I am traveling to the US soon for work from Europe. I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks.
My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection, but times has changed now and it has been happening a lot more frequently.
I am wondering what is the best course of action, prior to travel and if asked to give your phone and password. Also, what happens if you refuse to do so? Is the worst case scenario that they will send you back to where you came from?
The short answer is that CBP has the right to ask to see your electronic devices and you have the right to refuse but if you refuse (and you are not a U.S. green card holder or citizen), CBP likely will deny you admission and send you home.
I had a friend who was asked to unlock her phone, and she did, and then… they did nothing. They watched her do it and moved on to the next question.
Seems like asking someone to do this is just a good test to see the kind of individual they’re dealing with. It’s not practical to thoroughly search phones at scale and plus they know people can just have burner phones anyway. If you’re cagey and combative they know you’re a problem.
1. An itemized list of every account they have and their passwords and any 2FA they've used.
2. Multiple forms of payment.
3. A photo gallery that, in many (if not most) cases, will have private content.
4. The contact information of everyone they know, who have not consented to having that information distributed.
I find the entire idea that it's acceptable for any barely-educated border agent having a power trip with no probable cause to demand this under the duress of rejection, repugnant.
Especially in a country where police officers are occasionally allowed to "have sex" with people they apprehend - it seems like there's nothing that actually stops a CBP agent from just stopping any attractive woman they happen to see and demanding their phone so they can find nudes.
It's not actually about any form of screening. It's a power trip. Only the dumbest criminal or terrorist would bring an incriminating device across the border and have any need to say "no" to that request.
Which, stopping dumb criminals and terrorists is important and valuable and they do exist, but nobody applied to work for CBP in order to check the phones of dumb criminals. They applied because they have strong opinions about certain things.
Still, if a dumb criminal or terrorist does slip past you, that just means you’re an even bigger idiot. So might as well ask people to unlock the phone.
An acquaintance used to work airport security and he told me they asked to unlock/power up etc. electronic devices such as phones, laptops or SLR to check if they are real electronic devices. Apparently they were -- maybe are -- afraid of EDs that looked like electronics on the scanners.
Not completely groundless, even if I could think of more than one way to construct a device, e.g. laptop, that boots up and still explodes, but hey.
Perhaps EDs are a concern, but mostly what terrorists actually use phones for is remote detonation. A feature phone is the ideal sort of radio transmitter, modified or not, to send a remote command to detonate explosives. If security is really scrutinizing carry-on luggage, then perhaps the strategy moves to placing a bomb in checked baggage, and carrying only the trigger through the checkpoint.
So if you force someone to turn on their phone or laptop at security, you will hopefully force the decision point; even if the inspector cannot tell the difference, a terrorist is going to get real nervous and jumpy around activating the thing they intend to use as a detonator, in contrast to some businessdude activating his very ordinary mobile device.
I'm wondering if anyone uses burner phones. I have an old phone, and a second phone number that I got from Tello for $5 a month, intending to use it for a business number, but then never did. It's currently completely detached from anything personal and I figure if I do need to go over the border I could just use that still for any communication and internet access, but personal details would be at a very bare minimum.
Yes. If I will have to go there on a normal visa, I will not take my phone with me, just the SIM card. For the laptop, I don't care at all, it is a company laptop and as long as the company agrees to open it up for the border control, I will, but I will set a clean password upfront that meets the minimum complexity requirements ("UperLower12345#") with no access to anything else. I have long random passwords on all accounts like email or Amazon account, I never type it in because I never know the password, that may be a problem if they ask me - who will believe that the only 2 passwords I ever know are for the company laptop and for my desktop at home in Europe?
This is not because I have something to hide, but because I have nothing to show. I don't have Facebook, Twitter or Instagram accounts, don't keep pictures on the phone (family pictures are downloaded on the NAS, I don't take other pictures), so there is nothing to show on a personal level, while the company I work for is a big, old US company and the content of the laptop is theirs, not mine, and it is nothing sensitive that even our business competitors would be interested into.
I case I would go there as a tourist, my only luggage would be my motorcycle helmet and a pair of gloves, I would rent a bike, buy a cheap phone with a local number and do road trips around the country. Not even a suitcase, so nothing to show. If they ask me about itinerary, that is a high risk for me because I use to travel across Europe without an itinerary, just a direction, they may not believe me, but old bikers don't go to a destination, they go wherever the road goes.
Yeah, this worries me a lot. I have a quite tricky Type 1 diabetes, which I can manage well with an artificial pancreas software that's running in my phone. Now if they tamper my phone, or take it completely away when crossing the border, I am in quite a trouble. Especially after a big change in time zones, the health apps really do their job and help me settle in without medial risks in a few days.
This is such a risk right now, that me and my American partner decided to not travel to US at all until things change. Too bad we cannot see some of the family in there...
> My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection
Get a burner phone! Upload your entire data to the cloud as well. Either you can store your phone in the check-in luggage or restore your data once you've arrived at your US location.
For any electronic device it is advisable to take a complete backup of the unit, store an encrypted version somewhere online, and then restore the device to factory reset. Do not log in to any account that you wouldn't feel perfectly fine giving up in an inspection.
They can already hijack any phone number, so the only vulnerability you are giving up by crossing the border is the files, call log/sms, and accounts you bring with you.
As early as the last Trump presidency I was seeing people with good opsec doing the following.
1. Backup your device to the cloud (a different cloud than the default if possible)
2. Erase your device
3. Provide your empty / near empty device for inspection.
4. Load the backup after the airport checks.
It might be wise to update this with some basic changes, like creating fake accounts that are auto signed in on your device. Blank twitter account, blank gmail account etc.
> I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks.
I travel internationally all the time. I work with companies in China, Singapore, Japan, Australia, Europe and Latin America. Meaning, I know lots of people who travel internationally with great frequency. I have never heard from anyone having any such problems. Ever. Not during this administration nor others. Stop listening to idiots pushing false narratives. It's fear mongering. Not real.
Oddly enough, I have been asked more questions when travelling to Canada (Montreal) over the years than almost anywhere else. Nothing serious, thigs like "Why are you travelling to Canada?", "Where are you staying?", "How long?", "Where do you work?", "What's your website and business email?", "Who are you meeting with?", "What is their contact information?", etc. And, BTW, all of this at the standard entry passport check booth, not a side room.
Of course, it feels intrusive when it happens. I look at it as security theater. Just chill and go through the process. Being stupid about this can ruin your trip in any country. Unless you are a diplomat, you are not important enough to bother with. Picking a fight with entry officials in any country will result in bad things happening to you. Don't be that person.
To the point about security theater: Last year we travelled to Mexico on vacation. When we got to the hotel we bought a few supplies. A couple of the items were sealed the type of plastic packaging that you cannot possibly open with your bare hands or teeth. I said "I'll go to the front desk and see if they can let me use a pair of scissors". Without missing a beat, my daughter pulls out a pair of standard size Fiskars scissors from her luggage. Jaw drop moment. She went through security, full scan, and a pair of scissors made it onto the plane. So, yeah, security theater at its best. BTW, the scissors did not make it through security at the airport in Mexico when returning.
BTW, I have also hired Canadian engineers and we've never had problems. You just have to go through the process, hire and attorney and do it right. Which, BTW, is true anywhere in the world.
I've heard similar accounts, and anecdotally holds up, although my experience travelling for work specifically is limited. Incidentally, as a Canadian, I've been searched many more times, if not 100% of the time, coming back from the states than going in. Security theater in both directions though for sure, just looking for a slip up. Going in to the states, I once had a slightly vague answer about where I was staying because I'd planned to camp on a long road trip. They pulled me into the lineup and then asked me again, I tried explaining but they just wanted an address and hinted as such, so I just google searched a hotel in front of them and gave them that. They've got boxes to check.
Yup. That's it. And the people running entry and customs at airports around the world are not necessarily the most capable and accomplished among us. I have lots of stories.
For example, entering into Mexico (Cancun), there are probably twenty passport check booths. The line for passport checks easily had 500 people in it. Every single agent left their station, with only one left to process 500 people. That remained so for about an hour. As could be expected, tempers were flaring and interactions with this one person, in some cases, where, well, less than ideal. No supervisor in sight. About an hour later five agents showed-up. It was horrible, the agents had an attitude and travelers were tired and angry. I've been going to Mexico for a decade, this was the only time I've seen something like this. Someone for whom that trip was their only exposure would likely come out of it with a very different perspective.
Here's another one. I won't name the country because this was a thing at a moment in history for them and no-longer the case for probably the last twenty years. When travelling to this particular country is was an unspoken rule that you had to put money into your passport (typically $100 per traveler) in order to gain entry without being hassled. If you did not, the consequences were in a range between having to pay serious "taxes" on your stuff to having some of your things confiscated (typically your electronics).
As I said in another comment, this isn't a black and white issue, it's shades of grade.
Mexico uses passport control almost purely as a jobs program. At the land borders only the largest cities seem to check (like Tijuana), most of them don't even glance at you. The guy at the x-ray machine has been asleep a few times.
For first world entry they just depend on the fact the 1st world country is harsher on security than them so they don't bother. Might be different if you enter from Mexico's south land border.
Trip to Mexico. Get into the hotel. We bought a few things that had the kind of packaging that is impossible to open. I said "I'll go to the front desk and ask for scissors". Without missing a beat, my daughter pulls out a full size Fiskars pair of scissors from her carry-on luggage and hands them to me. The scissors made it past LAX security theater x-ray machines, etc. Hilarious and terrifying at the same time. Mexican security caught them on the way back, so we had to donate them to Mexico's GDP.
People get worked-up about interactions at airports without fully understanding their context and realities. Just chill, don't argue, don't be an idiot and enjoy the trip.
That comment is 100% dislocated from reality. To be sure, entry dynamics vary by country, person and other circumstances. Law enforcement is different in philosophy and approach all over the world. For example, in the US you are not met with soldiers carrying machine guns, which is something you are likely to encounter in Italy. To some people, being met by soldiers with machine guns is terrifying, to others, it is normal. To some people being asked questions in a terse manner is rude and scary, others understand security theater and the role these people play. It's shades of gray, not black and white.
Hi Peter. I am a Lead Computer Vision Engineer, working remotely at Veryfi (YC 17). I am a citizen of Russia, living in Armenia for last 3 years.
We applied to O1 visa, got approval from the USCIS, then got visa stamps and at the day of my flight visas were revoked. Embassy said to reapply - I did and now it's been 11 months of Administrative processing (as they said in the DoS).
My employer tried writing to the Congressman's office couple times, but every time Embassy answers ~"please wait, no timelines". I also filed a DHS Trip complaint and received this statement: "We have made any corrections to records that our inquiries determined were necessary, including, as appropriate, notations that may assist in avoiding incidents of misidentification".
With everything above, we were not able to get any meaningful timelines or figure what's going on. Is there anything we can do to make movement in my case? It's hard to plan your life living like this, so it is very important for me. Thanks!
If you want to try to take control back over this process (and your life), you probably need to file a mandamus action. This is essentially a demand that a government official execute his or her official duties. I don't handle mandamus actions but I'd be happy to refer you to some very good attorneys who do.
My advice would be to relax, enjoy Armenia, and assume you are not entering the U.S. in the next couple of years, for any reason. Administrative processing (I assume you actually mean 221(g) refusal) can easily take 1-2 years. The most extreme case I've heard of took 4 years.
In 2016-2020 writing to a congressmen could actually help: https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2020/11/09/a-us-visa-in-937-days... , but not anymore. Last year I've heard about some success stories with U.S. courts. Still, it took for one O-1 person about two years from the initial visa interview.
I've also never heard of anyone getting any timeline estimations.
Just I quick note - writing to congressman may actually help and worth trying. My mom's greencard was stuck in 2023 due to some bs with documents in consulate with officer there non responding. After the letter by my senator I got a call from the officer over there and the issue resolved within a day. This is of course different from op's issue, but just wanted to note that it is worth trying in any case.
There are people who file collective mandamus lawsuits, so you might consider joining one of those groups.
However, from what I've seen, it could be a waste of money, as there isn't convincing evidence that it accelerates AP. These lawsuits usually take many months, and AP often resolves "by itself" before the lawsuit reaches a resolution.
It’s doubtful you’ll get any answers. Lawyers are of little help due to “consular nonreviewability” and your case clearly has hit some sort of national security flag. Since this was pre Trump II, it likely was a real human review not their new approach of automated revocations for poorly designed queries (a student was recently revoked due to fishing license citations).
As I understand, AP generally means Washington and not the consulate is actually the block/decision maker now, but they wouldn’t even officially tell you that. It could be with State or they could be waiting an opinion from someone. Picture some CIA agent who got stuck with a boring desk job and has a stack of thousands of visas to research.
I'm a US citizen born abroad - I got my citizenship via (I believe) INA 320 when I was a child. I have a US-born father who was not eligible to pass on his citizenship at the time of my birth. I lived in the US for most of my childhood up until ~2015 (initially as an LPR), and at some point, I obtained a US passport.
I don't have a certificate of citizenship, only a US passport. Given the way the US is going, I'm concerned that one day I'm going to apply renew my passport or otherwise have to prove my citizenship, and I'm not going to be able to sufficiently document it. Is this a real risk? Would you advise applying for a CoC in my circumstances? Am I even eligible to apply for one given that I live abroad? What other steps if any should I take to protect my status?
You still can apply for a Certificate of Citizenship but there's a cost associated with it and I really don't think it's necessary or even advisable because you are now giving the government a chance to reassess its previous approval. A U.S. passport is always considered sufficient evidence of U.S. citizenship.
In order for U.S. citizens to pass on their citizenship to children born abroad, they need to have resided in the U.S. for a certain period prior to the birth of the child.
The amount of time the parent has to have lived in the U.S. varies but usually it’s 5 years with at least 2 years after the age of 14.
If they don’t automatically pass it on and they want to move back to the U.S., they need to apply for green cards for their kids.
Since 2001, anyone under 18 who has a green card and lives with a U.S. citizen parent becomes a citizen automatically by process of law, under INA 320. Unfortunately documenting this is not automatic. A lot of people who came before 2001 don’t even know that they’re citizens. The application for a certificate costs a lot of money, so often parents tend to skip it if they don’t feel it’s necessary.
