)(c)(i) (“Misrepresentation”).

9 FAM 302.9 was updated and effective September 1, 2017, new "90-day rule" replaced old "30-60 day rule".

In the new guidance, 9 FAM 302.9, entitled “Inconsistent Conduct Within 90 Days of Entry” Consular Officers are advised:

“…if an alien violates or engages in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status within 90 days of entry…you may presume that the applicant's representations about engaging in only status-compliant activity were willful misrepresentations of his or her intention in seeking a visa or entry.

For purposes of applying the 90-day rule, conduct that violates or is otherwise inconsistent with an alien’s nonimmigrant status includes, but is not limited to:

1. Engaging in unauthorized employment;
2. Enrolling in a course of academic study, if such study is not authorized for that nonimmigrant classification (e.g. B status);
3. A nonimmigrant in B or F status, or any other status prohibiting immigrant intent, marrying a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident and taking up residence in the United States; or
4. Undertaking any other activity for which a change of status or an adjustment of status would be required, without the benefit of such a change or adjustment.”

Effective September 1, 2017, this new 90-day rule applies to the U.S. consulates and embassies abroad.
It's possible that the DHS and USCIS will adopt this more strict interpretation instead of the current 30-60 day rule
--------------------------------------
*** 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)  (U) Interpretation of the Term Misrepresentation
g. (U) Activities that Indicate Violation of Status or Conduct Inconsistent with Status
(1)  (U) In General:
(a)  (U) In determining whether a misrepresentation has been made, some of the most difficult questions arise from cases involving aliens in the United States who conduct themselves in a manner inconsistent with representations they made to consular officers concerning their intentions at the time of visa application or to DHS when applying for admission or for an immigration benefit.  Such cases occur most frequently with respect to aliens who, after having obtained visas as nonimmigrants and been admitted to the United States, either:
(i)     (U) Apply for adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident; or
(ii)    (U) Fail to maintain their nonimmigrant status (for example, by engaging in unauthorized study or employment).
(b)  (U) Applications for adjustment or change of status in the United States are adjudicated by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), other than in those cases where the application is made before an Immigration Judge.  If you become aware of derogatory information indicating that an alien in the United States who has a valid visa, may have misrepresented his or her intentions to you at the time of visa application, or to DHS at the port of entry or in a filing for an immigration benefit, you may bring the derogatory information to the attention of the Department for potential revocation.  See 9 FAM 403.11-5.  If you become aware of derogatory information indicating that an alien in the United States without a valid visa but who is not a Lawful Permanent Resident may have misrepresented his or her intentions to you at the time of visa application, or to DHS at the port of entry or in a filing for an immigration benefit, then you may enter a P6C1 lookout in CLASS with the appropriate information.  See 9 FAM 403.10-3(C)(1).  Do not request an advisory opinion from the Advisory Opinions Division (CA/VO/L/A) in these cases, because it would not be binding on USCIS.
(c)  (U) With respect to the second category referred to above in subparagraph g(1)(a)(ii), nonimmigrant visa holders who fail to maintain their nonimmigrant status, the fact that an alien's subsequent actions are inconsistent with those stated at the time of visa application or admission or in a filing for an immigrant benefit does not necessarily prove that the alien's intentions were misrepresented at the time of application or entry.  You should consider carefully the precise circumstances of the change in activities when determining whether the applicant made a knowing and willful misrepresentation.  To conclude there was a misrepresentation, you must have direct or circumstantial evidence sufficient to meet the "reason to believe” standard, which requires more than mere suspicion but less than a preponderance of the evidence.
(2)  (U) Inconsistent Conduct Within 90 Days of Entry:
(a)  (U) However, if an alien violates or engages in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status within 90 days of entry, as described in subparagraph (2)(b) below, you may presume that the applicant's representations about engaging in only status-compliant activity were willful misrepresentations of his or her intention in seeking a visa or entry.  To make a finding of inadmissibility for misrepresentation based on conduct inconsistent with status within 90 days of entry, you must request an AO from CA/VO/L/A. As with other grounds that do not require a formal AO, the AO may be informal.  See 9 FAM 304.3-2.
(b)  (U) For purposes of applying the 90-day rule, conduct that violates or is otherwise inconsistent with an alien’s nonimmigrant status includes, but is not limited to:
(i)     (U) Engaging in unauthorized employment;
(ii      (U) Enrolling in a course of academic study, if such study is not authorized for that nonimmigrant classification (e.g. B status);
(iii)    (U) A nonimmigrant in B or F status, or any other status prohibiting immigrant intent, marrying a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident and taking up residence in the United States; or
(iv)    (U) Undertaking any other activity for which a change of status or an adjustment of status would be required, without the benefit of such a change or adjustment.
(3)  (U) After 90 Days:  If an alien violates or engages in conduct inconsistent with his or her nonimmigrant status more than 90 days after entry into the United States, no presumption of willful misrepresentation arises.  However, if the facts in the case give you reasonable belief that the alien misrepresented his or her purpose of travel at the time of the visa application or application for admission, you must request an AO from CA/VO/L/A.  (See 9 FAM 302.9-4(C)(2)).  

9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3)(g)(2) link is here.
--------------------------------------------------

In Russian:

Если в течение первых 90 дней после вашего въезда в США, вы подадите заявление на смену статуса, выйдите замуж, или совершите другие действия, не совместимые с вашим неиммиграционным статусом -- то Госдеп США, посольства, консульства, пограничные и иммиграционные службы теперь будут рассматривать это как обманное действие (мошенничество), что может повлечь пожизненный запрет на въезд в США.

1 сентября 2017 года Государственный департамент США обновил правило в Кодексе для Консульских Сотрудников, под номером 9 FAM 302.9-4(B)(3). Эта статья описывает “несогласования” между типом визы, полученной неиммигрантом, и его действиями по приезде в США.

