nocomment
09-23 09:22 PM
my pd march 2002 pending 485 any estimated time to get 485 approved?
EB2 or EB3?
EB2 or EB3?
wallpaper 1939 New York World#39;s Fair
gausoni@hotmail.com
09-24 08:39 AM
eb3
mihird
11-13 09:30 AM
Just in case people didn't see this on CNN Money today...
http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/10/magazines/business2/election_tech.biz2/index.htm?section=money_topstories
There's talk of increasing H1-Bs, but nothing regarding immigrant visa numbers though...
http://money.cnn.com/2006/11/10/magazines/business2/election_tech.biz2/index.htm?section=money_topstories
There's talk of increasing H1-Bs, but nothing regarding immigrant visa numbers though...
2011 in Gary Grigsby#39;s World at
swathim
10-20 06:02 PM
Hi everyone,
I need a suggestion . i am working on virgina state. and my employer is running the pay roll on newjersey state. I am sending emails to him but replying. I am working on from last year for that company. He is having backup amount (caustion deposit) nearly 7000$
Please help me what kind of legal action i can take ?
Thanks
Swathi
I need a suggestion . i am working on virgina state. and my employer is running the pay roll on newjersey state. I am sending emails to him but replying. I am working on from last year for that company. He is having backup amount (caustion deposit) nearly 7000$
Please help me what kind of legal action i can take ?
Thanks
Swathi
more...
gingerhippy69
10-08 01:34 PM
hi 2 those who know me and 2 those that don't...
i finally got my hands on swift 3d....
Q: what formats can i import into swift 3d?
cheers...ben...
i finally got my hands on swift 3d....
Q: what formats can i import into swift 3d?
cheers...ben...
Macaca
10-30 08:54 PM
Honey, They Shrunk the Congress (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/opinion/30tues4.html) By ADAM COHEN | New York Times, October 30, 2007
President Bush�s nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, was asked an important question about Congress�s power at his confirmation hearing. If witnesses claim executive privilege and refuse to respond to Congressional subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal � as Karl Rove and Harriet Miers have done � and Congress holds them in contempt, would his Justice Department refer the matter to a grand jury for criminal prosecution, as federal law requires?
Mr. Mukasey suggested the answer would be no. That was hardly his only slap-down of Congress. He made the startling claim that a president can defy laws if he or she is acting within the authority �to defend the country.� That is a mighty large exception to the rule that Congress�s laws are supreme.
The founders wanted the �people�s branch� to be strong, but the Bush administration has usurped a frightening number of Congress�s powers � with very little resistance. The question is whether members of Congress of both parties will do anything about it.
Congress is often described as one of three coequal branches, but that is not entirely true. As Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale law professor, observed in �America�s Constitution: a Biography,� Article I actually makes Congress �first among equals, with wide power to structure the second-mentioned executive and third-mentioned judicial branches.�
Article I, which describes Congress�s powers, is the Constitution�s first, longest and most generously worded article. It gives Congress a wide array of specific powers, but also broad authority to pass laws that bring to life �all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.�
It would be hard to recognize that powerful Congress today. In part, that is because Congress has been unwilling or unable to enact laws on the most important issues facing the nation � Iraq, immigration reform, health care.
Just as troubling, though, is how it has allowed its institutional power to erode. President Bush has regularly issued signing statements � including on critical issues like the ban on torture � that assert his right to ignore new laws at the same time as he signs them. These signing statements are not just talk. A report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office states that in nearly one-third of the cases it looked at, after President Bush issued a signing statement objecting to a provision of a new law, his administration did not implement it as written.
The Senate has routinely confirmed judicial nominees who make no secret of their belief that the president�s power should be sweeping, and Congress�s sharply cut back.
The Senate confirmed Jeffrey Sutton to a federal appeals court judgeship even though Patrick Leahy, now the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, observed that as a lawyer Mr. Sutton �aggressively sought out cases to limit the power of Congress to enact laws protecting individual rights.� It confirmed Janice Rogers Brown to the powerful United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit even though she had suggested that much of the legislation passed during the New Deal � including the Social Security Act � was unconstitutional.