Hi Peter, I am a naturalized US citizen (via employment sponsored H1B to Green Card route). Prior to obtaining my citizenship I held an F1 visa to complete my PhD, and may have overstayed in the US at the end of my studies (I am not sure, this was 15+ years ago). This was never raised as an issue when I applied for my H1B, Green Card or citizenship, but is it something that could become an issue for me now if I travel as a US citizen and attempt to return to the US? Is there anything I can do proactively to address this if it is likely to be a problem? Thank you.
Almost certainly, even if you did overstay, it's not an issue but for peace of mind, you should speak with an attorney because it sounds like you didn't overstay in a way that would have impacted your H-1B, green card, or citizenship applications. (F-1 students are admitted until D/S - duration of status - so they almost never considered overstays.)
Let's put it this way: if you have a problem, you have the same problem as the First Lady and Elon Musk, both of whom violated/overstayed their initial U.S. visas but are now citizens.
This line of thinking is based on the assumption that the law applies people close to the current president with the same rigour as it does to the average person.
I would expect that a brief look at the current situation in the US suggests the opposite, does it not?
I'm a Canadian software developer who'd like to join an American startup so naturally I've been applying to a bunch of jobs. More specifically, I'm looking to go with TN visa.
In most job applications, I need to answer the two following questions 1) Are you legally authorized to work in the US? and 2) Will you now or in the future require sponsorship? I'm looking for advice on how I should be answering these questions.
For example, I believe I should technically be answering NO to 1) and YES to 2), but I'm slightly unsure about this.
I've heard recently that some Canadians actually recommend answering YES to 1) as getting a TN visa is very simple and not too much harder than just hiring an American. The idea is that when you answer NO to 1) that recruiters (and especially startups who are often more naive about visas) will lump you in as being hard to hire like immigrants who come to the US on the H1B and then filter out your application.
As for question 2), because the TN is a "Nonimmigrant" visa, does this technically mean I can answer NO here?
Basically in summary, how would you recommend I answer these questions? I don't want my applications to get auto filtered, but I'd also like to be as honest as possible.
Hi, I just spent 2 months interviewing and hiring candidates for 4 open (remote) eng positions at a US startup. Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer and make a mental note to never trust you. I don't think you should do that.
We actually hired some Canadian talent -- we just used an EOR in Canada. The EOR cost us about $600 a month per head as their cut, but it was worth it to get the excellent developers we have through that deal.
The reason why some/many firms would filter out anyone saying NO to (1) is that getting a visa sponsored requires significant work of a specialized nature and our company certainly is not equipped to do that because we don't have people who have the time and skills to deal with the insane demands of our government to obtain the necessary document (This is not a new or partisan issue btw, I remember losing a great developer in the Obama years due to the feds giving her the run-around).
TN is not a visa and all you need to get this status is a job offer. There's really no work of any specialized nature but some companies do get legal advice to help streamline the process and get better outcomes like reducing the probability that the person would be denied.
(EDIT: it is sometimes referred to a visa and sometimes as a status but at any rate as someone who had TN status with two different US startups there was very little process around it)
I am a Canadian working in the US on TN status too (and yes, despite my opinion on it they call it a “status” not a “visa”). I can’t emphasize enough how light of a burden it is on employers to hire a Canadian on TN status. There’s no limit on the number of people who can come in, and it’s issued literally as you travel across the border.
The paperwork is very basic. It’s essentially just a letter signed by the employer that describes what you will be doing. I put it together myself, but an immigration lawyer can help you with it for a couple of hundred dollars if you need it. It’s issued at the border, you just tell the immigration/border guard that you’re getting a TN, then you go into the office, they review the paperwork and put a stamp on your passport. It took about 20 minutes when I did it in Toronto a couple of weeks ago.
Post on the /r/tnvisa sub on Reddit please, make the process transparent and most importantly VISIBLE so we Canadians dont have to pay a lawyer, this is a community process thanks.
Brief reading of reddit posts by people who actually did this almost always included that the company's lawyers wrote them letters and prepared packets of materials for them to provide CBP. We don't have any lawyers. We're simply not employing people who don't have green cards. We don't have time or money to play games with the government.
One important thing in seeking TN status is that the title of degree matters immensely to your employability, which goes entirely against what I stand for, as if you have a degree in economics or no degree but do a great job of writing code, I'd want to hire you. The law contains vagaries and there is a "memo" which suggests that they use common sense, but it's all up to a random border guard who might not know any of that to interpret everything.
Anyway, you're not automatically legally allowed to work in the US and lying about it won't help. We can agree to disagree on whether we "should" deal with all that stuff or if we're missing out, but lying to get halfway in the door is the worst way to change an employer's mind, especially in this economy when plenty of domestic candidates are available.
I agree with you about the dishonesty of saying yes (as I replied in another comment).
That said this is a choice you're making from what sounds like more religious reasons. Your company and your choice but it's not hard to employ TNs in a startup (and I know because I had TN status with two startups so I'm a little ahead of "brief reading of reddit posts").
TN status can also be applied for in advance by the way, doesn't have to be at the border. This wasn't an option when I had TN status but now it is.
While I was only speaking in hypotheticals about companies that only want to hire people who have legal status (no one has asked us to help them get TN status), I'd rather do zero paperwork by hiring people with existing status, than (allegedly) "not hard" work to support TN hopefuls, especially given the US government is liable these days to randomly change things around and cause chaos - especially in areas likely to score political points like immigration. POTUS could declare tomorrow that every TN (in a certain industry? state? whatever) has to go home in 10 days.
My attitude would certainly change though, if/when we can't find skilled people with existing work authorization, or if I had an incredibly strong personal referral.
Well, if you read through your link, you'll understand what parent comment is talking about.
> Requirements for Canadian Citizens
> A visa is not required for a Canadian citizen entering the United States as a USMCA Professional, although a visa can be issued to a qualified Canadian TN visa applicant upon application at a U.S. embassy or consulate.
> A Canadian citizen can apply for TN nonimmigrant status at a U.S. port-of-entry. Learn about these requirements on the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) websites. More information about receiving TN status without applying for a visa is also available on the U.S. Embassy Ottawa website.
You guys are talking about two similar and related but different things.
TN is both a "nonimmigrant classification" and a visa. The TN nonimmigrant classification is what is what grants a Canadian citizen eligibility to enter into the U.S. without a visa. A TN visa also grants a Canadian citizen entry into the U.S., and is required for TN nonimmigrants to enter with family members. In a nutshell, you establish your TN classification at your port of entry with (a) proof of Canadian citizenship, (b) letter from employer or prospective employer, and (c) any required credential and fees. You can acquire a TN visa the same way, or (recommended) at a U.S. consulate or embassy prior to your trip, and the primary difference is that the TN visa takes a little more time and paperwork.
Prior to this administration, TN status was a simple and short process; we had dozens of Canadian employees visiting the U.S. every week. However, the current administration does not believe in following established laws, so our legal counsel has been advising us to apply for TN visas for Canadian employees visiting the U.S prior to their trips to avoid any surprises at the border.
Note: Mexican citizens don't get TN nonimmigrant classification status. They must apply for the TN visa at a U.S. consulate or embassy in Mexico prior to their departure for the U.S. They must then apply for admission (aka, a visa) into the U.S. again when they actually arrive (basically, they need a TN visa to get a visa. It is as ridiculous as it sounds.)
Canadian employees visiting the united states is usually not a situation requiring a TN. That said most of the time this happens the visitors are indeed breaking the law. So one could argue that the current administration does believe in following the law.
One of the situations when I had a TN was exactly like that. Canadian employees of a US startup needed to get a TN so they're not hassled at the border.
Many administrations ago. Before the first Trump presidency.
Either way getting your Canadian employees TN status is easy and is probably a better solution.
A TN visa is a visa, but what someone is “on” is a status, not a visa. Visas are only relevant to the moment of entry. You need a visa of type X to ask to enter with status X.
The exception to that is Canadians like OP, they don’t need most visa types (the E investor/trader visa is the exception—but TN, H1B, etc., don’t need).
"If you are a Canadian citizen, then you are not required to apply for a TN visa at a U.S. consulate.
You may establish eligibility for TN classification at the time you seek admission to the United States by presenting required documentation to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer at certain CBP-designated U.S. ports of entry or at a designated pre-clearance/pre-flight inspection station. You must provide the following documentation to the CBP officer:"
"You may be eligible for TN nonimmigrant status, if:
You are a citizen of Canada or Mexico;
Your profession qualifies under the regulations;
The position in the United States requires a NAFTA professional;
You have a prearranged full-time or part-time job with a U.S. employer (but not self-employment - see documentation required below); and
You have the qualifications to practice in the profession in question."
"If a CBP officer finds you eligible for admission, you will be admitted as a TN nonimmigrant. "
The main point is this has none of the process usually related to "visas" and even if that term is sometimes used along with "TN status" it's its own special thing. Canadians don't need a Visa to visit the US and I am not a lawyer. Mexicans might be in a slightly different situation. Either way, the proper legal answer has no influence whatsoever on the points being made.
Being pedantic, the authorized admission into a country is a visa.
TN status is a special thing. A TN visa is just a non-immigrant visa given to a TN-eligible Canadian or Mexican citizen.
Canadian citizens don't need to receive a visa prior to their departure for the U.S.; they can get a form of "visa on arrival" through their TN classification. Mexican citizens need to get a TN visa in order to be eligible to get a visa on arrival when they arrive.
> Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer
This might actually violate EEOC. You would discriminating on the basis on nationality. The question that was asked was "Are you legally authorized to work in the US?" and Canadian have a limited legal right to work in the US under NAFTA.
The question is usually understood to mean "on an ongoing basis" and it's essentially lying. The system may not be correct or kind, but I'd have a lot of trouble trusting someone whose response to "the system isn't fair" is "I'll lie to get around it and achieve the outcome I believe is right" enough to hire him.
I could see that, but given that jobs are all at-will it's hard to argue the employer would have any damages for a contract that can be terminated with literally zero notice.
Most employment is at will, but salaried employees usually have specified severance in case of termination for convenience. Misrepresenting qualifications does in fact create a case for damages unless the employee is literally perfect. But civil aside, and ethics aside, it is fraud and could conceivably be prosecuted accordingly.
I personally wouldn't have a lot of faith in the abilities and judgement of someone who doesn't leverage an unfair system to their advantage despite there being basically no downsides to doing so unless im hiring a middle manager to sort through excessive bureaucratic bloat.
> Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer and make a mental note to never trust you.
I wouldn't trust you either. The question is ambiguous when it comes to NAFTA and applicants are worried about being filtered out despite not needing visa sponsorship. TN is not a visa it's a status based on a free trade agreement.
Ugh, arguing over the simple meaning of factual statements on the Internet is my biggest pet peeve. If you don't have an appropriate work visa, permanent residency or citizenship, and you answer yes to the question of "Are you legally authorized to work in the US", you are just a liar, plain and simple.
> If you don't have an appropriate work visa, permanent residency or citizenship
Well, TN is none of those, and here I am authorized to work legally. If I apply for another job elsewhere, the honest answer to this question is yes, despite the fact that I will be required to get a new TN.
> The nonimmigrant USMCA Professional (TN) visa allows eligible citizens of Canada and Mexico to work in the United States as USMCA professionals in prearranged professional level business activities for U.S. or foreign employers.
When I looked at working in America several years ago, many people I spoke to and people commenting about it on Reddit/HN/Blind emphasized that it's TN status, not TN visa. They even suggested that calling it a visa when trying to enter the US could get your application rejected. I'm not sure if things have changed since then but if so there's probably lots of people who heard that same advice in the past and haven't learned the updated info.
Visa and status are different things and exist simultaneously. A visa is used to cross the border, a status is what enables one to be in the country. Many people on H1B don't have a physical H1B visa either as they have "adjusted status" from some other status to H1B without leaving the country and hence cannot possibly have a visa, which can only be issued in a US consulate, which don't exist in the US per se.
Colloquially people refer to a status granted through a particular visa category as "visa" e.g. "I am studying on F-1 visa", "H-1B visa employees" etc.
You’ve now been informed by an immigration lawyer that that is not an honest answer, so were you to answer “yes” you’d be demonstrating you’re either willfully ignorant or dishonest.
If those are remote positions, why do you care about any of this at all? Make it clear that the applicant needs to handle taxation in their home country themselves, and that’s that. I know many software engineers working remotely for companies outside their home country. One would typically set up an LLC or equivalent, and be employed by that.
Any options agreement would be with the private individual to not mess up the cap table.
Thanks Peter for your answer. I’ll be sure to apply this advice going forward.
With that being said, from seeing the replies to my original question, would you mind expanding on your answer a little more? I’m sure many of the other commenters in this thread would appreciate some more clarity here.
Peter already replied to this elsewhere in the thread. To a question
"Maybe a dumb question, but... I'm a Canadian who would qualify for a TN visa if I worked in the States, but don't currently have a visa or green card. On the online submission form for job openings, it always asks 'Are you legally entitled to work in the US?'. Am I meant to answer yes or no to that?"
Peter replies:
"Unfortunately, the correct answer is No because until you have the TN, you are not legally entitled to work in the U.S. Of course, this means that you will be excluded automatically for consideration of certain jobs."
He won’t answer the question from a strategic perspective. He will answer only from a legal standpoint. That’s the only perspective he is an expert in.
I think It's not sponsorship in terms of what you hear about for h1b. But if you need a "Job Offer" before getting a TN (as someone upthread mentioned) that itself is a form of sponsorship, since you still need something from that company before you can work.
"Sponsorship" is not a legal term but like an H-1B, it requires a job offer so it is not just an individual filing. Broadly, there are two ways to get a TN, one by applying with U.S. Customs and Border Protection with a letter from an employer and the other is for that employer to file a TN petition with USCIS. When the latter approach is taken, the employer must complete, sign, and submit forms as the petitioning (read, "sponsoring") employer and these forms are many of the same forms that an H-1B petitioning employer must submit. So, "sponsorship" by an employer is required for those seeking to work in TN status.
Appreciate the AMA. I'm curious about options for transitioning employees from the temporary (and now at-risk) Uniting for Ukraine parole status to something more stable and long term.
Is H1B lottery just going to be a Ukrainian's best bet? A lot of the advice and documentation seems contradictory, as 'parole' seems in some ways to be more a lack of status than a status itself. Leave the country and apply for some other type of more permanent work visa?