Новая статья содержит раздел под названием "Непоследовательное поведение в течение 90 дней после въезда", в котором говорится: 

“Если иностранец предпринимает действия, несовместимые с полученным им или ею неиммиграционным статусом, в течение 90 дней после въезда США, стоит понимать, что указанные им данные для получения визы или статуса были умышленно искаженными с намерением получить возможность въехать в США”.
В случае, если иммиграционный офицер "установит, что иностранец, находящийся в Соединенных Штатах по действительной визе, исказил свои намерения в момент подачи заявления на визу, в порту въезда в страну или при подаче заявки об иммиграции", он обязан “предоставить эту информацию Департаменту внутренней безопасности (DHS) для возможного отзыва визы”.
В статье Иммиграционного Кодекса 212 (a) (6) (C) говорится, что любому иностранцу, который путем преднамеренного искажения существенного факта пытался получить визу, другие документы при въезде в США или любые иммиграционные привилегии, может быть пожизненно запрещен въезд в США.
--------------------------------------
​
1. Несогласованное поведение (не соответствует визе или заявлениям сделанным в посольстве)
Поведение, которое нарушает или противоречит неиммиграционному статусу иностранцев, включает в себя:

• Трудовая деятельность без соответствующего разрешения;
• Регистрация на курсы или другие виды обучения в США, если это не разрешено полученной визой;
• Заключение брака с гражданином или постоянным резидентом США и подача заявки на проживание в стране, если въезд в страну осуществлялся по туристической, студенческой или любой другой визе, не предусматривающей дальнейшее получение иммиграционного статуса;
• Выполнение любых других видов деятельности, для которых потребуется изменение или корректировка статуса даже в случае, если заявка на эти изменения не была подана.

2. Презумпция умышленного искажения основывается на сроке 90 дней после въезда в США.
Новая статья в FAM устанавливает презумпцию преднамеренного искажения данных при подаче на визу, если деятельность иностранца противоречит полученному статусу в течение 90 дней после въезда в США. В таком случае бремя доказывания невиновности ложится на иностранца, который должен доказать, что его поведение и действия в этот 90-дневный срок были допустимы в соответствии с полученным им неиммиграционным статусом.
Консульские должностные лица должны предоставить иностранцу «возможность опровергнуть презумпцию преднамеренного искажения информации путем представления доказательств для ее опровержения».
3. Что случилось со старым правилом “30-60”, и может ли новое руководство FAM иметь обратное действие?
Обновленное правило по сути дело заменило старое правило "30-60 дней" в отношении изменения неиммиграционного статуса после въезда в США.
Правило 30-60 дней действовало так:

• Иностранец, который подал заявку на смену статуса в течение 30 дней после въезда, автоматически сталкивается с презумпцией преднамеренного искажения информации и намерений при подаче заявки на визу. В результате чего лицо могло быть выдворено из страны с пожизненным запретом на въезд в США.
• Если заявка на смену статуса подавалась в период от 30 до 60 дней после въезда, презумпция намеренного искажения информации не возникала. Однако, если чиновники имели логические доводы и факты, доказывающие возможное искажение, тогда иностранец должен был представить встречные доказательства.
• Если заявка на смену  статуса происходила более чем через 60 дней после въезда в США, как правило, должностные лица считали, что оснований для подозрений в преднамеренном искажении информации при въезде нет.

На вебсайте USCIS правило “30-60” пока не было заменено, но это может произойти в ближайшем будущем.

9 FAM 302.9 не упоминает о ретроспективном применении нового руководства, но указывает, что оно вступило в силу с 1 сентября 2017 года. 

4. Будьте внимательны, подавая заявку на смену статуса
Новое правило предполагает, что Госдепартамент США проверит иностранцев, которые въехали в США по программе Visa Waiver (она разрешает поездки в США гражданам некоторых стран для туризма или бизнеса на срок до 90 дней без предварительного получения визы), а также тех, кто въехал по визе B-1/B-2, и подали заявки на получение статуса постоянного резидента.

Даже если заявление на смену статуса подается по истечении 90 дней после въезда, от иностранца могут потребовать доказательств того, что произошло конкретное событие, на которое он не рассчитывал и которого не планировал, требующее изменения его иммиграционного статуса.

5. Является ли подача заявки на иммиграционную визу и получение визы (грин карты) через посольство или консульство лучшим вариантом?

Несмотря на то что USCIS пока не ввела новое руководство DOS в действие, и пока не ясно, намерена ли USCIS это делать, становится все более безопасным получение статуса постоянного резидента США через консульские учреждения за рубежом (consular processing), чем подача заявки на изменение статуса, находясь на территории США (adjustment of status). 

Всегда лучше проконсультироваться с компетентным иммиграционным адвокатом перед тем, как начинать какой-то иммиграционный процесс, например, по смене статуса, или если вы планируете боак и подать заявление на грин карту, не выезжая из страны.

​Если вам нужна помощь или совет, вы можете связаться с нами по электронной почте.

We often get inquiries from Canadian citizens who make frequent or lengthy trips to the United States annually. They have heard about a so-called “180-day rule” that allows a Canadian visitor to visit the U.S. for the maximum period of 180 days.  

Although many Canadians citizens do not get a passport stamp or entry document that authorizes entry for a specific term, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) takes the position that Canadians citizens are deemed to be admitted for a maximum of six months. However, CBP may stamp a passport allowing a much shorter period of admission (only 5 days, two months, etc), in the situation where a Canadian citizen travels often to the U.S. which raises questions that he or she is not merely a visitor.

A person is in violation of the immigration laws if he or she does not depart the United States within the six-month limit (or whatever period is allowed by CBP), thereby becoming deportable and ineligible for other immigration benefits. Longer periods of overstay and unlawful presence of over a year can lead to a ban for 10 years.
​
But that rule has nothing to do with the person who makes frequent short visits that aggregate 180 days or more during the year. A Canadian citizen could theoretically come across (and depart) as a visitor every day and accumulate 365 days of presence in the United States without raising any concerns about overstay or unlawful presence. Such a pattern could certainly lead to more CBP scrutiny at the border as to the nature of the visits, to rule out the possibility that the person is working or living illegally in the United States.

Immigration rule summary: A Canadian citizen should not remain in the United States continuously for more than six months as a visitor (or longer than the admission period allowed by the CBP, if CBP allowed a shorter period of admission to USA). Aggregate time frames in excess of six months do not violate any immigration law, but they might create more CBP scrutiny at the border, requiring the person to prove how he or she qualifies as  visitor, to prove that they do not work in the United States. For the business visitor, this might require some advance planning and the implementation of record-keeping techniques that easily and credibly explain the number, nature, and duration of prior trips.