There are things Congress can do. It can start by speaking out about the importance of Congressional power the way the administration has talked about deferring to the commander in chief. Congress should pass laws that support its own power � like a bipartisan one that Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, has introduced to nullify the impact of signing statements.
The Senate should refuse to confirm nominees who do not take Congressional power seriously. And Congress should make clear that if the executive branch will not enforce its subpoenas, it will use its own �inherent contempt� powers to do so.
Right now, standing up for Congress may appeal more to Democrats than Republicans. The issue of reining in presidential power is beginning to gain traction among conservatives, however, as they contemplate the possibility of a Democrat � particularly Hillary Clinton � as president.
Defending Congressional authority should not be a partisan issue. The founders wanted a strong Congress because they understood the importance of ensuring that the most democratic branch have a strong say in how the nation is run.
President Bush�s nominee for attorney general, Michael Mukasey, was asked an important question about Congress�s power at his confirmation hearing. If witnesses claim executive privilege and refuse to respond to Congressional subpoenas in the United States attorneys scandal � as Karl Rove and Harriet Miers have done � and Congress holds them in contempt, would his Justice Department refer the matter to a grand jury for criminal prosecution, as federal law requires?
Mr. Mukasey suggested the answer would be no. That was hardly his only slap-down of Congress. He made the startling claim that a president can defy laws if he or she is acting within the authority �to defend the country.� That is a mighty large exception to the rule that Congress�s laws are supreme.
The founders wanted the �people�s branch� to be strong, but the Bush administration has usurped a frightening number of Congress�s powers � with very little resistance. The question is whether members of Congress of both parties will do anything about it.
Congress is often described as one of three coequal branches, but that is not entirely true. As Akhil Reed Amar, a Yale law professor, observed in �America�s Constitution: a Biography,� Article I actually makes Congress �first among equals, with wide power to structure the second-mentioned executive and third-mentioned judicial branches.�
Article I, which describes Congress�s powers, is the Constitution�s first, longest and most generously worded article. It gives Congress a wide array of specific powers, but also broad authority to pass laws that bring to life �all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.�
It would be hard to recognize that powerful Congress today. In part, that is because Congress has been unwilling or unable to enact laws on the most important issues facing the nation � Iraq, immigration reform, health care.
Just as troubling, though, is how it has allowed its institutional power to erode. President Bush has regularly issued signing statements � including on critical issues like the ban on torture � that assert his right to ignore new laws at the same time as he signs them. These signing statements are not just talk. A report by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office states that in nearly one-third of the cases it looked at, after President Bush issued a signing statement objecting to a provision of a new law, his administration did not implement it as written.
The Senate has routinely confirmed judicial nominees who make no secret of their belief that the president�s power should be sweeping, and Congress�s sharply cut back.
The Senate confirmed Jeffrey Sutton to a federal appeals court judgeship even though Patrick Leahy, now the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, observed that as a lawyer Mr. Sutton �aggressively sought out cases to limit the power of Congress to enact laws protecting individual rights.� It confirmed Janice Rogers Brown to the powerful United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit even though she had suggested that much of the legislation passed during the New Deal � including the Social Security Act � was unconstitutional.
There are things Congress can do. It can start by speaking out about the importance of Congressional power the way the administration has talked about deferring to the commander in chief. Congress should pass laws that support its own power � like a bipartisan one that Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, has introduced to nullify the impact of signing statements.
The Senate should refuse to confirm nominees who do not take Congressional power seriously. And Congress should make clear that if the executive branch will not enforce its subpoenas, it will use its own �inherent contempt� powers to do so.
Right now, standing up for Congress may appeal more to Democrats than Republicans. The issue of reining in presidential power is beginning to gain traction among conservatives, however, as they contemplate the possibility of a Democrat � particularly Hillary Clinton � as president.
Defending Congressional authority should not be a partisan issue. The founders wanted a strong Congress because they understood the importance of ensuring that the most democratic branch have a strong say in how the nation is run.
more...
sambhajisgayake
12-14 10:10 AM
Hi,
I am currently in Dallas. For applying a duplicate passport, it is OK if i Mail my application through USPS express mail which provides acknowledment . Can anybody please tell me if there is any problem with this?