The task is to find another type of work visa, which would require departure at some point but this could be to countries other than Ukraine. For most Ukrainians, the visa options are going to limited to the regular H-1B, the cap-exempt H-1B, and the O-1.
There has been a bunch of chatter in Canadian founders whatsapp groups about people getting detained for long periods of time coming into the states either at SFO or pre-clear in Canada. Are you advising Canadians travel with any additional documentation these days?
There's no question that it's tougher now to get into the U.S., whether from Canada or another country via pre-clearance or via a land crossing, and there can be significant differences among airports and land crossings. Canadians are unique because they are visa exempt and CBP feels particularly emboldened to reassess their admissibility every time they enter. The keys are to avoid bad pre-clearance offices and land crossings and even more importantly to carry the right paperwork, which varies depending on the specific status being sought. There is also a huge difference between seeking entry as a visitor versus seeking entry as a worker with a visa, with the former much more challenging now.
The one that I frequently hear of as a layman (not a lawyer) is Toronto Pearson Airport's Preclearance, which has a very strict and narrow view of the TN Status eligible occupations.
Obviously anecdotal but I've had zero issues with preclearance at Pearson as a TN holder, both crossing and when applying for TN. They usually just ask me some combination of where I work for, what I do, and if I know when my TN expires, and that's it. My experience applying there has also been incredibly uneventful. I guess engineering is a bit easier to do though, especially if you have a strong application that's been done by lawyers.
I've been given hell by immigration about my TN when flying directly into US airports though.
Conversely, preclearance at Pearson royally screwed up my TN visa after claiming that the other ports of entries were doing it wrong. I have received multiple TN from HOU and, in general, I like the CBP at HOU. EWR was always friendly as well in my opinion. I personally prefer getting my TN at land border crossings because they tend to take the "gather all the facts" approach vs. airports have a procedural approach that feels highly dependent on the agent you get. My most recent TN was I-129 which I think is a waste of money but if someone else is paying for it and you have the luxury of waiting in the US, then it's a seamless experience.
I was thinking just for folks going down regularly on a B1, do you think it's worth having a copy of your lease or rental agreement in Canada or something similar? It seems most of the stuff I was seeing is about Canadians establishing roots using a B1.
The concerns on the part of CBP when someone is seeking admission as a B-1 business visitor are the appropriateness of the applicant's proposed activities and the applicant's ties to home/intent to return home (Canada). So you want to keep in your back pocket documents that address these concerns, such as a foreign lease agreement, foreign pay statement, and evidence of the purpose, such as a printout of the conference being attended or a letter of invitation. It's also really important to be prepared to provide specifics about your purpose, who, what, when, and where.
For example, you are allowed to withdraw your application to enter the US and leave the preclearance area. Additionally you are bound by different laws for search and siezure.
At this point I am only going to the US through preclearance areas because you are still on Canadian soil and bound by Canadian laws. That doesn’t necessarily mean that USBP won’t break those laws, but the Canadian courts get to decide if laws were broken instead of the US courts.
One thing I have not found a straight answer on yet is if USBP can compel you to unlock your electronic devices in a preclearance area. My current strategy is if I am asked to do that in preclearance I will withdraw my application to enter because Im not letting anyone access to my phone.
That makes sense. The laws about removal creating an entry ban were written before preclearance was a thing. Withdrawal is a think at normal ports to, but since you’re already they, they can force “expedited removal” instead if they want to generate a ban. But preclearance isn’t US territory so removal isn’t applicable.
Historically the US has not had much "exit control".
For example leaving the Schengen area it's obligatory to go through "exit immigration" and get your passport stamped. Leaving the US, you show your passport to the airline, but usually there is no formal immigration check at all.
That’s because the airline updates your I-94 for you. If they don’t you risk overstaying. There is a website you can use to validate that they did everything correctly.
Yeah, once upon a time you had to return your actual I-94 stamped to your passport to the airline, but today this is done automatically on the background
Especially by land. I've walked into Mexico at an official crossing with zero passport / papers check by either side. In general land and sea travel can have differing rules though, where international air travel is governed by a set of international agreements with standard rules. For instance the full passport book is required for all international air travel.
You will get your docs checked about 10 miles inland Mexico. There you will go through customs and immigration. The border zone is treated differently in Mexico. Mexican customs is very strict: two laptops and you’re taxed 25% on the second one. Technically you can’t bring an iPad and a laptop without paying taxes.
IIRC, [a long time ago?] you MUST give a piece of paper to a guy/gal near the exit, so they remember to mark your exit in the database. I don't think they check too much, just collect the pieces of papers? (I don't remember the details, but if there was a scary warning if you forget to give it and they forget to update the database.)
This is part of the Canadian border control in my experience; i.e.
- Arrive in Pearson
- go to passport control, scan passport at kiosk, kiosk spits out receipt
- you flash receipt to a border officer at the stairs out of passport control
- go to baggage claim
- get bags
- go to customs
- hand passport with receipt to officer at customs
- welcome to Canada
I haven't had that experience when leaving other countries bound for the US; like GP said, I've had to show my passport to the airline to board, but I believe that's to fulfill the requirement that they made good-faith effort to ensure I'm capable of entering the US.
Sure. Or USBP could just be waiting for you as your flight lands in the US and then immediately detain you. You have no rights in a US airport.
I have not ever heard of that happening, but if I did hear about it happening to normal people (i.e. people without a criminal warrant) I would probably stop going to the US.
nit: USBP (US Border Patrol) is not at the ports of entry. Border Patrol is for the land border _between_ ports of entry. CBP (customs and border protection) is the organization that does immigration control at the ports of entry.
I am not replying to the i94 side of this, just the "talking to" side.
There are massive data sharing agreements between US and Canada customs. US and Canadian sides can pull full criminal records, and a pardon means nothing. Exit data is shared in both directions as well.
If you are a Canadian citizen you don’t need a visa — due to the visa waiver program — for business purposes as long as your stay is less than 90 days.
You cannot be employed in the US under these conditions, but as a founder you are most likely doing things which are permitted:
* negotiating contracts
* business meetings
* board meetings
* conferences
* purchasing property in the US
As someone who is a US Citizen, what is something about the immigration process that I probably do not know about, but causes a lot of issues/could be improved.
* By law, the US can only issue 140,000 employment-based green cards per year, and no more than 7% to one country. This means people from India or China can face a 100+ year backlog, even after they have proved they qualify for a green card. There's no cap on marriage-based green cards.
* Processing times for many green cards (i.e. for people who have already qualified, but just need the physical green card), are 12-24 months.
* USCIS still expects many applications to be sent by mail. Some applications (like O-1s, EB-1s) require hundreds of pages of evidence, and it all needs to be printed out on 8.5x11" paper, for USCIS to scan it in on B+W scanners. This means that there is no error checking (e.g. on fee amounts), and if you have made a mistake, you might not know about it for weeks. Also, it means your petition cannot include working hyperlinks, webpages, or videos - the USCIS officer judges the petition by scrolling through a 400+ page PDF.
* The 'standard' post-graduate work visa is the H-1B. It's entirely lottery-based, not merit-based, and typically there are 400,000+ people competing for 85,000 visas. Many qualified people are forced to leave the US each year because they didn't get selected in the lottery.
Hyperlinks are often banned in various kinds of petitions and applications. Mostly to ensure that the entire application is submitted at once and does not change afterwards. Then you can process the application in multiple passes (maybe first for the formal requirements and then for the actual content), confident that the conclusions from the earlier passes are still valid.
The standard for employment-based permanent residency (green card) is extraordinarily high. As in, would likely place you in the top 1-5% of the most successful people in the country.
That, or you have to invest $800k and create 10 jobs.
No other country in the world requires foreigners to be significantly more qualified than its own population. You can move to France with a regular paying job no problem or just a few thousand euros in savings. Impossible in the US. You have to be extraordinary (they literally call their criteria, "extraordinary abilities") or you have to make top 5% money (so if you work in tech, that would be at least $500k-1M/year in many cases).
The only other way is to get married. This means there is a massive discrepancy between the qualifications of self made immigrants, versus those simply lucky enough to fall in love. It's pretty unfair, but that's how it works. But that's also the reason so many immigrants are so successful in the US, the bar is so high, that it creates a massive motivation to succeed to become eligible for the criteria.
> You can move to France with a regular paying job no problem or just a few thousand euros in savings
Unless something has changed dramatically in the last decade this is patently false. Getting an EU work permit was historically very hard with employers having to demonstrate that a position can't be filled by an EU citizen before a non-EU citizen candidate can be considered.
The difference in the US is that it's (comparably) extremely difficult to change status from a temporary visa to a permanent one. Even if you are highly qualified. For example the most common academic visa, the J1, is explicitly a temporary exchange program and you can't have immigrant intent (on application). Most universities won't give out academic H1Bs even though they're cap-free.
In most European countries, once you're in, you can find a way to stay. One exception I can think of is Switzerland, which can be pretty annoying for temporary visas because they don't count for time accrual.
Austria has a pretty good system (RWR) that lets you job seek and is a pathway to permanent residency as a 3rd country citizen. I think there are similar programs in France and Germany.
For example "very highly qualified" in Austria is satisfied by almost anyone with a STEM degree, being under 35 and (amazingly) being an English speaker. If you have that initial visa, companies can hire you without worrying about sponsorship.
You could also use that as a route to the Blue card I think. I wouldn't say the bar is exactly low, but a lot of mobile people are sufficiently educated and are paid enough. As in, a typical European STEM salary would cover it.
But also the grandparent's comment is out of touch. Of course countries want people who are more skilled than local labor, that's the whole point. Aside from the benefit of attracting talent and higher tax revenue, it's much harder for your voters to argue that immigrants are taking your jobs this way.
You are correct, however the criteria are a lot more relaxed in Europe comparatively. Most positions in tech, engineering and healthcare are often exempt from labor market tests. Also, there are plenty of options for "entrepreneurs" and self-employed digital nomads, often requiring some savings to prove sufficiency. I live in Portugal, and I believe the amount required when we moved was about 12k. In France, I believe it is closer to 21k (which is basically minimum wage multiplied by 12). Still dramatically easier than 800k in the US.
Indeed those are the rules but on a practical level it seems pretty simple to get a visa if the company had an even reasonably competitive process. Though I moved to Europe 12 years ago (and went through getting work permits twice), maybe it's gotten harder.
Nah it's still very easy. The logic is pretty simple. Europe could really use more talent... and the bar is quite low. Any developer/engineer of any grade will easily get a visa. Any retiree will also easily get a non-work long-term visa with just 1 year worth of minimum wage (around 20k in most of Western Europe) as savings to prove self-sufficiency. So it's extremely easy and almost a non-issue compared to the other side of the pond.
Maybe for instant green card you have to be extraordinary, but for regular employment-based immigration you don’t have to be.
The path is H1-B -> Green Card -> US citizen (I have done it), and to get H1-B your potential employer gotta post that $60-80k/year job and show that there were no qualifying US applicants for it.
Not related, but to add some woes of the american immigration system.
There is no instant green card.
If a truly extraordinary Indian-born person (say a Nobel laureate or olympic gold medalist) files for a green card today, they will be waiting for 7-10 years to get a green card. At this point, it may be worse too, because this category's priority date has not moved a single day in 8 months.
This is true, I have omitted this path because I am not so familiar with it. The trouble however is that this only works for employees, not for self-employed or startup founders. So in some way I guess they make it kind-of easier if you just get a job, versus try to create jobs... which is pretty strange?
Many countries have quite strict limitations on immigration for work. Many countries do not permit any immigration without visa sponsorship. The U.S. permits sponsored immigration with a quite reasonable bar (e.g: H1B, L-1). Many countries have similar lottery systems, quotas and minimum salary requirements. Given the demand for immigration into the U.S., it's not too surprising to see the limits (and restrictions) be more prominent.
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is the extraordinary ability does not have to germane to your employment. I am aware of the the story of Gabby Franco - who appeared on a season of Top Shot years ago. She was on the Venezuela Olympic pistol team for the 2000 Summer Olympics in Australia. This status as an Olympian got her entry into the USA and eventually citizenship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar%C3%ADa_Gabriela_Franco
For me, I have about 15 30-minute calls each day with existing and potential clients during which we discuss their chances of getting temporary work visas or green cards and issues around international travel. The rest of the time, I'm reviewing applications and responding to emails from staff and clients. It sounds pretty mundane but despite the stresses of the job and the challenges associated with the new administration, I still really enjoy what I do because I have a wonderful team and I get to interact with really smart people doing super interesting things and help them realize their dream of living and working in the U.S.
Good question. There are a lot of repeat issues but because every person's background is different and every person's circumstances are different, every case is different, which keeps our work challenging and interesting.
Have people gotten into trouble for having a nearly empty phone when they get searched? Like using a burner phone or doing a factory reset prior to the trip. I've wondered if that would be considered suspecious.
At least one person has been subject to secondary screening and ultimately denied entry on the accusation that they had two phones.
> I thought I was just going to be given my passport and sent on my way, or maybe asked a couple of questions, but they made some pretty outlandish accusations. They said, ‘We know you have two mobile phones. We’ve been tracking your calls. We know you’ve been selling drugs’.
Oh my god, the story/stories from that post are awful. I didn't know it had came to the point where people with valid visas could be detained, rejected and visas cancelled. :(
If an individual is transgender, not a US citizen, and has a passport with an updated gender marker (or X), can they still get a visa? Or is submitting an official document with "wrong information" enough for a refusal?
The short answer is Yes, this individual can still get a U.S. visa. But I'd still recommend that this person speak with an attorney before applying for a visa or traveling to the U.S.
I was under the impression that guidance from the state department allows border agents to deny visas to visitors whose “apparent sex differs from sex at birth.” Moreover, “misrepresenting sex” (whatever that means) could be grounds for permanent refusal of entry, by this guidance.
It's not normal. The vast majority of people travelling to other countries do not consult with an attorney before doing so. By recommending that someone consult an attorney Mr. Roberts has effectively cautioned this person against travelling to the US without politicizing the discussion.
I got a work visa to live in Luxembourg and a visa to work in India and in neither case did I consult with a lawyer, the process was well documented and easy to do.