The second part of the “180-day rule” relates to U.S. tax issues. If you spend too much time in the United States you can be deemed a resident for U.S. federal income tax purposes, requiring to file a U.S. income tax return and report all worldwide income even if there is no earned income in the United States or any other activity that would require a U.S. tax filing.

The IRS uses a “substantial presence” test to determine if someone is a resident for U.S. federal income tax purposes in a given calendar year.  The “substantial presence” test is a mechanical formula based solely on the number of days on which an individual is present in the United States. The formula is applied to make a determination each calendar year. To be classified as a U.S. resident under the substantial presence test for a particular year, an individual must be physically present in the United States on at least 31 days of the current calendar year, and the sum of the following must equal 183 or more days: 1) all days in the United States in the current year, plus 2) one-third of the days in the immediately preceding year, plus 3) one-sixth of the days in the second preceding year.
​
The general rule of thumb is to keep presence in the United States under 120 days each year. (The designation “resident” for federal income tax purposes has nothing to do with immigration status or actual place of domicile; it just means that the person must file a U.S. resident return and report his or her worldwide income.)

Thus, someone who consistently visits the United States for around 180 days a year is going to satisfy the substantial presence test and be deemed a U.S. resident for federal income tax purposes. That isn’t the end of the analysis, however, because there are exceptions, including the “closer connection” and “tie-breaker” rules under the Internal Revenue Code and U.S.-Canada Tax Treaty that may allow the person to avoid being subject to U.S. tax on their worldwide income even if the actual number of days creates substantial presence.

The closer connection exception is only available if the individual is present less than 183 days in the current year. In order to claim the application of one of these exceptions, the individual is required to affirmatively file a tax return or other information statement with the IRS. The closer connection exception is generally preferred because it does not require additional information filings with the IRS as does the treaty exception. 

Tax rule summary. A person will not be considered a resident for U.S. federal income tax purposes if he or she keeps the number of days in the United States to under 120 days on a consistent basis. Individuals who do satisfy the substantial presence test may nevertheless still avoid residency status under the closer connection or treaty tie-breaker rules (though they do not avoid U.S. tax filings altogether).

It is a good rule of thumb to keep visits to USA to less than 120 days annually. If that is not possible, the Canadian visitor should keep presence under 183 days so that he or she can elect the closer connection exception if otherwise applicable to the Canadian’s situation. An over-simplistic approach might lead to unintended consequences or lost opportunities.

Please note that this overview is provided for general information purposes only, and should not be considered legal advice. To receive advice regarding your tax liability you should consult a professional who specializes in taxation. Our firm only deals with immigration matters.

Interesting statistics from Pew Research Center:

Muslim population of the world is expected to reach 73% in 2050. Islam is going to be a predominant religion, not a minority.

In 2015, according to Pew Research Center's best estimate, there were 3.3 million Muslims in the U.S., or about 1% of the U.S. population.

A majority of U.S. Muslims (63%) are immigrants. The government should treat them with respect and adjust our immigration policies to avoid alienating our own citizens.

Year 2050 is only 33 years away.

Rew Research Center: 

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/27/muslims-and-islam-key-findings-in-the-u-s-and-around-the-world/

​

 On March 06, 2017, President signed a new Executive Order replacing the previous EO. 

On Monday, March 06, 2017, the President signed a new "Executive Order Protecting The Nation From Foreign Terrorist Entry Into The United States" (to replace the previous EO, so called "Travel Ban" or "Muslim Ban" which was placed on hold by the courts). 

New executive order narrowed a scope of the travel ban to block only new applicants for visas from 6 countries (LIst of Six instead of List of Seven), and removed Iraq from its coverage.

The new order, which goes into effect one minute after midnight on March 16, 2017, prohibits entry into the United States for citizens of six countries—Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen—for 90 days for those who do not already hold a valid visa. Iraq was removed from the "List of Seven".

New visas will not be issued and expired visas will not be renewed for citizens from the six countries during the 90-day period.

DHS had clarified the new ban: "If you're in the United States on the effective date of this order, which is March 16 2017, it does not apply to you. If you have a valid visa on the effective date of this order, it does not apply to you."

Like its predecessor, the new order shuts down the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days, effectively halting the admission of new refugees into the United States for four months. But March 6th order no longer includes the January 27 2017 order’s permanent ban on Syrian refugee admissions. Syrian refugees resettlement is temporarily halted for 120 days (not permanently as it was in the previous EO).

The new executive order will not apply to anyone who already holds a green card or a valid U.S. visa or has been granted official refugee or asylum status. 

The new executive order restores visas that were revoked “as a result of” the previous order. 

Sec.12 (d): "Any individual whose visa was marked revoked or marked canceled as a result of Executive Order 13769 shall be entitled to a travel document confirming that the individual is permitted to travel to the United States and seek entry.  Any prior cancellation or revocation of a visa that was solely pursuant to Executive Order 13769 shall not be the basis of inadmissibility for any future determination about entry or admissibility."

And it removes Iraq from the list of targeted countries, creating a "List of Six" from the previous "List of Seven".

Moreover, the new order expands the government’s ability to issue “case-by-case waivers” to immigrants affected by the ban. The old ban allowed these waivers only when they were “in the national interest”. Under the new order, Customs and Border Protection agents, as well as consular officers, may grant a waiver to immigrants from the six targeted countries if they fall under a number of categories. 

Those waiver categories include:

- foreign students stranded outside the United States on the day the order is signed; 
- immigrants with “previously established significant contacts” with the U.S. who are outside the country when the order is signed; 
- foreign nationals with “significant business or professional obligations” in the U.S.; 
- foreign nationals “seeking to enter the United States to visit or reside with a close family member … who is a United States citizen, lawful permanent resident, or alien lawfully admitted on a valid nonimmigrant visa”; 
- children and those in need of “urgent medical care", or “someone whose entry is otherwise justified by the special circumstances of the case”; and
- immigrants who have previously served on behalf of the U.S. government (if they can prove their service).