Thanks,
Sambhaji
I am currently in Dallas. For applying a duplicate passport, it is OK if i Mail my application through USPS express mail which provides acknowledment . Can anybody please tell me if there is any problem with this?
Thanks,
Sambhaji
2010 Poland 1939-1945
arun397
07-18 04:06 PM
Thousands of innocent people are stuck with the delay in FBI name check for more than 3-4 years. If IV can do some thing for this
more...
mikrupee
11-15 03:52 AM
Is it okay with AOS application to take contract Job after six month of AOS filling.
I am getting a long term contract with better opportunities. How is the contract job interpreted with continuing AOS application
I am getting a long term contract with better opportunities. How is the contract job interpreted with continuing AOS application
hair Map of Ostpreussen 1939
Macaca
05-19 07:54 AM
3 Months of Tense Talks Led to Immigration Deal (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/19/washington/19immig.html?_r=1&oref=slogin) By CARL HULSE (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html) and ROBERT PEAR (http://www.nytimes.com/gst/emailus.html), May 19, 2007
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Hours before a bipartisan deal on immigration policy was to be announced Thursday, a tenuous compromise was threatening to unravel, and tempers flared once again.
Just off the Senate floor, Senators John McCain of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas, both Republicans, exchanged sharp words, with Mr. McCain accusing his colleague of raising arcane legal issues to scuttle the deal. Mr. Cornyn retorted that he was entitled to his view and noted that Mr. McCain had spent more time campaigning for president than negotiating in recent weeks.
The senatorial dust-up, described by witnesses, was just one of the tense moments in remarkable negotiations over the last three months that resulted in this week�s accord. Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who oversaw the talks, compared them to a floating craps game, with a changing cast of characters and shifting sites.
Lawmakers and staff members who participated said passions occasionally ran high in the dozens of meetings, with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, sometimes using his temper as a negotiating tactic. Senators who had spent hours anguishing over the smallest details had little patience for colleagues who made brief appearances to offer their views.
�New people came in and wanted to revisit the whole deal,� Mr. Specter said. �That happened all the time. It was very frustrating.�
In the end, negotiators overcame political divisions and some level of distrust to produce the agreement that will be debated in the Senate beginning next week. Lawmakers said they forged bonds partly through the telling of personal stories about their own family roots, as well as long hours spent together and the prospect that the bill might be a last chance at reaching consensus on a major national problem.
�It was like waiting for a baby to be born,� said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, about the negotiations. �On occasion, it was like being in mediation with a divorced couple. It was like being at camp with your buddies. It was feeling like a part of history.�
As difficult as the negotiations were, they might ultimately seem tame compared with the fight the authors of the plan now face. Before the language of the bill was even published, the proposal � a major domestic objective of the Bush administration � was under attack from the right for allowing illegal immigrants to earn citizenship and from the left for dividing families. The offices of the negotiators were under siege from critics who had the phones ringing endlessly.
�It is real easy to demagogue this thing, and some people probably won�t be able to help themselves,� said Senator Mel Martinez, Republican of Florida and another key participant in the talks. �We are going to have to stick together on the fundamentals of this agreement.�
The talks had their genesis in last year�s failure on immigration after House Republicans essentially chose to ignore a bill passed by the Senate that conservatives derided as amnesty since it would have allowed some of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States to remain and eventually qualify to be citizens.
President Bush helped plant the seeds of this year�s negotiations on Jan. 8, at a White House event celebrating the fifth anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act. Mr. Bush pulled aside Senator Kennedy, and they went into a room off the Oval Office to talk about immigration.
A month later, Senator Jon Kyl, a conservative Republican from Arizona who would become an important figure in striking the deal, began meeting with other Republicans and administration officials to explore ways to find a legislative response to an issue with potent political and humanitarian ramifications.
When those talks progressed far enough, the Republicans on March 28 invited in Democrats like Mr. Kennedy, a longtime advocate of immigration changes, and Senators Ken Salazar of Colorado and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. What followed was a series of meetings around the Capitol, typically on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday nights, as the lawmakers, staff members, White House officials and two or three cabinet secretaries immersed themselves in immigration rules as part of unusually direct high-level negotiations.
�To take an issue and basically start from scratch and write it from the bottom up is something I haven�t seen done in a really long time,� said Candida Wolff, chief of Congressional relations for the White House.
