Source: http://crimmigration.com/2013/04/18/crimmigration-provisions-of-immigration-bill.aspx?ref=rss
Timestamp: 2014-04-24 14:30:26
Document Index: 711765535

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 212', '§ 212', '§ 212', '§ 212', '§ 237', '§ 237']

crImmigration.com: CrImmigration provisions of immigration bill crImmigration
Blog Statistics crImmigration.com: CrImmigration provisions of immigration bill
The last of the bill’s myriad provisions that I’ll note are the many bars to eligibility for the provisional immigrant status that the bill would create, “Registered Provisional Immigrant Status.” Otherwise eligible individuals could not receive this status if they have been convicted of an aggravated felony as that term is defined when the person was convicted, convicted of a felony (other than one “for which an essential element was the alien’s immigration status or a violation of this Act”), convicted of a three or more misdemeanors (except “minor traffic offenses or…offenses for which an essential element was the alien’s immigration status or a violation of this Act”) on different dates, convicted of an offense under foreign law which makes the person inadmissible under INA § 212(a) (except the public charge provision of INA § 212(a)(4), the documentation requirements of § 212(a)(7), and the 3 and 10-year bars of § 212(a)(9)(B)) or deportable under INA § 237(a) (except the document fraud and false claim to citizenship provisions of § 237(a)(3)), or voted unlawfully. Sec. 2101(a). Individuals would also be ineligible if they are inadmissible to the United States on the basis of a crime-related ground. DHS would be granted authorization to waive most grounds of inadmissibility, but not those related to criminal activity. Sec. 2101(a).
Update: The BSEOIMA has been numbered Senate Bill 744. Detailed information about amendments and the bill's path through Congress is available through the Library of Congress's Thomas web site.
Posted by Cesar at 4/18/2013 4:00 AM Categories: commentaries, proposed legislationTags: commentaries proposed legislation Previous Post Next Post
It seems that under the Registered provisional ineligibility requirements under (3)(A) has different definition of conviction than the traditional 101(a)(48) provision, the definition of conviction for RPI seem to exclude expunged, or "set aside' convictions. the RPI definition is limited to RPIs but I wonder if this change in definition may be something extended to all criminal convictions in the near future. unfortunately I looked at the entire bill and didn't see any revisions to the definition of conviction generally and nothing directed towards 101(a)(48) though perhaps this statutory language could be used to challenge Matter of Roldan and Matter of Pickering.
Margarita E. Hernandez wrote:
Thank you so much for the information. We know some details are going to be tricky, but we need this bill to pass this time. We cannot wait longer.Thanks again.
Hi there , I have a question and this site is the only one that covers my situation . I have been in the country for 15 yrs. Was married for 7 yrs. got ssn , work permit ( that can not renew )but I got divorced before my case was concluded , so now I have been "floating" for few years and hoping for amnesty . But , I'm concern bcs I was arrested for theft ,3rd degree felony in Florida , I plea guilty and got a adjudication withheld ( that was in 1997 ), my only mistake . Anyway , I was told that adjudication withheld is now considered convicted , so was wondering if this new bill is going to help me as it is proposed . It mentions expunged or set aside , so maybe I could do set aside with my case or anything ? Please help , thanks a lot .
4/23/2013 9:08 AM