The updated and revised executive order on immigration took into consideration many legal objections to its predecessor, and the court of appeals decision. However, the second revised EO is not immune to litigation. We will keep you posted.
​
#EO #executiveorder #travelban #muslimban

Breaking News 02/03/2017:

A U.S. federal judge on Friday, February 03 2017 imposed a nationwide hold (injunction) on President's 01/27/2017 executive order, banning travelers and immigrants from seven predominantly Muslim countries.

The judge agreed with two states (Minnesota and Washington) that had challenged the executive order.
"The state has met its burden in demonstrating immediate and irreparable injury," judge said. "This TRO (temporary restraining order) is granted on a nationwide basis ..."

​A State Department official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Friday: "We are working closely with the Department of Homeland Security and our legal teams to determine how this affects our operations. We will announce any changes affecting travelers to the United States as soon as that information is available." 

It means that as of February 3, 2017,  the president's 01/27/2017 executive order is unenforceable, and the White House, DHS, ICE, CBP, DOS must follow the judge's order (not the president's executive order). The government will appeal, and the judge will hear the arguments and make the final decision at a later date.

​Read here.

UPDATE Following the court order, on Saturday, February 4, 2017, the DHS released the following statement:

"From the Department of Homeland Security (DHS):In accordance with the judge's ruling, DHS has suspended any and all actions implementing the affected sections of the Executive Order entitled, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States."
This includes actions to suspend passenger system rules that flag travelers for operational action subject to the Executive Order.
DHS personnel will resume inspection of travelers in accordance with standard policy and procedure.
At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the President's Executive Order, which is lawful and appropriate. The Order is intended to protect the homeland and the American people, and the President has no higher duty and responsibility than to do so.
For the latest information, please visit the DHS website: https://www.dhs.gov/news"

​****************************************************************************************************************
Ситуация с указами президента меняется каждый день: помните, что информация и законодательство постоянно обновляются, и мы не в состоянии вовремя опубликовать изменения и дополнения на этом блоге. Если вам нужен юридический совет адвоката, свяжитесь с нами по электронной почте и мы договоримся о дате и времени консультации по телефону или через скайп.

После решения федерального судьи о том, что некоторые положения указа президента должны быть приостановлены от 3 февраля 2017, 4 февраля DHS, USCIS, CBP, ICE DOS и все другие департаменты и агентства официально заявили, что они возвращаются к старым процедурам, как это было в силе до подписания указа. И пока указ президента находится на рассмотрении в суде, они не будут его применять.
****************************************************************************************************************

UPDATE Following the court order, on Saturday, February 4, 2017, the DHS released the following statement:

"From the Department of Homeland Security (DHS):In accordance with the judge's ruling, DHS has suspended any and all actions implementing the affected sections of the Executive Order entitled, "Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States."
This includes actions to suspend passenger system rules that flag travelers for operational action subject to the Executive Order.
DHS personnel will resume inspection of travelers in accordance with standard policy and procedure.
At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this order and defend the President's Executive Order, which is lawful and appropriate. The Order is intended to protect the homeland and the American people, and the President has no higher duty and responsibility than to do so.
For the latest information, please visit the DHS website: https://www.dhs.gov/news"

02/01/2017 UPDATE on so called Muslim ban executive order (List of 7 restricted countries: Iran, Iraq, Sudan, Syria, Somalia, Yemen & Libya):

USCIS

On February 2, 2017, the Acting Director of the USCIS confirmed that "...the Executive Order does not affect USCIS adjudication of applications and petitions filed for or on behalf of individuals in the United States, regardless of their country of nationality."

***The previous contrary statements issued by the USCIS and DHS officials are no longer valid.​***

This means that we can expect that all applications filed with USCIS in the United States by (the 7 countries) will be adjudicated.

In Russian:

​2 февраля 2017 USCIS Директор официально уведомил публику о том, что указ президента о лицах из семи мусульманских стран НЕ распространяется на заявления и петиции, поданные в пределах США в иммиграционную службу USCIS, даже если поданы заявителями из этих 7 стран. Это хорошие новости. Так как даже Asylum офис прекратил рассматривать эти заявления, но они начнут рассматривать заявления как и ранее после такого официального заявления.

P.S. ситуация меняется каждый день. Следует следить за официальными сообщениями.

--------------------------------------------

CBP

On February 1, 2017, the U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) held a meeting with immigration attorneys in San Francisco, CA:

As reported by San Francisco immigration attorneys in attendance, the CBP provided the following explanations regarding executive order ban:

1) All U.S. Legal Permanent Residents will be let into the U.S. without waivers, as of yesterday (Wed., Feb. 1st) afternoon. This includes U.S. Legal Permanent Residents from the 7 banned countries. (Note: The INA - Immigration & Nationality Act is a federal statute. In Section 212 of the INA, it states that all U.S. Legal Permanent Residents have to be let into the U.S. So, CBP is now complying with the law on this.)

2) All dual citizens will be treated as if from the country they present themselves from (which passport they use). So, if someone has French Citizenship and Iranian Citizenship, and uses their French passport, they should be let into the U.S. If they use their Iranian passport, they will not be let into the U.S.

3) CBP confirmed that officers will search electronic devices and social media of anyone it wants more info. on. They called this one of their tools of investigation.

4) Advance Parole travel permits for DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) will be honored until they are told otherwise, unless it is an individual from 1 of the 7 banned countries.

5) CBP has not heard of and is not aware of any additional countries that will be added to the list of 7. (On 02/02/2017 the US Department of State also released a statement, saying that DoS has no information about any additional countries  being added to the List of 7.)

6) All U.S. Citizens, even with dual citizenship from restricted countries, will be let into the U.S.

7) Airlines have been given instructions by CBP on who to let board airplanes. This does not mean that some airline employees will bar people from boarding that should be allowed to board.

8) Anyone with a medical issue while in primary or secondary inspection will be attended to by paramedics and taken to the hospital if necessary. If inspection is not complete, a CBP officer will go with the individual to the hospital.

P.S. Situation is very fluid, and can change in the future. It's advisable to follow any official announcement by USCIS, CBP, ICE, Department of State.

ПРАКТИЧЕСКИЕ СОВЕТЫ: ЗНАЙ СВОИ ПРАВА И КРАТКИЙ ОБЗОР УКАЗОВ ПРЕЗИДЕНТА ОБ ИММИГРАЦИИ ОТ 25 И 27 ЯНВАРЯ 2017.