It is a sign a deeply adversarial country if you send the signal you need legal consultation to work or live there.
I’m not the person you’re replying to, but I’m interested in your response to your own question if you’re up for sharing.
My uninformed opinion if you want it: No, it’s not normal for someone to speak to an attorney before traveling. That question is a tad rigged though since I do find it normal to talk to an attorney if you’re doing something abnormal[0] to a legal document, especially to a legal document used to (ideally) rigorously confirm your identity.
[0] uncommon is likely a better choice of words, but I hope the added indirection isn’t necessary in this format of discussion
Hey Peter! I'm going to pose a question that I think is tangential, but still related.
With genAI and LLMs making way into every profession, how much of an impact have you seen on the immigration law side? Have these style of tools made your job easier, or are they adding more confusion and uncertainty?
Given the rapidly changing landscape (on the immigration side; what is valid today may not be valid tomorrow, and everything seems kind of up to the best guess of the practitioner) do you see these tools (potentially) causing more harm than good (to specific individual cases)?
I'm probably the last person to provide advice about technology but AI is helping immigration attorneys significantly, primarily in the drafting of arguments. That being said, there's still a critical role to be played by immigration attorneys to determine the best strategy, to provide advice on travel and other issues, and ultimately to review and edit anything that is "drafted" by AI.
I have a US passport and am a naturalized US citizen however due to some sort of clerical error my passport says I was born here (even though you have to staple your immigration cert to the passport application). I never even noticed it until I'd been in and out of the country a few times, my passport is about to expire and I'm worried about having trouble trying to get it fixed, what course of action should I take, I'd really like to have a valid US passport.
FWIW I had the wrong US state on my passport for a long time. Not sure how that happened but it didn't cause any issues traveling at all.
I called the national passport line for advice about this when renewing, and they said to mail in the correction form the other commenter linked along with the renewal form. I also included a letter explaining that I wanted the passport renewed, but that it had my wrong birth state, and I wanted that corrected along with the renewal.
A legally-uneducated read of 22 CFR 51.62 suggests that the State Department can revoke a passport that was "illegally, fraudulently, or erroneously obtained."
How likely would you consider the idea that the current administration would revoke existing passports for transgender Americans under the pretense that they were "fraudulently or erroneously" obtained under processes put in place by previous administrations?
The issue is whether a misrepresentation was material and whether it was done with the intent to mislead. I don't know the data because we're still early in this administration but a concern has been that the administration will increase efforts to reopen and revoke naturalization, which happened during his last administration.
One could make that argument, except that until the Trump administration the US government has made no distinction between sex and gender when it comes to sex markers. A transgender woman is a transexual woman is legally female. They have explicitly allowed updating passports and had a process of providing documentation from courts and doctors to prove that one has transitioned. So no one obtained anything erroneously or fraudulently and in fact were very upfront about it.
Where it gets awkward for everyone involved is when you have a trans woman say who is recognized female on her birth certificate and by her state now coming in conflict with a federal government that suddenly doesn't respect that. Where it gets even awkwarder-r is more trans people pass than people assume and it would cause more issues to have their chromosomal sex listed on their ID than not. If my friend who is a trans woman walked into the men's bathroom they would be like, "hey lady this is the men's."
Hi Peter,
I’m currently on year 3 of H1B, and my company filed this march for the 3 year extension (with premium processing), which got approved.
Concurrently, they also filed form i539 for my wife on H4 to extend her status (her current visa stamp and status expire in July this year). She has no EAD as I don’t have an approved i140.
Her request is still pending, and given current processing times it likely still will be when her status expire.
To complicate things, we travelled outside the US for 10 days while her request was pending (after receiving the green light from my company lawyers saying it wouldn’t impact the i539).
Reading online we got mixed results, so we’re not sure if she can stay in the US until her i539 is approved, or if having left the country for a short period might cause USCIS to consider her application abandoned.
We could have her travel and to make arrangements for a consulate appointment before July, but we’d like to avoid that if possible.
My understanding is that is a bit of a legal gray area, so I wanted to hear your thoughts.
If USCIS is paying attention, it will treat her departure as abandonment of her H-4 extension application. So it's important that she check her I-94 admission record to see when her current H-4 status expires and make sure that she departs before it expires or that she files a new I-539 before it expires.
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA! I'm an EU citizen. I got my H1B in late 2023, but ended up not moving to the US after all. When I travel to the US for short business trips (same employer as back then), should I enter using this H1B or ESTA? And could this unused H1B become an issue now that there seems to be increased scrutiny at the border? Thank you.
That depends on a number of factors, such as your activities/purpose when you are in the U.S. (whether these activities constitute "employment" and if so whether they are in line with your H-1B position and job duties), your compensation when you are in the U.S. (are you getting paid and if so, how much and by whom), etc. The question here really is whether H-1B work authorization is required or whether ESTA business travel is fine.
Does being "busted" by Customs (i.e. carrying some items that should be declared, but going, and being pulled of from "Nothing to declare" lane) affects admission to the US at all?
I was let go with just a warning for my "offense", but still the customs officer took my passport and make some note in the system. Should I expect secondary inspection next time I cross the border?
Yes, you probably will be pulled into secondary again but you should be able to get this cleared up in connection with future travel by filing a "complaint" with DHSTRIP. But you should only submit a complaint if and when it happens again; you shouldn't submit one preemptively now.
See the ACLU guidance referenced in a previous comment. There's no right to counsel during routine admission. The right only arises when arrested or being investigated for a crime.
But you can (and should) ask if you're being detained on suspicion of a specific (criminal) offense, or not (e.g. officer wants to doublecheck your story, or background, or thinks there are irregularities), or (esp. for non-citizen) refusing to consent to unlocking your devices.
The answer to the above should give you some idea what's likely to happen, and what CBP has flagged you for, if anything.
Maybe a dumb question, but... I'm a Canadian who would qualify for a TN visa if I worked in the States, but don't currently have a visa or green card. On the online submission form for job openings, it always asks "Are you legally entitled to work in the US?". Am I meant to answer yes or no to that?
Unfortunately, the correct answer is No because until you have the TN, you are not legally entitled to work in the U.S. Of course, this means that you will be excluded automatically for consideration of certain jobs.
Not a lawyer but have been working in the US on a TN status for multiple employers and I would answer yes and discuss further with the recruiter or hiring manager.
TN status is conceivably something you could get without help from the employer (though even the smallest startup hired one to help me set up a package). What you need is basically proof that a company wants to hire you (offer letter), evidence that the company exists, and proof that you fall in one of the TN occupations.
Also not a lawyer, but wanted to second what jsbg said.
I've been through this process many times, and I would always say yes and then mention with the recruiter (even if I had to explain that the process was basically "asking politely for permission at the border").
The underlying question that employers really care about is "will you be legally allowed to accept a job offer without unexpected expenses or delays". Even if you file through USCIS (and not petition at the point of entry), you can (should) have an answer in 14 days and ~2k in fees, which is 1) a drop in the bucket for any hiring budget, and 2) not impactful to a hiring timeline.
Employers are subject to substantial penalties if they hire someone who is not legally permitted to work. I think they are woried about more than unexpected delays, though I admit I'm way out of my sphere of knowledge on this subject.
To be clear, I meant "unexpected delays (to work legally)". As in, waiting a year to submit, and hope for, an H1B to be issued, vs waiting 2 weeks for a TN to be approved.
No portion of my initial comment should have been interpreted to mean that employers do not do their own due diligence after actually hiring someone.
Hi Peter! Thank you for this!! A while back, ~10 months, I was rejected from a B1 visa in the US. However, I have now secured admission from Stanford and would need to apply for an F1 visa.
What can I do to make my case strong and ensure that the previous visa application does not affect my current F1 process?
Unless there was a finding of fraud or misrepresentation, the previous denial shouldn't impact your F-1 visa application; the requirements/standards are different. That being said, because so much is at stake for you, I would recommend that you get an attorney involved. It should just involve one or two consultations so the cost shouldn't be much.
I'm in the US using E-3 visa since July 2024, working as a software engineer for a smallish non-faang company. I am fully remote in the Bay area and there is no office, but technically the company is based in NYC. New hiring for SWEs is outside the US. There haven't been layoffs in the last 12 months and it doesn't seem like there will be.
What is the best way for me to pursue a green card? I am aware that E-3 is not the ideal path, but is workable with some risks. My main concern is the state of the SWE market, with so many candidates looking for work.
I expect that any labour market test will fail as there will be suitable US candidates that appear. Is there any way to navigate this situation? What are the chances of success in this market? Would joining a big-tech company help?
Broadly, an E-3 visa holder can pursue a green card and we sponsor a lot but there are potential issues, most notably, when seeking to renew an E-3 visa while in the green card process. Alternatives to the PERM (labor market test) based green process are the national interest waiver and extraordinary ability paths, which are not tied to a specific job/employer but require a high level of achievement.
Not a lawyer but I went through exactly this route back in the Obama administration so it may have changed. But even then there were questions about whether you could file an I-485 while on what was technically a nonimmigrant intent temporary visa (this includes E3 and TN). There were a lot of people who said it wasn't possible. Those people were wrong.
Here's how I approached it: when my PERM was approved, I immediately went and renewed my E#. This required a trip out of the country. I went back to Australia. My employer was amenable. This was to avoid being out of status or needing a renewal when my I-485 was pending.
One thing to note is that the application for the E-3 doesn't ask you "do you intend to immigrate?". It asks "Have you filed an I-485?" and at that point I could truthfully answer no because I hadn't.
I arrived back in the US and almost immediately filed the I-140 and I-485 concurrently.and applied for EAD and Advanced Parole. Those arrived within a few months.
The only wart was USCIS asked me to file an extra form giving up my diplomatic rights because other E visas are for diplomats. My lawyer said this really wasn't necessary but the best path was simply to give it to them. I think I got my green card after 8 months.
Thanks Peter. I'm very unremarkable as a software engineer, no publications or anything like that either. It's unlikely I would qualify for NIW or O-1.
You seem to agree that PERM would be problematic in these times? Maybe you are seeing failures too? My thinking is that I don't want to try to persuade my employer to start the sponsorship process but then fail the market test (potentially repeatedly). Some SWEs are being successful in this though, so I'm wondering if it's also down to having a good law firm handle the process.
Unfortunately, if you get laid off while in L-1B status before you are able to file an I-485 application, which is the last step in the green card process, you would need get no benefit from the PERM/green card process and would need to take an action within 60 days of the end of your employment to be able to remain in the U.S., by filing some type of application with USCIS. PERM processing is still really slow, over a year, but I'm seeing some indications that this might improve.
qq and i'm double checking what my own immigration lawyer has already told me just because i'm nervous on this point. Is filing the i-485 the point at which you can stay?
I've filed an i-485 via US spouse and waiting to hear back but the 60day period is looming and obviously nervous on this point.
Unfortunately, the approved I-140 EB1C is no help here; for you to be able to stay past your 60 days grace period, you will need to get sponsored for another work visa (likely the O-1 but you need to have a discussion with an attorney) or file an application to change your status to B-2 visitor status during the grace period.
Hi Peter, Im currently on H1B with I-140 approved. Im thinking of starting my own company and have other co-founders who are US citizens / GC holders. What is the path for me to have a visa while also being able to start my company.
Because you have cofounders, an H-1B might work. The other option is the O-1. You should schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney to determine the best path.
From my limited perspective, No although I have clients who have decided not to open operations in the U.S. and/or transfer employees to the U.S. because of the political situation.
They've just decided that they don't want to be in the U.S. in the current environment. They just don't see it as good place for their business or their employees.
My I-140 was approved in June 2013 under the EB2 category (H1B). I later downgraded to EB3 and filed my I-485 when my priority date became current back in 2021. I received my EAD in 2022 and have been working on EAD since then.
According to the current visa bulletin, my priority date is expected to become current soon. However, I have a couple of concerns:
The job title I had when I filed the I-485 is different from my current role.
I have also changed employers since then.
I understand that I may need to submit a new I-485J.
Given that I was promoted and my current title is significantly different from the one in my original petition, could this pose any challenges to my I-485 application?
Yes, you and your current employer need to file an I-485J if proceeding based on the approved EB3 petition but whether you will have an issue because of the change in positions will need to be analyzed (although you probably are fine). Does your employer have an immigration attorney because this is something that he or she should analyze?
Yes, my employer does have an immigration attorney. I applied 485 as a Programmer Analyst. But now I work as a Director, Applications with a more diverse application suite than what I originally worked on. The labor and wage and roles/ responsibilities will not create any problems ?
Not yet. The main changes that we're seeing are with CBP at the ports of entry. CBP is being much more aggressive in questioning those seeking admission, including searching electronic devices and even detaining applicants. But nearly all our filings are still getting approved.
I've been through customs all over the world for the past forty years, and US customs are some of the worst human beings I've ever encountered. Why is that function such a shit show?
Very familiar with the need for LEO dumping grounds, especially at the federal level, so that's been my working assumption but I've never asked.
Because it can be, and nearly every administration has a ‘tough on illegal immigration’ stance - because the US is so desirable to go to.
A good Great Depression economic reset + insane facist government will reset that a little - but it will still be better than a huge number of places on the globe. Even if the gov’t targets immigrants.
A huge number of places with massive populations of people who would love to come over.
Currently living in the US, I applied for a green card via marriage (partner is GC holder) in March 2023. I received my AP and EAD over a year ago, but there has been zero movement on the I-485..
What are the options here?
Given the current political climate, I'm not comfortable leaving the US until I have the I-485. Is this fear warranted? Would really like to travel overseas, but don't want to end up getting detained on re-entry..
I understand the above is specific to my case, but perhaps you can answer in a general sense for anyone else who finds themselves in a similar position..
Without knowing all the facts, the delay probably is simply the result in the backlog in that green card category. Is your spouse eligible to become a U.S. citizen because this could speed up the process for you. Again without knowing all the facts, regarding travel, you are fine to travel; just carry your passport, advance parole, and marriage certificate (in your back pocket).
It's super easy (the form is N-400 and instructions are on the USCIS website) and doesn't require the assistance of an attorney unless the applicant has a criminal record or has been outside the U.S. for extended periods of time while a green card holder (that is, more than 6 months at a stretch).