The first big hurdle was cleared a few weeks ago when the negotiators settled on what they called the grand bargain, the main outlines of the issues they were going to address. Major elements included border security improvements and other measures that would have to be undertaken before new citizenship programs were put in place; potential legal status for millions of illegal immigrants; new visas for hundreds of thousands of temporary workers; and clearing a backlog of family applicants for residency.
Republicans also won support for a new �merit-based system of immigration,� which would give more weight to job skills and education and less to family ties. The negotiators decided to adopt a point system to evaluate the qualifications of foreign citizens seeking permission to immigrate to the United States.
No question was too small for the senators. They asked: How many points should be awarded to a refrigerator mechanic with a certificate from a community college?
The negotiations were a roller coaster ride that continued until the deal was announced Thursday, with negotiators expressing despair one day and optimism the next.
�Wednesday evening was one of the most important moments,� Mr. Kennedy said in an interview. �The mood and the atmosphere were good. You got a feeling that maybe this would all be possible. But on Thursday morning, it suddenly deteriorated again.� He told his colleagues that �it�s imperative that we announce an agreement� on Thursday afternoon, or else they could lose momentum. The announcement was made.
In some respects, the lawmakers benefited from the Congressional focus on the Iraq war as they were able to negotiate below the radar, avoiding the disclosure of every twist and turn in the talks and pressure from influential interest groups. Those involved also said the deep participation of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was vital.
The senators who put together the bill say they have their own reservations about aspects of it. And some of the regular participants, including Senators Cornyn and Menendez, have backed away from endorsing it. But those who have embraced the bill say they intend to see it through.
�We made a pact,� said Mr. Specter, who was referred to as Mr. Chairman even though Democrats control Congress. �We will stick together even on provisions we don�t like. We are a long way from home in getting this through the Senate.�
WASHINGTON, May 18 � Hours before a bipartisan deal on immigration policy was to be announced Thursday, a tenuous compromise was threatening to unravel, and tempers flared once again.
Just off the Senate floor, Senators John McCain of Arizona and John Cornyn of Texas, both Republicans, exchanged sharp words, with Mr. McCain accusing his colleague of raising arcane legal issues to scuttle the deal. Mr. Cornyn retorted that he was entitled to his view and noted that Mr. McCain had spent more time campaigning for president than negotiating in recent weeks.
The senatorial dust-up, described by witnesses, was just one of the tense moments in remarkable negotiations over the last three months that resulted in this week�s accord. Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who oversaw the talks, compared them to a floating craps game, with a changing cast of characters and shifting sites.
Lawmakers and staff members who participated said passions occasionally ran high in the dozens of meetings, with Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, sometimes using his temper as a negotiating tactic. Senators who had spent hours anguishing over the smallest details had little patience for colleagues who made brief appearances to offer their views.
�New people came in and wanted to revisit the whole deal,� Mr. Specter said. �That happened all the time. It was very frustrating.�
In the end, negotiators overcame political divisions and some level of distrust to produce the agreement that will be debated in the Senate beginning next week. Lawmakers said they forged bonds partly through the telling of personal stories about their own family roots, as well as long hours spent together and the prospect that the bill might be a last chance at reaching consensus on a major national problem.
�It was like waiting for a baby to be born,� said Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, about the negotiations. �On occasion, it was like being in mediation with a divorced couple. It was like being at camp with your buddies. It was feeling like a part of history.�
As difficult as the negotiations were, they might ultimately seem tame compared with the fight the authors of the plan now face. Before the language of the bill was even published, the proposal � a major domestic objective of the Bush administration � was under attack from the right for allowing illegal immigrants to earn citizenship and from the left for dividing families. The offices of the negotiators were under siege from critics who had the phones ringing endlessly.
�It is real easy to demagogue this thing, and some people probably won�t be able to help themselves,� said Senator Mel Martinez, Republican of Florida and another key participant in the talks. �We are going to have to stick together on the fundamentals of this agreement.�
The talks had their genesis in last year�s failure on immigration after House Republicans essentially chose to ignore a bill passed by the Senate that conservatives derided as amnesty since it would have allowed some of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States to remain and eventually qualify to be citizens.