****************************************************************************************************************
Ситуация с указами президента меняется каждый день: помните, что информация и законодательство постоянно обновляются, и мы не в состоянии вовремя опубликовать изменения и дополнения на этом блоге. Если вам нужен юридический совет адвоката, свяжитесь с нами по электронной почте и мы договоримся о дате и времени консультации по телефону или через скайп.

После решения федерального судьи о том, что некоторые положения указа президента должны быть приостановлены от 3 февраля 2017, 4 февраля DHS, USCIS, CBP, ICE DOS и все другие департаменты и агенства официально заявили, что они возвращаются к старым процедурам, как это было в силе до подписания указа. И пока указ президента находится на рассмотрении в суде, они не будут его применять.
****************************************************************************************************************

25 и 27 января 2017 Президент США Трамп подписал три важных указа, касающихся иммиграции, виз и национальной безопасности страны.
 
Полный текст этих указов можно прочитать по линкам:

1. Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements (01-25-2017)
2. Enhancing Security in the Interior of the United States (01-25-2017)
3. Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States (01-27-2017)

Указ номер 1 касается постройки стены на границе между США и Мексикой.
 
Указ номер 2 касается новых приоритетов в депортации из США, а также изменения во взаимоотношении федерального правительства и так называемых "sanctuary cities", городов, не выдающих нелегальных иммигрантов. Если такие города будут отказываться сотрудничать с федеральными орнанами, и не согласятся передавать им информацию о нелегалах, федеральное правительство угрожает отменой федерального финансирования для некоторых программ. Следует помнить, что это касается только тех программ, которые финансируются федералным правительством США, так как большая часть программ в любом штате финансируется за счет бюджета штата.

Указ номер 3 был подписан и вступил в силу 27 января 2017, и получил самую большую огласку и вызвал шквал негодования и возмущения граждан и политиков как в нутри США, так и за пределами. Указ предусматривает следующее: (1) вводится временный на 90 дней запрет на въезд в США лиц имеющих отношение к семи исламским странам Ближнего Востока (указ не расшифровал, что значит national): Иран, Ирак, Сирия, Судан, Ливия, Йемен и Сомалия; (2) временно на 120 дней приостанавливается въезд беженцев в США изо всех стран мира; (3) на неопределенное время запрещен въезд в США лиц, имеющих отношение к Сирии (важно подчеркнуть, что запрет не ограничен по времени, он относится как к лицам, имеющим гражданство Сирии, так и рожденным там, и может относится к лицам, которые имеют паспорта или travel documents, выданные Сирией, но рожденным в других странах, (4) отменена процедура выдачи виз в США без интервью.

Также в понедельник 30 января 2017 года Иммиграционная Служба США USCIS объявила своим сотрудникам, что на неопределенное время приостанавливается вынесение решений по всем заявлениям и петициям от заявителей из этих семи стран (Иран, Ирак, Сирия, Судан, Ливия, Йемен и Сомалия). Вот это уже очень серьезно. Так как большая часть заявителей находятся в США, и они будут подавать заявления на продление и смену статуса, на получение или продление разрешения на работу, на грин карту, на гражданство и т.п., и USCIS будет вынуждено откладывать их дела "until further notice", так как им запрещено принимать окончательные решения, даже если заявитель успешно прошел интервью (например, на грин карту или гражданство). Пока не понятно, что будет происходить на практике. Скорее всего в течение 2017 года этот запрет будет снят, но конкретной информации пока нет.

Также Госдеп США прекратил выдачу виз гражданам из этих же семи стран (Иран, Ирак, Сирия, Судан, Ливия, Йемен и Сомалия). 27 января 2017 мы получили меморандум из Госдепа о том, что все визы, выданные гражданам этих стран считаются "условно аннулированы" с 27 января.

Запрет на въезд в США относится также к лицам с двойным гражданством. Например, если у вас одно гражданство Ирана и второе Германии, и ранее вы могли ездить в США без визы по Visa Waiver Program по немецкому паспорту, то теперь это невозможно. (2 февраля 2017 Госдеп США опубликовал инструкцию о том, что они продолжают выдавать визы лицам с двойным гражданством, и ставят визу в паспорт той страны, которая не включена в список семи стран).

Запрет на въезд в США по этому указу президента от 27 января 2017 все также относится и к постоянным жителям США (тем, у кого грин карта или вид на жительство в США). За последние дни несколько федеральных судов приняли решения о том, что постоянные жители должны быть допущены в США, но это пока не отменило положение указа. И инструкции от DHS позволяют въезд постоянных жителей, так как это "в национальных интересах" США, что не отменяет сам запрет. Постоянные жители США должны пройти secondary inspection при въезде в США, и доказать, что не являются риском для национальной безопасности.

Если вы имеете вид на жительство США и при въезде в США, сотрудники CBP пытаются отобрать вашу грин карту или не впустить вас в страну, читайте наши практические советы тут.
 
Будьте осторожны, если вы подпадаете под одну из невъездных категорий. Всегда лучше проконсультироваться с адвокатом заранее.

Ожидается еще один указ президента о рабочих визах H-1B visa. Некоторые веб сайты поместили черновик предполагаемого указа. Этот указ внесет изменения в порядок выдачи рабочей визы H-1B и разрешения на работу EAD для супругов H-4. Предполагается, что указ изменит порядок проведения лотереи для виз H-1B, где упор будет делаться на том, получено ли образование в США и какую зарплату готов платить работодатель, а также фокус будет на выдаче рабочих виз "самым лучшим и самым умным" (расшифровка такой нетипичной для юридического документа фразы, я надеюсь, последует когда указ будут подписан).