When it comes to Canadians working in the US on a TN, are we allowed to accept promotions (title, comp or both) without going through reapproval of our visa? Are there any nuances here like caps on how high a salary increase could be before needing a reassessment? Maybe increases in equity don’t count?
Also if the reassessment is denied does your original visa still remain valid or are you risking it all for the promotion?
There's a lot more flexibility in the TN context than in the H-1B context so generally it's not an issue to get an inline promotion as long as the core job duties remain the same as or similar to the job duties in the initial application.
I'm currently a Swiss national on E2 with my own biz but looking at partnering with an American (the form could be a partnership or S-corp but it's not set in stone.. Recommendations welcome. State of CO or potentially Wyoming). All the work I do for them currently is consulting under my biz (SMLLC) as investment but apart from my biz paying for some PCB manufacturers there's no flow of money, just a lot of time.
Now my current E2 business has only me as an employee and I'm not sure how the chances of renewal look in 1.5 years if stays that way. End goal is a good partnership on the new venture and US citizenship but AFAIK there's no path from E2. Do you recommend reapplying for a new E2 with the new venture or extend the current one or something else entirely?
From what I understand from the last E2 is that the embassy prefers majority control from the treaty investor which we'd have to discuss if that's a hard requirement
There is an argument that it is harder to renew an E-2 visa when there are no employees and limited revenues than to get a new E-2 visa when there are no employees and limited revenues because a new E-2 is forward looking/potential. But I'd have to dig in deeper to the facts to make a firmer assessment. Regarding majority control, that's not correct; it's enough if your ownership is just 50%.
My wife recently got her O1 visa approved and I'll be getting an O3 as dependent. I currently have an app that I'm actively developing that generates $50-$100 per month. I might be able to stop development, but at the very least would need to support the customers. I also have some product ideas I'd like to build and potentially monetize.
Add thousands of immigration judges and CBP officers to improve the asylum process and improve the conditions of those going through the process, particularly children, do away with H-1B quotas, and do away with green card quotas and change to a point-based green card system.
I am on H1b visa and my partner is on H4 dependent visa. On H4, my partner wants to open a startup but is afraid if I lose my job then she has to stop working on the H4 visa as well.
I have my cousin who has a green card who is willing to be part of it, but I don't want to dependent on them.
Being a founder is often a path to an O-1 visa so if your partner opens her startup and it does "well," then the O-1 might be an option for her if you lose your job. There's also an E-2 investor visa, which is another potential option for founders.
Doesn't matter since the EB1A requires a separate assessment that is not tied to the underlying status. But between the two, because of the inability to travel on an O-1 visa while in the last stage of the green card process, the H-1B is slightly better.
I asked this question in the first place because I heard/read that an EB1A application is a little more likely to be accepted if you already possess an O-1 visa. The reasoning behind this being the similarity in the eligibility requirements for the O-1 and EB1A applications make them more “compatible”.
It’s not true. There are two steps to EB-1A: the statutory criteria, functionally identical to the O-1, and a final merits determination where the examiner evaluates the totality of evidence to determine if you belong to the small percentage at the top of your field. This is a far higher bar than O-1. Additionally, each petition before USCIS is evaluated independently, except for subsequent O-1 petitions with substantially similar facts. In such cases, USCIS policy and the APA’s prohibition on arbitrary and capricious action generally require approval absent extraordinary circumstances.
Are O1 visa applications getting significantly more scrutiny nowadays?
I comfortably qualify for one, based on the USCIS criteria, but my employer (big tech company, big law firm for immigration) wants to wait one more year for another H1B attempt before trying this.
Hence I am wondering if switching jobs could potentially help here.
Big tech is risk averse and avoids pursuing O-1s unless there's no other option and the candidate/employee is highly valued. But I haven't seen any change yet in the adjudication of O-1 petitions. Nearly all our O-1 petitions still get approved and when we receive a Request for Additional Evidence (or RFE), the issues raised are the same issues that were raised before January 2025.
Is it true that most big tech companies and possibly the startups you work with strongly prefer H-1B transfers over candidates who might have held an H-1B in the past (with an approved I-140), but are currently on a B-2? In your experience/opinion, is such a situation disadvantageous to the candidate's competitiveness in attaining employment at these coveted companies?
If the company is paying attention and knows what it's doing, then the interim B-2 status of a candidate shouldn't matter; at worst, it just means that the candidate might have to depart and reenter to activate his or her H-1B status with the new employer.
O1 is an inferior visa, so they are right that you should be trying for H1B before going for an O1. I'm assuming that you are on OPT or some other visa category. There is likely no advantage to getting an O1 in your current situation.
Yeah, if your F1 expires before your OPT, it makes sense to try for an O1. It's a minor expense for the company. Escalate it through your management chain.
Do L1B visa holders have reasonable chance of getting compelling circumstances EAD if their visa date isn't current for EB-3? I'm wondering if I should suggest that option for HR when they file the I-140 (or after if it's approved, whatever the process is).
USCIS rarely issues I-140 EADs based on compelling circumstances unless there are government/national interests at stake or significant humanitarian issues.
Okay, thanks. I was primarily wondering due to "Significant Disruption to the Employer" seems to be one of the possible categories and it's description sounded similar to reasons why one would get L1B visa.
Are you seeing a downturn in people trying to come here for work. It's a shame, but I don't think any rational person should try to come here to study or work right now.
Gone are the days of attending a community college and dating girls from Korea and Japan.
And I can't blame anyone for not wasting to be destined indefinitely for trivial reasons.
Your comment is about coming for work or study, yet you linked to a story of someone who clearly abused/misused a tourist visa and got caught. It was an egregious enough offense that the Canadian immigration officials wouldn't even let her enter Canada under the same pretense, which is what eventually led to her arrest.
The woman is effectively a British nanny who did chores for friends. She doesn't look like a threat to anyone.
Maybe your afraid of British nannies baking pies and changing litter boxes, I'm not.
Anyway, the proper solution at most is a life time ban and the first flight home.Not indefinite detention.
To be burnt, this is a white woman who natively speaks English. If she's having a hard time, it doesn't bold well for anyone else.
Numerous other examples exist, in most of these cases people either didn't do anything wrong or it's something that could have been rectified with a quick flight home.
The German person you link to was attempting to enter the US to work as a tattoo artist which is not allowed under tourist visa programs. I actually think the law should be more flexible and this kind of casual work should be allowed. However the law as it currently stands doesn't allow it and they were "correctly" denied entry.
The reason this person wasn't put on a "quick flight home" is because they (along with the British person) were detained at a land port of entry so there's no option to send them straight back.
In general, I think two things are simultaneously true. One is that Trump is cracking down on immigration. The second is that the media are suddenly reporting on a lot of cases -- like the German and British women -- that aren't actually new but were happening under Biden. It's just now the media has an angle and narrative such that these cases are deemed report worthy.
The net effect is your talking about putting non criminals in detention facilities rife with human rights violations.
As a hypothetical, if you can visit two countries and one offers the risk of indefinite detainment , which is roughly dependent on how behind the customs officials are on their quotas. Or another country that at most will just send you home, I think most will pick the country that just sends people home.
They can figure out a way to get people to Venezuela faster than due process, they can figure out a way to get a British nanny back to London without detaining her indefinitely.
how about denying them entry, and turning them back to the country they were entring from (Mexico in your example), so that they can fly back home from there?
I have a company in my home country with revenues of $200k/year with 12 transactions per year from US clients. Can I apply for an E1 treaty trader visa and what are my chances of success?
I'm a Canadian moving to the US under TN status. Im looking for tax advice on what to do with my TFSAs and my American income, planning on returning to Canada in a few years. I've struggled to find an accountant who seems to really know what they're talking about. Any tips?
Also, the moving company wants me to get a visa before they book my movers, but the TN status thing happens at the port of entry. Can I get the TN status now even if I don't start for another 6 weeks? Can I get the TN "visa" from a consulate even as a Canadian citizen?
Regarding a tax accountant, email me and I can refer you a few good ones. Regarding the TN, the employer could file a petition with USCIS and then you could present the approval notice to the moving company but this process takes longer and is a lot more expenses (and also riskier from an outcome standpoint, depending on the position and your education) than the other path, applying at a port of entry. There's no longer advance approval at ports of entry so going this route means that you will need to get the TN and commence employment, even if just for a very limited period of time, before relocating to the U.S. with your stuff and then returning to Canada to actually move your stuff.
Hi Peter, I was checking my I-94 recently, and noticed that my travel history is missing one trip, an arrival. Basically, it lists two departures in row, couple months apart. Does it matter? and is there any way to fix it?
It doesn't matter unless it matters, which it doesn't appear to; the issue in an I-94 history is when a timely departure isn't recorded, not an arrival. There's also no effective way to fix this error.
Recent change to H1B allow organizations that conduct research "as a fundamental activity" to be eligible for cap exemption status. Can you kindly share your opinion on this?
I don't think this has really expanded the organizations that qualify legally for cap exempt status (we essentially argued this before) but rather signifies a greater openness/flexibility on the part of USCIS to approve organizations as cap exempt organizations. Query, however, whether this openness/flexibility will continue.
With widespread layoffs in the tech industry, it’s worth asking what role is immigration really playing in meeting labor market needs? Are there truly skill shortages in the U.S.?
Many argue that programs like H-1B are less about addressing talent gaps and more about cutting labor costs. What’s your take?
In its current form, does the program actually protect the interests of the domestic workforce? Is it filling a legitimate labor need that can’t be met internally - or is it primarily structured to benefit investors looking to inflate stock prices?
I'm sure that there is abuse but from my limited perspective, I see employers using the H-1B program because they can't find qualified U.S. workers or because a foreign national is the best candidate. In essence, your question is whether the H-1B program protects the wages of U.S. workers and my feeling is that in practice, it neither protects nor undermines these wages.
Good afternoon. I am taking a break now and will return later this afternoon/evening to respond to any comments and answer any questions. Thank you everyone for a great and engaged AMA so far.
Can you clarify the current status of the U4U program? Is it limited to TPS only, or are there other pathways available? Also, what do you think the government’s broader intentions are with U4U?
Hey Peter, what are your thoughts on networks states and the methods tech CEOS and VCs are using to push the working class towards Techno feudalism? Do you think Peter Thiel using Palantir to mine US tax payers information, to help drive and target innocent civilians towards their vision, is legal? Should the constitution exist or do we need to be conquered and lead by monarchies? Most importantly, do you believe the supreme court should exist to serve its purpose in our system of checks and balances?
Certainly :) Immigration is actually directly related to how CEOs and VC intend to change the landscape for all things government related, and democracy as a whole. There is very much a subjective intent to tear down the rule of law, the rights that safeguard Americans as a whole, starting with immigration. IT's an entry point, a target to whittle away basic rights of the average American. Peter Thiel touches on this need for a tech revolution in his paper "The Straussian Moment", https://www.hoover.org/research/peter-thiel-straussian-momen..., who also funded JD Vance's rise to VP. These guys love the concepts written in Sirrivassan's book "the Network State", and want to replace our current government with distributed monarchies. Sirrivassan, Thiel, Andresen, and Curtis Yarvin actually have a documented plan to achieve this which is being executed, to a "T", which involves attacking immigration, not just as a distraction so they can attack the courts directly, but also cause it's part of their vision. Curtis Yarvin's writings include pointed attacks on immigration, both as a policy and as a reflection of deeper systemic problems. He uses immigration as an example to argue for the failure of democracy and to advocate for his preferred model of authoritarian governance. He also frames immigration debates as distractions from what he sees as the real issues-namely, the incompetence and self-serving nature of current elites and institutions.
How common is it for pre-Series A startups to sponsor H1Bs? What's the process like for EB2 on the PERM route, and how difficult is it to be successful in that process?
No issues whatsoever with respect to H-1B sponsorship but potential issues with respect to green card applications, particularly PERM-based applications because of the ability pay requirement and because of issues related to ownership/equity held by the employee.
A company sponsoring an employee for a green card must show that it has the ability to pay the offered wage and this is more complicated when the company just has funding and no revenues or limited revenues. Also if the sponsored employee owns more than 5% of the company, USCIS could question whether recruitment process was done in good faith.
I'm a Brazilian citizen with an associate-equivalent degree and 15 years of experience in software engineering. I have an offer from a FAANG company for an IC4 position but I need to relocate to the US. Do I have any chances to get a work visa? I don't have patents, publications, or spoken at conferences.
For the H-1B, it's really just getting selected in the lottery, the actual substantive requirements aren't difficult; the J-1 is easy but with limited exceptions it's not supposed to be used for regular employment.
Thank you for clarification. I wonder if there is any stat on how many initial H1B applicants make it to the lottery list to be selected. Is the process straightforward or does government/Labor Dept challenges a certain percentage of applicants.
An E-2 would require some investment ($100k+) but Dutch citizens or Dutch-owned VCs but if this investment exists, then an E-2 could be a very good option. The other option would be the O-1 and as a founder of company that has had a good round of seed funding, you might qualify.
1) My son who turned 14 this year is a gc holder. Does he need to go for the biometrics to register. I am asking this question, since the government page talks about visa only.
2) One of my relatives went out country has valid green card and overstayed beyond 6 months and he was able to come back fortunately. However, he is skeptical to visit out of country now due to his previous overstay. Do you think he can visit ? He has valid gc.
Hi Peter - I'm on H1-B and not eligible for EB-1/2 or O-1. I filed for EB-5 through an RC and just got my EAD and I want to use that to start a startup in the US. If the underlying EB-5 petition is rejected after the startup is established, do you know if there is a path to re-sponsoring my H1-B through my own startup? I'm trying to understand whether I should wait for a proper green card before going down the startup route.
Hi Peter, thank you for this AMA.
I've been a green card holder for 1 year as the result of working for big tech in the US, originally via getting a L1-B 3.5 years ago. I'm planning on moving back to my home country in Europe permanently. Is there any way I can keep my green card or at least keep it for longer in case I start a startup in Europe and want to also have a US presence? I'm a Portuguese citizen.
Yes, there is a way to keep a green card while living outside the U.S. although at some point, if the green card holder truly has no intent of returning to the U.S., he or she will lose the green card. The protection is known as a reentry permit and the form used to apply for it is Form I-131. It's an easy application.