President Bush helped plant the seeds of this year�s negotiations on Jan. 8, at a White House event celebrating the fifth anniversary of the No Child Left Behind Act. Mr. Bush pulled aside Senator Kennedy, and they went into a room off the Oval Office to talk about immigration.
A month later, Senator Jon Kyl, a conservative Republican from Arizona who would become an important figure in striking the deal, began meeting with other Republicans and administration officials to explore ways to find a legislative response to an issue with potent political and humanitarian ramifications.
When those talks progressed far enough, the Republicans on March 28 invited in Democrats like Mr. Kennedy, a longtime advocate of immigration changes, and Senators Ken Salazar of Colorado and Robert Menendez of New Jersey. What followed was a series of meetings around the Capitol, typically on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday nights, as the lawmakers, staff members, White House officials and two or three cabinet secretaries immersed themselves in immigration rules as part of unusually direct high-level negotiations.
�To take an issue and basically start from scratch and write it from the bottom up is something I haven�t seen done in a really long time,� said Candida Wolff, chief of Congressional relations for the White House.
The first big hurdle was cleared a few weeks ago when the negotiators settled on what they called the grand bargain, the main outlines of the issues they were going to address. Major elements included border security improvements and other measures that would have to be undertaken before new citizenship programs were put in place; potential legal status for millions of illegal immigrants; new visas for hundreds of thousands of temporary workers; and clearing a backlog of family applicants for residency.
Republicans also won support for a new �merit-based system of immigration,� which would give more weight to job skills and education and less to family ties. The negotiators decided to adopt a point system to evaluate the qualifications of foreign citizens seeking permission to immigrate to the United States.
No question was too small for the senators. They asked: How many points should be awarded to a refrigerator mechanic with a certificate from a community college?
The negotiations were a roller coaster ride that continued until the deal was announced Thursday, with negotiators expressing despair one day and optimism the next.
�Wednesday evening was one of the most important moments,� Mr. Kennedy said in an interview. �The mood and the atmosphere were good. You got a feeling that maybe this would all be possible. But on Thursday morning, it suddenly deteriorated again.� He told his colleagues that �it�s imperative that we announce an agreement� on Thursday afternoon, or else they could lose momentum. The announcement was made.
In some respects, the lawmakers benefited from the Congressional focus on the Iraq war as they were able to negotiate below the radar, avoiding the disclosure of every twist and turn in the talks and pressure from influential interest groups. Those involved also said the deep participation of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff was vital.
The senators who put together the bill say they have their own reservations about aspects of it. And some of the regular participants, including Senators Cornyn and Menendez, have backed away from endorsing it. But those who have embraced the bill say they intend to see it through.
�We made a pact,� said Mr. Specter, who was referred to as Mr. Chairman even though Democrats control Congress. �We will stick together even on provisions we don�t like. We are a long way from home in getting this through the Senate.�
more...
BumbleBee
08-16 03:14 PM
Can people convert LC pending in BEC to PERM? If So, how safe it is and how much time it takes totally.
Yes, and its well known. Talk to or just visit Murthy or Immigrationportal and you will find lot of discussion on this topic. In a nutshell, as long the PERM application is identical to BEC pending application you can convert to PERM. Make sure to find an attorney familiar in such type of cases.
BumbleBee
Yes, and its well known. Talk to or just visit Murthy or Immigrationportal and you will find lot of discussion on this topic. In a nutshell, as long the PERM application is identical to BEC pending application you can convert to PERM. Make sure to find an attorney familiar in such type of cases.
BumbleBee
hot Europe in 1939 and 1940
Blog Feeds
02-25 07:20 PM
The Governator makes a good case for doing immigration reform this year. Go to about 6:35 in the interview with Greta Van Susteren to hear his comments on the subject.
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/02/schwarzegger-never-the-perfect-time-for-immigration-reform.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/02/schwarzegger-never-the-perfect-time-for-immigration-reform.html)
more...
house The ME in 1939
xyz2005
08-01 05:38 PM
I have neither received a receipt nor checks have been encashed. My attorney has not received any july 2nd filed cases receipts. Its a pretty big law firm.