ПРАКТИЧЕСКИЕ СОВЕТЫ:

1. Если вы из одной из семи стран (гражданин, рождены, имеете какое-то другое задокументированное отношение), воздержитесь от поездок в США или от поездок за пределы США в ближайшие 90 дней, или пока указ находится в силе, или вообще на неопределенное время, если вы имеете отношение к Сирии
2. Если вы постоянный житель США, имеющий отношение к одной из семи стран, воздержитесь от поездок за предеыл США в течение 90 дней или пока указ находится в силе (а если вы из Сирии - то вообще не выезжайте из США, так как запрет на неопределенное время).
3. Если вы из любой другой мусульманской страны, будьте на чеку. Ваша страна может быть добавлена в "список семи". Возможно, что вам стоит заранее подать какие-то заявления, которые вы откладывали, продлить документы, истекающие в скором будущем.
4. Если вы из одной из семи стран, и ваше заявление уже находится на рассмотрении в USCIS, будьте готовы к долгому ожиданию, так как они обязаны отложить все такие заявления и им запрещено выносить решения по делу. Теоретически возможно подать иск в федеральный суд, чтобы принудить государство принять решение по вашему делу, но практический совет будет подождать прецедентов и официальных разъяснений от иммиграционной службы.
5. Визы уже выданные лицам из семи стран были "условно аннулированы" 27 января 2017. Выдача новых виза в настоящий момент приостановлена.
6. Если вы планируете подать петицию на маму, отца, брата, сестру, детей, жену или мужа - и по настоящим законам вы вправе подать такую петицию, не откладывайте и подавайте петицию. По некоторым сведениям целые визовые категории могут быть отменены, изменены или уменьшены в будущем.
7. Если вы нелегал, проконсультируйтесь с адвокатом и определитесь, есть ли у вас какие-то варианты.

 
В заключение я хочу добавить, что хотя в большинстве случаев, этот третий указ президента от 27 января 2017 не имеет отношения к лицам из русскоговорящего сообщества в США, но есть и такие, к кому этот указ имеет прямое отношение. Например, если вы родились на территории одной из семи стран, где ваши родители жили, учились или работали, даже если у вас нет гражданства из одной из семи стран, вы подпадаете под действие указа. Например, если вы лицо без гражданства, но ваши документы были выданы Сирией или одной из семи стран, или вы в прошлом постоянно указывали Сирию, Ирак, Иран и т.п. как страну своей национальности -  вы тоже подпадаете под действие указа. Многие положения указа нуждаются в дальнейшей расшифровке и детальном объяснении (например, что такое "лицо имеющее отношение к одной из семи стран"). Такие официальные объяснения обычно публикуются через соответствующие каналы в иммиграционной службе USCIS и через Госдеп США Department of State. Мы будем вас держать в курсе!

On January 25 and 27, 2017, President signed several Executive Orders. Here are the links to full text of three Executive Orders on Immigration:

1. Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements (01-25-2017)
2. Enhancing Security in the Interior of the United States (01-25-2017)
3. Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States (01-27-2017)

Executive Order Number 1 concerns building a wall along the 2,000 mile border between the US and Mexico.

Executive Order Number 2 would prioritize the deportation or removal of criminals from USA. It would also compel state and local agencies to participate in federal deportation program, by targeting so called Sanctuary Cities, Districts, states. If a sanctuary city doesn't comply, the federal funding can be cut off. Lawsuits are expected to follow. Some jurisdictions, such as, for example, Miami, already declared that they are abolishing their sanctuary city status.

Executive Order Number 3 immediately (1) Implemented a travel ban from seven designated predominantly Muslim countries for 90 days (Iran; Iraq; Libya; Somalia; Sudan; Syria; and Yemen); (2) suspended refugee admissions from all countries of the world for 120 days; (3) indefinitely suspended admission for nationals of Syria, and (4) suspends interview waivers at US consulates abroad.

On Monday January 30, 2017, the USCIS has announced that it will put a hold on all applications and petitions benefitting citizens/nationals of the 7 countries (Iran; Iraq; Libya; Somalia; Sudan; Syria; and Yemen), be they in the US or abroad.  That means that a green card holder from one of seven countries cannot be sworn in as a US citizen, or a work permit can't be approved, or a green card application can't be approved -- even if a person was already interviewed, and there are no issues with the person's background and he/she is otherwise eligible for a green card, work permit, visa or US citizenship. Because a person is a "national" of one of the seven countries, his or her application will be placed on hold "until further notice". 

The US Department of State had stopped issuing any visas to nationals from the seven enumerated countries: Iran; Iraq; Libya; Somalia; Sudan; Syria; and Yemen.

If you are a national of one of the seven countries, even if you were already issued a visa, you are no longer able to travel to USA on a that visa while this ban remains in place. Effective January 27, 2017, US Department of State had "provisionally revoked" all visas issued to the nationals of seven countries (click here to read the DoS memorandum).

Even if a national of one of the seven countries has a passport from another "unrestricted" country (dual citizenship), he or she will not be allowed to travel to USA while the ban is in place.  (Update: on Feb 2, 2017, DOS issued a clarification on dual nationals: "We will continue to issue nonimmigrant and immigrant visas to otherwise eligible visa applicants who apply with a passport from an unrestricted country, even if they hold dual nationality from one of the seven restricted countries.")

The executive order also suspends the “interview waiver” program at US consulates abroad. However, ESTA or the Visa Waiver Program is not directly impacted by the new executive order. The “interview waiver” program is a policy whereby some foreign nationals applying for a renewal of a visa abroad are exempt from an in person interview at US consulates since they have been previously screened. By eliminating the interview waiver program, interview wait times at US consulates will likely increase.

The executive order also suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days and indefinitely suspends admission of Syrian refugees for an undefined amount of time. During the 120 days, government agencies are instructed to implement new procedures to help secure the “national interest.”

Upon resumption of the refugee program, the executive order instructs the government to prioritize admission of Christians over other religions, which will result in more lawsuits to follow.

Yes, the executive order still applies to lawful permanent residents. Please keep in mind that the ban was not cancelled but merely modified as it applies to green card holders nationals of one of the seven enumerated countries. 

As of result of litigation, on Sunday, January 29, 2017 DHS stated that permanent residents are allowed to board planes and come to the US, but will undergo additional secondary inspection screening upon their entry. The same day DHS issued a statement stating that allowing permanent residents to enter the US on a “case by case basis” is in the “national interest” but that permanent residents will continue to undergo increased interrogation. Even after DHS’ announcement softening how the ban applies to permanent residents, anyone returning from one of the seven designated countries should anticipate increased interrogation, potential detention and long delays when returning from trips abroad.

Please see our previous posts on executive orders on travel ban and about sanctuary cities here.