Thanks, Peter! What's the most viable visa for European to-be founders looking to move to the US (without affiliation to any institution / accelerator)?
I've been considering (a) going on a M-1 or F-1 master's student visa while working remotely my non-US company or (b) applying for an E1 Treaty Investor Visa. Are there other routes I haven't considered, and are there any unclear watch-outs around these two routes?
For European founders, the O-1, E-2, and E-1 are the most common options, each with its own requirements. What you propose while on an M-1 or F-1 visa really isn't appropriate.
For the most part, O-1 filings for the founders or employees of startups are no more difficult than the O-1 filings for employees of established/large companies; the main issue is "distinguished reputation" (a component of one of the O-1 criteria), which can be harder for startups to show.
For a foreigner living outside of the US but interested in immigrating to the US in the longer term. Is it possible file the I-140, and while the application is being processed (or waiting for the priority date) apply for another nonimmigrant visa (B, F or J) for short term visit? Is it likely the application will be denied because of the "immigration intent" after filing the I-140?
Hello! I do have concerns relating to the U.S. so I will put my questions out there.
I know somebody who is a U.S. citizen, however they are originally from Perú. They have official citizenship meaning they went through the whole process and gotten those documents.
Are they at risk of losing their citizenship and being deported with the current administration's standing on immigration?
> Are they at risk of losing their citizenship and being deported with the current administration's standing on immigration?
No, they are not. I know this kind of thing is being circulated in social and traditional media. It is pure fear mongering and completely disconnected from reality. Stop listening to idiots trying to create FUD.
Oh well that's good to hear that they aren't at risk. But on that note, I suppose I shall further scrutinize my social media feeds, I might get off them for good.
I'm curious what gaps you see in firm operation software?
I work in legal tech and from what I've seen all of the software focuses on tasks and artifacts (e.g. the many AI letter drafters) as opposed to holistically understanding / optimizing business operation.
Does this fit your sense of the software landscape? Are there other opportunities here beyond case management etc?
Have a friend who quit his job and overstayed his TN visa during The Pandemic. After going back to Canada for visiting family, his next visit to the US was denied at CBP, and he was given a 10 year entry ban with option to appeal at a facility across the river from Buffalo, NY. What are his options? Is this situation fixable with a new work visa?
A work visa/status won't help. He has to deal with the overstay issue first, which he should be able to fix since presumably his overstay happened because he was unable to travel/depart before his status expired.
Are there any difficulties in obtaining TN Visas related to the stage of the sponsor company?
More specifically, is it feasible for a Canadian operating startup to open a US entity and employ Canadian engineers under the TN Visa category? This would be an early stage non-VC backed company, but profitable and paying above prevailing market wage.
Hi Peter, thank you so much for doing this AMA! I'm currently trying to decide whether to appeal an EB1A decision - they agreed to meeting "plain language" for 3 criteria, but denied the application on final merit.
What kind of considerations would you advise your clients to think of when making this decision?
It's impossible for me to say without reviewing the filing and the decision but the final merits analysis is incredibly subjective and discretionary so generally speaking, appealing on this issue is not a good idea. Again, generally speaking, understanding and fixing the deficiencies in the initial filing/evidence and refiling is the better approach.
I'm looking to sponsor a family member (brother) to immigrate to the USA, have been told sibling sponsorship takes too long.
What is the minimum credible investment one is likly to need in order to apply for an E2 investment visa? What are the most common types of investments the USA government will find credible for approval?
That's correct, it could take at least 10 years through sibling sponsorship. The E-2 visa isn't available to everyone, it depends on the individual's country of citizenship, but if it was available to him, then an investment of $100k could be enough. But definitely consult with an immigration attorney because there are a number of requirements for the E-2 visa.
I'm a US Citizen who married a citizen of New Zealand, we met while she was a international student studying CS at the school I was studying at. Since graduating, we moved back to New Zealand.
Over a year ago we filed a for I-130 to move towards her getting a Green Card and being able to live with me in the US.
Right now the USCIS website estimates that it will be another 20 months until our form is processed. This seems like an absurd amount of time? I've tried reaching out to the White House, who passed my case onto USCIS, who told me to pound sand, and to my congressional representatives, who told me they would "look into it".
Is there anything I can do to move this process along?
Not much more, unfortunately. You could file a mandamus action which might help but also might just be a waste of $5k to $10k. Another option is for her to get some type of work visa and then for you to sponsor her when she's here on that work visa.
If there is a travel ban, then the specifics of the ban will matter (countries impacted, whether LPRs and citizens are exempt, etc.) but absent a travel ban, I still think it's fine to travel. Just be prepared to have your devices searched and your political views questioned.
Hello, I'm currently on an H1B waiting on my priority date (I'm Canadian but born in China), my H1B hits the 6 year mark next year. My wife is currently on a TN which expires next year.
Should she switch to H4 EAD under my H1B instead of renewing her TN?
She has not filed a green card application so she probably won't have an issue renewing her TN but if CBP or USCIS connects her to you, questions might be raised about her intent which could undermine her ability to renew her TN. So, yes, an H-4 EAD would be safer (unless the current administration kills this benefit).
Given YC asks founders to apply for a batch just a few weeks (or months) before each batch starts, I am wondering if you run into issues with timing. Do you see issues with visa delays etc, that can cause founders to miss their batch?
Most consulates are willing to schedule expedited appointments for YC founders but still if you are an applicant for an accelerator and don't have a B-1 visa and are not from a visa waiver/ESTA country, then at a minimum, you should book a visa application appointment now.
Do you have any insights into how processing times are going to be going forward for legal immigration? USCIS is self-funded but hearing talk that the government seems to want to engage in their cost trimming layoffs anyway?
I used to go to a as a simple tourist on the basis that we were trying to raise capital for a telecom start up. Delaware C, SVB bank account. They just asked questions and let me in for 6 months. Anything changed?
That is still an acceptable basis for admission as a business visitor but you need to be prepared to provide detail about your meetings and provide documentation regarding your intended activities, ability to support yourself while here, and ties to your home country.
As a practitioner do you feel that it was a waste of time to have studied the law? As you say, it is "rapidly changing", meaning the jurisprudence may not have been as majestic as students were led to believe.
The main thing you learn in law school is not the substantive law but how to analyze facts and issues and to understand the law and its application to specific facts.
What do you think about Nexus... Do you think Nexus holders enjoy the best of both worlds, less hassle at the border, 2 citizenships for 1 type of thing (but not really) as long as you don't have criminal charges?
Are marriage-based green card applications still being processed at some pace when the petitioner's spouse is also a green card holder? I hear these days this category is ultra slow with no option to expedite.
Hello Mr Roberts
What happens if a positive asylum is not granted with a USCIS agent and the NOID is issued? Which could be the scenarios and also what happens if the appointment is before the 150 days. Thanks
Hello! I do have concerns relating to the U.S. so I will put my questions out there.
I know somebody who is a U.S. citizen, however they are originally from Perú.
They have official citizenship meaning they went through the whole process and gotten those documents.
Are they at risk of losing their citizenship and being deported with the current administration standing on immigration?
And a separate question(You don't have to answer this, but I will ask it however)
Is this anything I can do about this? I'm not willing to see myself worse off in 4 years after this situation.
And I want to do something about it, I'm aware you are just an attorney; but I haven't been able to find an answer nor think of an answer to what I could do; but I really want to do something about this, so what could I do?
Is asking about Recurse Center on-topic? I wanted to apply, but I genuinely don't consider it safe to travel to the US. As far as I can tell there is no comparable bootcamp-style retreat in EU :(
That is helpful to me! How did it work? I imagine a lot of RC interactions are kind of spontaneous, and I never understood how that would translate over the internet.
As an Spanish national and resident, can I found my company in the US without having any employee there? Would I be able to hire myself with a method other than Deel/Remote/others?
1) you don’t need any immigration permission to found a company, you can do that remotely via a lawyer or in person on a visa waiver.
2) if you aren’t working in the US, you don’t need to do any US tax paperwork to hire yourself. You need to register your foreign company under Spanish law and follow their procedures.
Hi Peter - why are international students on F-1 visa (not on OPT) being strongly recommended to not travel outside the US now? Is there a possible denial at the port of entry when returning? I for one am a F-1 student looking to travel to an academic conference abroad, but being advised to reconsider and stay back in the US by my DSO. I'm in the middle of my program, and my I-20 and visa are valid for another 3 years.
The concern is that USCIS is cancelling students F-1 status without the student being made aware of this because of some issue (prior arrests or convictions, political statements, etc.) but before you travel internationally, as an F-1 student, you will need to get a new I-20 endorsed for travel and when the school goes through the process of issuing a new I-20, it should see whether there is an issue and if there is no issue, you should be fine to travel.
If I am on STEM OPT and my F1 visa has expired, what are my chances of renewing my F1 visa if I visit home in Serbia and want to return to USA to work in person?
It's possible to renew an F-1 visa while on STEM OPT but there's some risk because a consular officer could conclude that you do not have the intent to return home to Serbia after the end of your STEM OPT. That being said, F-1 students renew their visas while on STEM OPT all the time; it's just not risk-free so you would want to be well prepared for your interview.
Thank you SO MUCH for your response, and for taking the time for this entire AMA, it is very very much appreciated.
I am curious about what the interview might entail? I've applied for tourist and F1 visas and renewals about 6 times and I've never been asked any pointed questions.
how long does 221(g) administrative processing take to complete in your experience? anything one can do besides waiting (Russian citizen working in tech, almost 1yr without adjustments)?
This really depends on the reason for the 221(g) and the applicant's country of citizenship or birth. Unfortunately, for those from certain countries, such as Iran and Russia, it has not been uncommon for such applications to go into a black hole and take 1-2 years. For those not from such countries, the process is relatively quick, from a couple of week to a couple of months.
No, they still should travel. But they should consult with their company's immigration lawyer regarding the documents they should carry when they travel.
That's the E-2 (the E-1 is the treaty trader visa and not based in investment) and most consulates require an investment of at least $100k regardless of the actual cost to get the company up and running.
It's really impossible to predict; whenever I've tried, I've been wrong. This is in part because the movement is based largely on demand, which changes all the time and is unpredictable.
Expedites are available for all USCIS filings and while it's worth it to request it here, your reason isn't like to meet the expedite requirements, which are listed on the USCIS website.
Is the correct term "Expedites", or "Expeditions"? Legal terminology seems to break language rules... The term for some (plural) things being expedited would be expeditions, but it seems from your response that, in legal terms, this would be expedites. This doesn't sound right. No source I could find agrees with the term "Expedites" as "plural of expedite". It generally returns something on the lines of "A third-person singular simple present indicative form of the verb "expedite.""
What was quoted below is really just codifying what existed in practice, that is, founders/owners of companies getting sponsored by their own companies. To answer your question, a job offer/employment is still a requirement and I haven't seen any major changes yet in the adjudication of O-1 petitions.
I'm pretty sure the job offer requirement is still in effect, and will remain in effect, since the O is an employment-based visa. What made you think it had changed?
"USCIS now permits separate legal entities, such as corporations or limited liability companies (LLCs) owned by the beneficiary, to file O-1 petitions on their behalf. This change provides a significant advantage for entrepreneurs and self-employed professionals."
Education is irrelevant. A PhD in and of itself doesn't help but it usually means that the individual has published, engaged in original research/work, etc. but someone can have published, engaged in original research/work, etc. without a PhD or any degree. So it's about what the individual has done, not his or her education. That being said, there's no question that USCIS's view of an O-1 petition is colored by the applicant's education and there's sort of a presumption that someone with a PhD qualifies for an O-1.
It's doable but you need a lot, and I mean a lot of documentation proving that you are indeed an alien with extraordinary ability. Any press mentions of you and your company, articles, proof that you're working with known companies in the US and more evidence like that will increase your chance.
In fact I worked with Peter on obtaining an O1 while not having a degree, I was a CTO of a startup, moving from the UK.
The details matter (the type of green card application, the green card category, the position held then, the new position, etc.) so it's impossible for me to comment. You should schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney.
There has been so much in the news recently, both on immigration, birthright citizenship, potential suspension of habeas corpus, lack of due process, the effective setup of stateless regions (El Salvador), and other aspects that all boil down to a question that seems to be on a number of people's minds and centered on a single question.
While this is more of a generic question, it'd be nice to hear from an actual attorney that's practiced law.
When we speak of a 'rule of law', and its benefits to society, its generally understood from Civic's classes we all had to take, that there are components that must be met, which are not met under a 'rule by law'; the latter which is more generally understood to be common to totalitarian regimes where they do what they want with the tacit approval of kangaroo courts, usually with some sort of reference to Lavrentia Beria's infamous quote, "Show me the person I'll show you the crime".
While there is some debate on the specific components of a 'rule of law', they almost all require: Independent Objective Judiciary, Equality under the Law, Access to Justice, Fundamental Rights, and Transparency (if I'm remembering my civic's correctly).
The primary purpose and benefit to society of such being non-violent conflict resolution.
In many respects, in the past few decades, Judicial activism seems to have broken the first, Access to bring an action now requires access to a lawyer which in many cases is a retainer of an amount that exceeds the average person's yearly salary (unspent), Transparency seems to have largely vanished behind paywalls, bad laws, and contradictory readings.
The last remaining two are equality under the law, and fundamental rights which are directly tied to those other properties, and have been degraded by corporations in their legal actions and lobbying as a whole over time. The remaining components seem in dire jeopardy with stateless regions, which the court doesn't seem capable of addressing (given the other failures that have occurred over the past 20 years that remain broken).
I hear all the time that we have a country that has a rule of law, but that isn't what the average person is seeing when they look at these things objectively.
Just so you know, I've reached out to numerous attorney's for various contract issues over the years, the most recent related to professional certification where the company clearly failed in their obligations, but they also apparently have received broad indemnification via their government contracts. I mention this, so the perception is not just based on a trusted news initiatives media alone, but also backed by my own conversations seeking services that came from my state BARs referral service.
Is there something wrong with my understanding here? Do we actually still live in a rule of law? If my understanding is right, it doesn't seem like we do anymore.
These are trying times and I think the proof will be in the pudding, whether courts at the appellate level, including the Supreme Court, push back against totalitarianism and uphold the law. That's an open question. And then of course, the executive branch has to abide by the decisions of the courts, which also is an open question.