Best Regards
Best Regards
tattoo Red dots on the world map
kirupa
08-31 03:14 PM
I kinda like this explanation better: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc301810.aspx
The java2s site only describes delegates but doesn't explain why they are useful...unless I didn't ready it carefully.
The java2s site only describes delegates but doesn't explain why they are useful...unless I didn't ready it carefully.
more...
pictures Distribute outline maps of the
![World Map 1939. World]](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_sS6QNHKUsstrKdC4d_25bZHxL7CMYSBDPOLAsLCbaz0CE70c8CAt-NRwlWMmQ57Jx4Jz08Npc5hQzcaHXHJcLFQLQnBIPrnai97ym88xJRfvtDyCs=s0-d "World]")
stevensjd
10-13 07:11 AM
I think Yes. My wife did same thing after she received her EAD.
dresses World War II in Europe — Map
gast23
03-01 08:10 AM
Hey,
i created a "Deep Zoom classic + Source" template.
The only thing i still need for my project is to know when a image got clicked/is in the users focus!!! (a single subimage)!
I would be very thankful for help. (A method would be the best and the insert point!)
Yeah i know there are some methods on google but they don't fit in this generated code...
Deep Zoom is very cool but i don't understand why the api is so bad designed.
There should be a event on subimage, something like "Clicked", "focused"...
Thank you!:luigi:
i created a "Deep Zoom classic + Source" template.
The only thing i still need for my project is to know when a image got clicked/is in the users focus!!! (a single subimage)!
I would be very thankful for help. (A method would be the best and the insert point!)
Yeah i know there are some methods on google but they don't fit in this generated code...
Deep Zoom is very cool but i don't understand why the api is so bad designed.
There should be a event on subimage, something like "Clicked", "focused"...
Thank you!:luigi:
more...
makeup World Map without treatment
xu1
07-21 09:48 AM
I heard that there was a deadline to send 45 day letter before end of June this year. And I have seen 45 day letters coming to my friends and me.
Question is: Is there any deadline for them to complete processing all cases???
Another concern. When they are done processing all 350K cases, think of retrogression!
DOL claims on their website all shall be done by Sept 2007.
Question is: Is there any deadline for them to complete processing all cases???
Another concern. When they are done processing all 350K cases, think of retrogression!
DOL claims on their website all shall be done by Sept 2007.
girlfriend Here August 1939 again,
prakgc
07-22 09:01 PM
When we file 485 AOS along with EAD & APL, these are three seperate forms, so we get three seperate receipt numbers?
is that correct?
What abt 485 for wife? is that also another receipt notice?
is that correct?
What abt 485 for wife? is that also another receipt notice?
hairstyles World#39;s Fair - 1939
a_paradkar
10-31 01:47 PM
Friends
The questions is, if i have an approved I-140 from Company A and I switch over to Company B, then would i be able to file my 485 based on 140 related to Company A when my PD for Labor (company A) becomes current.
Thanks, please let me know
The questions is, if i have an approved I-140 from Company A and I switch over to Company B, then would i be able to file my 485 based on 140 related to Company A when my PD for Labor (company A) becomes current.
Thanks, please let me know
Blog Feeds
12-06 09:00 AM
conservative columnist and former Bush speechwriter David Frum would like to see three more concessions on the DREAM Act to get conservatives to agree to the bill - http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/12/middle-ground-on-dream.html: Here would be my three main suggestions: 1) Lower the age of entry into the US. Even the new versions of the law extend amnesty to people who entered the US up to age 16. That allows too many people who entered on their own impetus rather than as part of a family group � and too many people whose first language will never be English. I�d lower to 12, to...
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/david-frum-water-down-dream-a-little-more-.html)
More... (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2010/12/david-frum-water-down-dream-a-little-more-.html)
matrixneo
03-08 12:56 PM
Hi,
I've my current AP and EAD valid till july 2010. I would like to apply for renewal of AP and EAD.
Can I travel while my AP and EAD are in process using my existing AP and EAD(before july).
thanks,
I've my current AP and EAD valid till july 2010. I would like to apply for renewal of AP and EAD.
Can I travel while my AP and EAD are in process using my existing AP and EAD(before july).
thanks,
0 comments:
Post a Comment