A draft copy of a 4th unsigned Executive Order entitled “Protecting American Jobs and Workers by Strengthening the Integrity of Foreign Worker Visa Program” was made available at some websites.  This Order would impact the H-1B and H-4 EAD programs, provide for site visits to L-1 employers and expand the E-Verify Program. It will change the way the H-1B Lottery is operated, giving preference to "the best and the brightest" applicants with the degree from the US university and higher salary.

A good article about the H-1B visas could be found here.

ADVISORY or GUIDANCE for Lawful Permanent Residents of USA, Dual Citizens, People with Pending Applications, Workers, Students and Visitors to the United States:
​

1. If you are from one of the seven countries listed above, do not leave the country unless you do not plan to return to the USA.
2. If you are a lawful permanent resident (a green card holder) from one of the seven countries, beware that the ban also applies to you. The ban was merely modified by DHS. On 01-29-2017, the DHS clarified that they will allow permanent residents to enter the US on a “case by case basis” is in the “national interest” but that permanent residents will continue to undergo increased interrogation and secondary inspection (therefore, they can be denied re-admission to USA). Read our guidance on what to do if you are being denied admission at the airport and the CBP agent tries to take away your green card.
3. If you are from a Muslim country, remember that your country also maybe added to the list of the "banned countries" while you are outside of the USA. 
4. If you are a national from one of the seven countries, and have a visa in your passport, your visa was "provisionally revoked" by the US Dept of State effective 01-27-2017, which means your visa was made invalid and you can't travel to USA.
5. If you are have a pending application/petition for immigration benefits with USCIS and you are from one of the 7 countries, your application will be placed on hold. At this time, this hold is indefinite or "until further notice". It might be possible to file a Petition for a Writ of Mandamus in Federal Court to try to force the government to take action on your pending application/petition.
6. If you are from a Muslim country which is not on the List of 7, you may want to file your application for immigration benefits now before your country is added to the list of banned countries.
7. If you are a green card holder, no matter what country you were born in, you may be wish to apply for naturalization as soon as possible in order to assure that you will be able to travel abroad and can always return to your home in USA in the future.
8. If you are present in the US on temporary visa and wish to extend or change your status, consult an attorney before filing any application.
9. If you are undocumented, see an immigration attorney to see if there are any possibilities for you to apply for lawful status.
10. If you plan to sponsor a relative for a green card, do so immediately as the family-based categories may be severely restricted in the future.
11. If you are on a temporary working visa and wish to apply for a green card, ask your employer to sponsor you now before it's too late.
12. If you are a dual citizen from one of the seven countries and any other country (except USA), you are not allowed to travel to USA. (Update: on Feb 2, 2017, DOS issued a clarification on dual nationals: "We will continue to issue nonimmigrant and immigrant visas to otherwise eligible visa applicants who apply with a passport from an unrestricted country, even if they hold dual nationality from one of the seven restricted countries.") 
13. Even if you are a lawful permanent resident of USA and plan to travel internationally or plan to return to USA after a trip abroad, you should consult an attorney.
14. The EO also suspends the “interview waiver” program at US consulates abroad. Importantly, ESTA or the Visa Waiver Program is not directly impacted by the new EO. The “interview waiver” program is a policy whereby some foreign nationals applying for a renewal of a visa abroad are exempt from an in person interview at US consulates since they have been previously screened. By eliminating the interview waiver program, interview wait times at US consulates will likely increase.

Full text of January 27 2017 executive order "PROTECTING THE NATION FROM FOREIGN TERRORIST ENTRY INTO THE UNITED STATES" can be found here.

Update from DHS 01-29-2017:

STATEMENT BY DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY JOHN KELLY ON THE ENTRY OF LAWFUL PERMANENT RESIDENTS INTO THE UNITED STATES
WASHINGTON – In applying the provisions of the president's executive order, I hereby deem the entry of lawful permanent residents to be in the national interest.
Accordingly, absent the receipt of significant derogatory information indicating a serious threat to public safety and welfare, lawful permanent resident status will be a dispositive factor in our case-by-case determinations.
------------------------------

Updated 01-29-2017: Importantly, however, Lawful Permanent Residents of the United States traveling on a valid I-551 (aka Green Card) will be allowed to board U.S. bound aircraft and will be assessed for exceptions at arrival ports of entry, as appropriate.  The entry of these individuals, subject to national security checks, is in the national interest. Therefore, we expect swift entry for these individuals.

​Read here 
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/01/29/protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
​---------------------------------------------

The 90-day visa moratorium and ban on entry to USA extends beyond just citizens of Iraq, Iran, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Libya and Yemen, the US Dept of State officials said. It also applies to DUAL citizens.

For example, if you are holding an Italian or UK passport, and normally can travel to USA without a visa on a Visa Waiver program, now under the new executive order, you will not be able to travel on your second European passport if you are also a national of one of the seven enumerated nations.

New executive order also applies to lawful permanent residents of the United States.

Please note that even if you have a green card and happen to be a native/national of one of the enumerated counties - stay put and avoid international travel for the next 90 days because you may not be allowed to return home to the US after a trip abroad.

Google said more than 100 employees who were out of the country on vacation or work assignments are subject to the order and afraid they won't be able to return to USA using their green cards or visas.

As per decision of federal judge of January 28, 2017, "there is imminent danger that, absent the stay of removal, there will be substantial and irreparable injury to refugees, visa-holders, and other individuals from nations subject" to Trump's order.

The federal judge ruled in favor of a habeas corpus petition filed by attorneys of  two Iraqis. 

Text of the habeas corpus petition can be found here.

Exception: The dual-citizenship ban doesn’t apply to U.S. citizens who are also citizens of the seven nations enumerated in executive order, and to holders of diplomatic passports.
​
“Travelers who have nationality or dual nationality of one of these countries will not be permitted for 90 days to enter the United States or be issued an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa,” a State Department official said. “Those nationals or dual nationals holding valid immigrant or nonimmigrant visas will not be permitted to enter the United States during this period. Visa interviews will generally not be scheduled for nationals of these countries during this period.”