Not legal advice but I'm a US citizen and when I've refused to answer their intrusive questions the worst that has happened to me is they imprisoned me, stripped me naked and searched me, got a fraudulent warrant for an internal body search, and then sent me the bill after dumping me at the border when they found nothing.
They claimed a dog alerted on me. An anonymous dog, handled by an unnamed officer in the affidavit, which was used as 3rd party inter-species hearsay via a HSI officer to the assistant attorney and judge.
A dog did not alert on me. In fact it is against CBP policy to use dogs on a person, they are to be used on your articles.
If you were an immigrant with legal status who lives in the US, would you feel OK traveling? What precautions would you take, what information would you memorize?
Yes. I still think that those with student or work visas or green cards should travel internationally. It's just a question of being smart and carrying the right documents. The right documents will vary depending on the status so I can't give a list but I'd recommend having a brief consultation with an attorney. Many like myself won't charge for a 15-minute consultation, which is all that this should take.
I would guess unnecessary delays. Leases or property ownership can be verified with a phone call but probably needs to happen during business hours and if you are prepared everything will have a better chance to go smoothly. Property ownership is public record but a lease might be a bit more trouble to verify if the landlord is privacy conscious.
Unless you're trying to prove a point, having everything they might want will make the process easier. If you want to get into an argument about what you are "required" to show, you may well prevail, but it may cost you six hours.
Are you seeing an increase in RFE/denial rates for EB2-NIW? What advice would you have if you get an RFE? This is for an AI researcher at one of the 3 foundation model companies.
Hallo Peter! Thanks for putting yourself out here.
You gotta look up another immigration attorney in the Valley, Rajat Kuver. He's a super cool guy and has for years done work on complex commercial and family immigration cases.
Good luck to all your endeavors and happy weekend.
I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. Do you mean the average per startup or the total number? All I can say is that startups usually can sponsor H-1Bs without issue.
There's no limit legally; the only limiting factor is when an employer becomes an "H-1B dependent employer" and then the hiring of H-1B workers becomes much more onerous.
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA.
I am traveling to the US soon for work from Europe. I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks. My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection, but times has changed now and it has been happening a lot more frequently. I am wondering what is the best course of action, prior to travel and if asked to give your phone and password. Also, what happens if you refuse to do so? Is the worst case scenario that they will send you back to where you came from?
The short answer is that CBP has the right to ask to see your electronic devices and you have the right to refuse but if you refuse (and you are not a U.S. green card holder or citizen), CBP likely will deny you admission and send you home.
I had a friend who was asked to unlock her phone, and she did, and then… they did nothing. They watched her do it and moved on to the next question.
Seems like asking someone to do this is just a good test to see the kind of individual they’re dealing with. It’s not practical to thoroughly search phones at scale and plus they know people can just have burner phones anyway. If you’re cagey and combative they know you’re a problem.
For most people, a phone contains:
1. An itemized list of every account they have and their passwords and any 2FA they've used.
2. Multiple forms of payment.
3. A photo gallery that, in many (if not most) cases, will have private content.
4. The contact information of everyone they know, who have not consented to having that information distributed.
I find the entire idea that it's acceptable for any barely-educated border agent having a power trip with no probable cause to demand this under the duress of rejection, repugnant.
Especially in a country where police officers are occasionally allowed to "have sex" with people they apprehend - it seems like there's nothing that actually stops a CBP agent from just stopping any attractive woman they happen to see and demanding their phone so they can find nudes.
Say no? Get deported, no legal recourse.
It's CBP
It's not actually about any form of screening. It's a power trip. Only the dumbest criminal or terrorist would bring an incriminating device across the border and have any need to say "no" to that request.
Which, stopping dumb criminals and terrorists is important and valuable and they do exist, but nobody applied to work for CBP in order to check the phones of dumb criminals. They applied because they have strong opinions about certain things.
Still, if a dumb criminal or terrorist does slip past you, that just means you’re an even bigger idiot. So might as well ask people to unlock the phone.
LOL. Yea. Sure. That scales up well with millions of tourists.
Madness how this is being normalised now in the US
An acquaintance used to work airport security and he told me they asked to unlock/power up etc. electronic devices such as phones, laptops or SLR to check if they are real electronic devices. Apparently they were -- maybe are -- afraid of EDs that looked like electronics on the scanners.
Not completely groundless, even if I could think of more than one way to construct a device, e.g. laptop, that boots up and still explodes, but hey.
Perhaps EDs are a concern, but mostly what terrorists actually use phones for is remote detonation. A feature phone is the ideal sort of radio transmitter, modified or not, to send a remote command to detonate explosives. If security is really scrutinizing carry-on luggage, then perhaps the strategy moves to placing a bomb in checked baggage, and carrying only the trigger through the checkpoint.
So if you force someone to turn on their phone or laptop at security, you will hopefully force the decision point; even if the inspector cannot tell the difference, a terrorist is going to get real nervous and jumpy around activating the thing they intend to use as a detonator, in contrast to some businessdude activating his very ordinary mobile device.
Not a lawer, but the ACLU has a page on this:
Short FAQ:
https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter...
Dedicated article:
https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/can-border-agen...
Thank you. This is excellent guidance.
from [1]:
> Refusal to do so might lead to delay, additional questioning, and/or officers seizing your device for further inspection.
Then, there's no point in denying device search?
[1]: https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/what-do-when-encounter...
I'm wondering if anyone uses burner phones. I have an old phone, and a second phone number that I got from Tello for $5 a month, intending to use it for a business number, but then never did. It's currently completely detached from anything personal and I figure if I do need to go over the border I could just use that still for any communication and internet access, but personal details would be at a very bare minimum.
Yes. If I will have to go there on a normal visa, I will not take my phone with me, just the SIM card. For the laptop, I don't care at all, it is a company laptop and as long as the company agrees to open it up for the border control, I will, but I will set a clean password upfront that meets the minimum complexity requirements ("UperLower12345#") with no access to anything else. I have long random passwords on all accounts like email or Amazon account, I never type it in because I never know the password, that may be a problem if they ask me - who will believe that the only 2 passwords I ever know are for the company laptop and for my desktop at home in Europe?
This is not because I have something to hide, but because I have nothing to show. I don't have Facebook, Twitter or Instagram accounts, don't keep pictures on the phone (family pictures are downloaded on the NAS, I don't take other pictures), so there is nothing to show on a personal level, while the company I work for is a big, old US company and the content of the laptop is theirs, not mine, and it is nothing sensitive that even our business competitors would be interested into.
I case I would go there as a tourist, my only luggage would be my motorcycle helmet and a pair of gloves, I would rent a bike, buy a cheap phone with a local number and do road trips around the country. Not even a suitcase, so nothing to show. If they ask me about itinerary, that is a high risk for me because I use to travel across Europe without an itinerary, just a direction, they may not believe me, but old bikers don't go to a destination, they go wherever the road goes.
Yeah, this worries me a lot. I have a quite tricky Type 1 diabetes, which I can manage well with an artificial pancreas software that's running in my phone. Now if they tamper my phone, or take it completely away when crossing the border, I am in quite a trouble. Especially after a big change in time zones, the health apps really do their job and help me settle in without medial risks in a few days.
This is such a risk right now, that me and my American partner decided to not travel to US at all until things change. Too bad we cannot see some of the family in there...
For what it’s worth, I recently travelled to the US from the Middle East (into Houston) and was also concerned about this.
My solution was to delete apps I didn’t want to be searched (e.g. WhatsApp) after having made a cloud backup, then enabling airplane mode.
CBP’s website [1] states:
> Prior to beginning a basic or advanced search, CBP Officers will ensure all data and network connections are disabled
And no, I wasn’t searched (thankfully!)
[1] https://www.cbp.gov/travel/cbp-search-authority/border-searc...
Leave gadgets at home. Buy burners here. Access data remotely.
Wipe and dump burners before flight home.
> My mindset has always been to never give my personal phone for an inspection
Get a burner phone! Upload your entire data to the cloud as well. Either you can store your phone in the check-in luggage or restore your data once you've arrived at your US location.
So what happens if you just put your phone in the check-in luggage and say you don't have a phone?
> So what happens if you just put your phone in the check-in luggage and say you don't have a phone?
Carry a cheap burner phone with you, then.
Related: KPMG, Deloitte Ask Staff to Use Burner Phones for overseas travel -> https://archive.is/lml0L
Don't lie. If you are caught, very nasty things can happen to you.
Or even better, don't go there in the first place. This is madness. How are you just normalising this?
For any electronic device it is advisable to take a complete backup of the unit, store an encrypted version somewhere online, and then restore the device to factory reset. Do not log in to any account that you wouldn't feel perfectly fine giving up in an inspection.
They can already hijack any phone number, so the only vulnerability you are giving up by crossing the border is the files, call log/sms, and accounts you bring with you.
As early as the last Trump presidency I was seeing people with good opsec doing the following.
1. Backup your device to the cloud (a different cloud than the default if possible)
2. Erase your device
3. Provide your empty / near empty device for inspection.
4. Load the backup after the airport checks.
It might be wise to update this with some basic changes, like creating fake accounts that are auto signed in on your device. Blank twitter account, blank gmail account etc.
Given the very real risks involved, can't your employer waive the travel requirement for the next few years?
Culture and society are a road, a path.
What if the current path means a permanent shift. What if this administration seems friendly compared to the next?
> I have been reading a lot of articles about detentions at US airports and phone checks.
I travel internationally all the time. I work with companies in China, Singapore, Japan, Australia, Europe and Latin America. Meaning, I know lots of people who travel internationally with great frequency. I have never heard from anyone having any such problems. Ever. Not during this administration nor others. Stop listening to idiots pushing false narratives. It's fear mongering. Not real.
Oddly enough, I have been asked more questions when travelling to Canada (Montreal) over the years than almost anywhere else. Nothing serious, thigs like "Why are you travelling to Canada?", "Where are you staying?", "How long?", "Where do you work?", "What's your website and business email?", "Who are you meeting with?", "What is their contact information?", etc. And, BTW, all of this at the standard entry passport check booth, not a side room.
Of course, it feels intrusive when it happens. I look at it as security theater. Just chill and go through the process. Being stupid about this can ruin your trip in any country. Unless you are a diplomat, you are not important enough to bother with. Picking a fight with entry officials in any country will result in bad things happening to you. Don't be that person.
To the point about security theater: Last year we travelled to Mexico on vacation. When we got to the hotel we bought a few supplies. A couple of the items were sealed the type of plastic packaging that you cannot possibly open with your bare hands or teeth. I said "I'll go to the front desk and see if they can let me use a pair of scissors". Without missing a beat, my daughter pulls out a pair of standard size Fiskars scissors from her luggage. Jaw drop moment. She went through security, full scan, and a pair of scissors made it onto the plane. So, yeah, security theater at its best. BTW, the scissors did not make it through security at the airport in Mexico when returning.
BTW, I have also hired Canadian engineers and we've never had problems. You just have to go through the process, hire and attorney and do it right. Which, BTW, is true anywhere in the world.
I've heard similar accounts, and anecdotally holds up, although my experience travelling for work specifically is limited. Incidentally, as a Canadian, I've been searched many more times, if not 100% of the time, coming back from the states than going in. Security theater in both directions though for sure, just looking for a slip up. Going in to the states, I once had a slightly vague answer about where I was staying because I'd planned to camp on a long road trip. They pulled me into the lineup and then asked me again, I tried explaining but they just wanted an address and hinted as such, so I just google searched a hotel in front of them and gave them that. They've got boxes to check.
> They've got boxes to check.
Yup. That's it. And the people running entry and customs at airports around the world are not necessarily the most capable and accomplished among us. I have lots of stories.
For example, entering into Mexico (Cancun), there are probably twenty passport check booths. The line for passport checks easily had 500 people in it. Every single agent left their station, with only one left to process 500 people. That remained so for about an hour. As could be expected, tempers were flaring and interactions with this one person, in some cases, where, well, less than ideal. No supervisor in sight. About an hour later five agents showed-up. It was horrible, the agents had an attitude and travelers were tired and angry. I've been going to Mexico for a decade, this was the only time I've seen something like this. Someone for whom that trip was their only exposure would likely come out of it with a very different perspective.
Here's another one. I won't name the country because this was a thing at a moment in history for them and no-longer the case for probably the last twenty years. When travelling to this particular country is was an unspoken rule that you had to put money into your passport (typically $100 per traveler) in order to gain entry without being hassled. If you did not, the consequences were in a range between having to pay serious "taxes" on your stuff to having some of your things confiscated (typically your electronics).
As I said in another comment, this isn't a black and white issue, it's shades of grade.
Mexico uses passport control almost purely as a jobs program. At the land borders only the largest cities seem to check (like Tijuana), most of them don't even glance at you. The guy at the x-ray machine has been asleep a few times.
For first world entry they just depend on the fact the 1st world country is harsher on security than them so they don't bother. Might be different if you enter from Mexico's south land border.
Trip to Mexico. Get into the hotel. We bought a few things that had the kind of packaging that is impossible to open. I said "I'll go to the front desk and ask for scissors". Without missing a beat, my daughter pulls out a full size Fiskars pair of scissors from her carry-on luggage and hands them to me. The scissors made it past LAX security theater x-ray machines, etc. Hilarious and terrifying at the same time. Mexican security caught them on the way back, so we had to donate them to Mexico's GDP.
People get worked-up about interactions at airports without fully understanding their context and realities. Just chill, don't argue, don't be an idiot and enjoy the trip.
"What are you complaining about? Just be white like me."
You are misinformed.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44006618
That comment is 100% dislocated from reality. To be sure, entry dynamics vary by country, person and other circumstances. Law enforcement is different in philosophy and approach all over the world. For example, in the US you are not met with soldiers carrying machine guns, which is something you are likely to encounter in Italy. To some people, being met by soldiers with machine guns is terrifying, to others, it is normal. To some people being asked questions in a terse manner is rude and scary, others understand security theater and the role these people play. It's shades of gray, not black and white.
> it has been happening a lot more frequently.
Is that factual? Or has the media simply been covering it more due to their bias?