January 29, 2017 DHS Press Release in response to recent litigation regarding the president's executive orders:
"The Department of Homeland Security will continue to enforce all of President Trump’s Executive Orders in a manner that ensures the safety and security of the American people. President Trump’s Executive Orders remain in place—prohibited travel will remain prohibited, and the U.S. government retains its right to revoke visas at any time if required for national security or public safety. President Trump’s Executive Order affects a minor portion of international travelers, and is a first step towards reestablishing control over America's borders and national security...
The Department of Homeland Security will comply with judicial orders; faithfully enforce our immigration laws, and implement President Trump’s Executive Orders to ensure that those entering the United States do not pose a threat to our country or the American people."

You can read full text here. 

On the same day, January 29, 2017, the CEOs of Google, Twitter, Facebook and Apple all issued statements condemning the ban and complaining that the order was pushed through so quickly it left great uncertainty about the status of some of their best employees.

In Russian:

В соответствии с указом президента от 27 января 2017 запрет на въезд в США на 90 дней распространяется не только на граждан Сирии, Ирака, Ирана, Ливии, Судана и Йемена, НО и на людей с ДВОЙНЫМ ГРАЖДАНСТВОМ.

Например, если у вас есть второе гражданство и паспорт Германии, Англии, Италии, и обычно вам не нужна виза на въезд в США, то по новым правилам вы не сможете въехать в США, т.к. вам будет отказано во въезде на основании того, что у вас есть второе гражданство из одной из стран, названных в указе.

Также запрет распространяется на постоянных жителей США (людей с грин картами), которые являются гражданами или выходцами из стран, названных в указе.

Решение федерельного судьи от 28 января 2017, ограничило применение указа по отношении тех лиц, которые уже въехали в США и находятся в аэропортах, или летят в США на борту самолета. Эта ситуация быстро меняется и ожидаются новые решения федеральных судей по конституционости нового указа.

Посольства и консульства США уже перестали выдавать любые визы гражданам из этих стран, и советуют не приходить на интервью даже если вам было назначено и вы заплатили за визу и интервью, т.к. вам откажут в визе.

Brussels, 29 October 2015.

Big victory for Dutch lawyers and their clients, and also for any other European lawyers who practice law in the Netherlands.

The District Court of The Hague has ruled that surveillance of lawyers by intelligence agencies constitutes an infringement of fundamental rights and orders the State to stop all surveillance of lawyers’ communications. 

Dutch court upholds lower court ruling banning surveillance of lawyers’ communications after successful CCBE intervention. The Dutch State may appeal the ruling within four weeks.

On 27 October 2015, a Dutch Court of Appeal upheld The Hague District court’s ruling in the Prakken d’Oliveira case which ordered the Dutch State to stop all surveillance of lawyers’ communications until it provided for independent oversight.

In its ruling, the Dutch Court of Appeal dismissed all the grounds of appeal alleged by the Dutch State. The Court indicates that according to case law of the European Court of Human Rights surveillance activities must be subject to review by an independent body with the power to prevent or terminate potential infringements of professional secrecy. The current Dutch surveillance regime does not meet the requirements for such independent control and, therefore, conflicts with the right to privacy (article 8 ECHR) and the right to a fair trial (article 6 ECHR). The Court stresses that information obtained from tapping lawyers may not be shared with prosecutors until an independent review has taken place regarding the legality of that information and the way it was obtained. Even the possibility that information is shared with the public prosecutor can result to people refraining from contacting a lawyer. According to the court, that is a violation of the right to a fair trial and undermines the rationale behind professional secrecy. The Court also ruled that the protection of client confidentiality is not limited to communications with Dutch lawyers but extends to communications with all European lawyers rendering services in The Netherlands as referred to in Directive 77/249/EC.

As a result of these findings the Court of Appeal confirmed the lower court’s ruling.

In welcoming the decision, CCBE President Maria Ślązak commented: “the trust between lawyer and client is, at root, an assurance of due process and the rule of law. It is therefore essential that the confidentiality of lawyer-client communications is always respected. Surveillance measures that could undermine this principle have always to be subject to review by an independent body with the power to prevent and/or terminate the infringement. The fact that this has been reaffirmed by the Dutch Court of Appeal is reassuring and an important step to bring Dutch surveillance policy in line with the right to a fair trial.”

**************
Background: in May 2015 the CCBE successfully intervened before The Hague District Court in a challenge brought against the Dutch State by the law firm Prakken d'Oliveira and the Dutch Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers (NVSA). The Court was questioned on the legality of eavesdropping by domestic intelligence agencies on lawyers’ calls and communications. In its verdict delivered on July 1st, the court recognised that the ability to communicate confidentially with a lawyer is a fundamental right which is currently being breached under Dutch surveillance policy. The court therefore ordered the Dutch government to stop all interception of communications between clients and their lawyers under the current regime within six months. In response, the Dutch State fast-tracked an appeal against the judgement. In turn, on 25 August, the CCBE challenged the grounds of the appeal.

Transcript of the judgement (in Dutch): http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2015:2881
Transcript of the previous judgement (in Dutch):http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2015:7436 
CCBE wins case against the Dutch State on surveillance of lawyers (press release, 02/07/2015):http://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/NTCdocument/EN_pr_0415pdf1_1435843144.pdf 
CCBE takes mass surveillance to court (press release, 27/05/2015):http://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/NTCdocument/EN_pr_0315pdf1_1432724578.pdf 
CCBE Statement on mass electronic surveillance by government bodies (including of European lawyers’ data):http://www.ccbe.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/NTCdocument/EN_14142013_CCBE_Sta1_1382086457.pdf
Dutch Intelligence Service (AIVD) taps Prakken d'Oliveira lawyers:http://www.prakkendoliveira.nl/en/news/dutch-intelligence-service-aivd-taps-prakken-doliveira-lawyers/

*******************
About the CCBE:

The CCBE represents the bars and law societies of 32 member countries and 13 further associate and observer countries, and through them more than 1 million European lawyers.

Founded in 1960, the CCBE is recognised as the voice of the European legal profession by the EU institutions, and acts as the liaison between the EU and Europe's national bars and law societies. The CCBE has regular institutional contacts with those European Commission officials, and members and staff of the European Parliament, who deal with issues affecting the legal profession. The CCBE is an international non-profit-making association incorporated in Belgium.