International Travelers Processed with Electronic Device Search
Fiscal Year Quarter Total Border Searches Conducted FY 24, Q1 10,937 FY24, Q2 11,273 FY24, Q3 12,090 FY24, Q4 12,658 FY25, Q1 12,092 FY25, Q2 12,260
(The U.S. 2024 fiscal year began on September 28, 2023)
To understand the scale, in FY25 Q2, there were 88 million entries.
So the assertion that 1) electronic searches are statistically meaningful and 2) they are increasing by any significance is just media-fed fear.
One ought to consider the UK’s Terrorism Act of 2000 — the police do not even need reasonable suspicion of a crime to stop and search a person, their vehicle, or electronic devices. https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/07/04/without-suspicion/stop...
You can also be arrested in the UK for the crime of insulting someone. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18102815.amp
Hi Peter. I am a Lead Computer Vision Engineer, working remotely at Veryfi (YC 17). I am a citizen of Russia, living in Armenia for last 3 years.
We applied to O1 visa, got approval from the USCIS, then got visa stamps and at the day of my flight visas were revoked. Embassy said to reapply - I did and now it's been 11 months of Administrative processing (as they said in the DoS).
My employer tried writing to the Congressman's office couple times, but every time Embassy answers ~"please wait, no timelines". I also filed a DHS Trip complaint and received this statement: "We have made any corrections to records that our inquiries determined were necessary, including, as appropriate, notations that may assist in avoiding incidents of misidentification".
With everything above, we were not able to get any meaningful timelines or figure what's going on. Is there anything we can do to make movement in my case? It's hard to plan your life living like this, so it is very important for me. Thanks!
If you want to try to take control back over this process (and your life), you probably need to file a mandamus action. This is essentially a demand that a government official execute his or her official duties. I don't handle mandamus actions but I'd be happy to refer you to some very good attorneys who do.
Thank you. Yes, I would appreciate any referrals you can share.
Not a lawyer here.
My advice would be to relax, enjoy Armenia, and assume you are not entering the U.S. in the next couple of years, for any reason. Administrative processing (I assume you actually mean 221(g) refusal) can easily take 1-2 years. The most extreme case I've heard of took 4 years.
In 2016-2020 writing to a congressmen could actually help: https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2020/11/09/a-us-visa-in-937-days... , but not anymore. Last year I've heard about some success stories with U.S. courts. Still, it took for one O-1 person about two years from the initial visa interview.
I've also never heard of anyone getting any timeline estimations.
A related small thread with Peter's response: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44006801
Just I quick note - writing to congressman may actually help and worth trying. My mom's greencard was stuck in 2023 due to some bs with documents in consulate with officer there non responding. After the letter by my senator I got a call from the officer over there and the issue resolved within a day. This is of course different from op's issue, but just wanted to note that it is worth trying in any case.
Check out this Russian Telegram channel on AP https://t.me/usadminvisaprocessing/1
There are people who file collective mandamus lawsuits, so you might consider joining one of those groups.
However, from what I've seen, it could be a waste of money, as there isn't convincing evidence that it accelerates AP. These lawsuits usually take many months, and AP often resolves "by itself" before the lawsuit reaches a resolution.
It’s doubtful you’ll get any answers. Lawyers are of little help due to “consular nonreviewability” and your case clearly has hit some sort of national security flag. Since this was pre Trump II, it likely was a real human review not their new approach of automated revocations for poorly designed queries (a student was recently revoked due to fishing license citations).
As I understand, AP generally means Washington and not the consulate is actually the block/decision maker now, but they wouldn’t even officially tell you that. It could be with State or they could be waiting an opinion from someone. Picture some CIA agent who got stuck with a boring desk job and has a stack of thousands of visas to research.
Thanks for doing the AMA!
I'm a US citizen born abroad - I got my citizenship via (I believe) INA 320 when I was a child. I have a US-born father who was not eligible to pass on his citizenship at the time of my birth. I lived in the US for most of my childhood up until ~2015 (initially as an LPR), and at some point, I obtained a US passport.
I don't have a certificate of citizenship, only a US passport. Given the way the US is going, I'm concerned that one day I'm going to apply renew my passport or otherwise have to prove my citizenship, and I'm not going to be able to sufficiently document it. Is this a real risk? Would you advise applying for a CoC in my circumstances? Am I even eligible to apply for one given that I live abroad? What other steps if any should I take to protect my status?
You still can apply for a Certificate of Citizenship but there's a cost associated with it and I really don't think it's necessary or even advisable because you are now giving the government a chance to reassess its previous approval. A U.S. passport is always considered sufficient evidence of U.S. citizenship.
Thanks. I guess that’s a valid point - why invite unnecessary scrutiny.
Especially since the current administration seems to be, er, indiscriminately grasping at low-hanging fruit make some kind of unofficial quota.
If good documentation and good behavior won't protect you, then that leaves trying to avoid being in the front page of search results.
This is a really good advice, actually.
What do you mean by a US born father not eligible to pass on his citizenship?
In order for U.S. citizens to pass on their citizenship to children born abroad, they need to have resided in the U.S. for a certain period prior to the birth of the child.
The amount of time the parent has to have lived in the U.S. varies but usually it’s 5 years with at least 2 years after the age of 14.
If they don’t automatically pass it on and they want to move back to the U.S., they need to apply for green cards for their kids.
Since 2001, anyone under 18 who has a green card and lives with a U.S. citizen parent becomes a citizen automatically by process of law, under INA 320. Unfortunately documenting this is not automatic. A lot of people who came before 2001 don’t even know that they’re citizens. The application for a certificate costs a lot of money, so often parents tend to skip it if they don’t feel it’s necessary.
See below for the residency criteria.
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/travel-lega...
INA 320: https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-h-chapter...
Obvious question: does your passport expire before 2029 or not?
i.e. will you need to renew it under the current, or next, admin?
Hi Peter, I am a naturalized US citizen (via employment sponsored H1B to Green Card route). Prior to obtaining my citizenship I held an F1 visa to complete my PhD, and may have overstayed in the US at the end of my studies (I am not sure, this was 15+ years ago). This was never raised as an issue when I applied for my H1B, Green Card or citizenship, but is it something that could become an issue for me now if I travel as a US citizen and attempt to return to the US? Is there anything I can do proactively to address this if it is likely to be a problem? Thank you.
Almost certainly, even if you did overstay, it's not an issue but for peace of mind, you should speak with an attorney because it sounds like you didn't overstay in a way that would have impacted your H-1B, green card, or citizenship applications. (F-1 students are admitted until D/S - duration of status - so they almost never considered overstays.)
Let's put it this way: if you have a problem, you have the same problem as the First Lady and Elon Musk, both of whom violated/overstayed their initial U.S. visas but are now citizens.
This line of thinking is based on the assumption that the law applies people close to the current president with the same rigour as it does to the average person.
I would expect that a brief look at the current situation in the US suggests the opposite, does it not?
modulo entry to the white house
I'm a Canadian software developer who'd like to join an American startup so naturally I've been applying to a bunch of jobs. More specifically, I'm looking to go with TN visa.
In most job applications, I need to answer the two following questions 1) Are you legally authorized to work in the US? and 2) Will you now or in the future require sponsorship? I'm looking for advice on how I should be answering these questions.
For example, I believe I should technically be answering NO to 1) and YES to 2), but I'm slightly unsure about this.
I've heard recently that some Canadians actually recommend answering YES to 1) as getting a TN visa is very simple and not too much harder than just hiring an American. The idea is that when you answer NO to 1) that recruiters (and especially startups who are often more naive about visas) will lump you in as being hard to hire like immigrants who come to the US on the H1B and then filter out your application.
As for question 2), because the TN is a "Nonimmigrant" visa, does this technically mean I can answer NO here?
Basically in summary, how would you recommend I answer these questions? I don't want my applications to get auto filtered, but I'd also like to be as honest as possible.
Hi, I just spent 2 months interviewing and hiring candidates for 4 open (remote) eng positions at a US startup. Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer and make a mental note to never trust you. I don't think you should do that.
We actually hired some Canadian talent -- we just used an EOR in Canada. The EOR cost us about $600 a month per head as their cut, but it was worth it to get the excellent developers we have through that deal.
The reason why some/many firms would filter out anyone saying NO to (1) is that getting a visa sponsored requires significant work of a specialized nature and our company certainly is not equipped to do that because we don't have people who have the time and skills to deal with the insane demands of our government to obtain the necessary document (This is not a new or partisan issue btw, I remember losing a great developer in the Obama years due to the feds giving her the run-around).
TN is not a visa and all you need to get this status is a job offer. There's really no work of any specialized nature but some companies do get legal advice to help streamline the process and get better outcomes like reducing the probability that the person would be denied.
(EDIT: it is sometimes referred to a visa and sometimes as a status but at any rate as someone who had TN status with two different US startups there was very little process around it)
I am a Canadian working in the US on TN status too (and yes, despite my opinion on it they call it a “status” not a “visa”). I can’t emphasize enough how light of a burden it is on employers to hire a Canadian on TN status. There’s no limit on the number of people who can come in, and it’s issued literally as you travel across the border.
The paperwork is very basic. It’s essentially just a letter signed by the employer that describes what you will be doing. I put it together myself, but an immigration lawyer can help you with it for a couple of hundred dollars if you need it. It’s issued at the border, you just tell the immigration/border guard that you’re getting a TN, then you go into the office, they review the paperwork and put a stamp on your passport. It took about 20 minutes when I did it in Toronto a couple of weeks ago.
Post on the /r/tnvisa sub on Reddit please, make the process transparent and most importantly VISIBLE so we Canadians dont have to pay a lawyer, this is a community process thanks.
Brief reading of reddit posts by people who actually did this almost always included that the company's lawyers wrote them letters and prepared packets of materials for them to provide CBP. We don't have any lawyers. We're simply not employing people who don't have green cards. We don't have time or money to play games with the government.
One important thing in seeking TN status is that the title of degree matters immensely to your employability, which goes entirely against what I stand for, as if you have a degree in economics or no degree but do a great job of writing code, I'd want to hire you. The law contains vagaries and there is a "memo" which suggests that they use common sense, but it's all up to a random border guard who might not know any of that to interpret everything.
Anyway, you're not automatically legally allowed to work in the US and lying about it won't help. We can agree to disagree on whether we "should" deal with all that stuff or if we're missing out, but lying to get halfway in the door is the worst way to change an employer's mind, especially in this economy when plenty of domestic candidates are available.
I agree with you about the dishonesty of saying yes (as I replied in another comment).
That said this is a choice you're making from what sounds like more religious reasons. Your company and your choice but it's not hard to employ TNs in a startup (and I know because I had TN status with two startups so I'm a little ahead of "brief reading of reddit posts").
TN status can also be applied for in advance by the way, doesn't have to be at the border. This wasn't an option when I had TN status but now it is.
While I was only speaking in hypotheticals about companies that only want to hire people who have legal status (no one has asked us to help them get TN status), I'd rather do zero paperwork by hiring people with existing status, than (allegedly) "not hard" work to support TN hopefuls, especially given the US government is liable these days to randomly change things around and cause chaos - especially in areas likely to score political points like immigration. POTUS could declare tomorrow that every TN (in a certain industry? state? whatever) has to go home in 10 days.
My attitude would certainly change though, if/when we can't find skilled people with existing work authorization, or if I had an incredibly strong personal referral.
I mean you are clearly not prioritizing talent, and that's fine. Does not change the fact TN is really simple.
The US State Department literally calls it a visa, I'd trust them before I trust random Internet commenters: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/employme...
Well, if you read through your link, you'll understand what parent comment is talking about.
> Requirements for Canadian Citizens
> A visa is not required for a Canadian citizen entering the United States as a USMCA Professional, although a visa can be issued to a qualified Canadian TN visa applicant upon application at a U.S. embassy or consulate.
> A Canadian citizen can apply for TN nonimmigrant status at a U.S. port-of-entry. Learn about these requirements on the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) websites. More information about receiving TN status without applying for a visa is also available on the U.S. Embassy Ottawa website.
You guys are talking about two similar and related but different things.
TN is both a "nonimmigrant classification" and a visa. The TN nonimmigrant classification is what is what grants a Canadian citizen eligibility to enter into the U.S. without a visa. A TN visa also grants a Canadian citizen entry into the U.S., and is required for TN nonimmigrants to enter with family members. In a nutshell, you establish your TN classification at your port of entry with (a) proof of Canadian citizenship, (b) letter from employer or prospective employer, and (c) any required credential and fees. You can acquire a TN visa the same way, or (recommended) at a U.S. consulate or embassy prior to your trip, and the primary difference is that the TN visa takes a little more time and paperwork.
Prior to this administration, TN status was a simple and short process; we had dozens of Canadian employees visiting the U.S. every week. However, the current administration does not believe in following established laws, so our legal counsel has been advising us to apply for TN visas for Canadian employees visiting the U.S prior to their trips to avoid any surprises at the border.
Note: Mexican citizens don't get TN nonimmigrant classification status. They must apply for the TN visa at a U.S. consulate or embassy in Mexico prior to their departure for the U.S. They must then apply for admission (aka, a visa) into the U.S. again when they actually arrive (basically, they need a TN visa to get a visa. It is as ridiculous as it sounds.)
Canadian employees visiting the united states is usually not a situation requiring a TN. That said most of the time this happens the visitors are indeed breaking the law. So one could argue that the current administration does believe in following the law.
One of the situations when I had a TN was exactly like that. Canadian employees of a US startup needed to get a TN so they're not hassled at the border.
Many administrations ago. Before the first Trump presidency.
Either way getting your Canadian employees TN status is easy and is probably a better solution.
A TN visa is a visa, but what someone is “on” is a status, not a visa. Visas are only relevant to the moment of entry. You need a visa of type X to ask to enter with status X.
The exception to that is Canadians like OP, they don’t need most visa types (the E investor/trader visa is the exception—but TN, H1B, etc., don’t need).
I edited my reply because it is sometimes referred to as both. But hey, can't rob you of the joy of correcting someone on the Internet.
https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary...
"If you are a Canadian citizen, then you are not required to apply for a TN visa at a U.S. consulate.
You may establish eligibility for TN classification at the time you seek admission to the United States by presenting required documentation to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer at certain CBP-designated U.S. ports of entry or at a designated pre-clearance/pre-flight inspection station. You must provide the following documentation to the CBP officer:"
"You may be eligible for TN nonimmigrant status, if:
"If a CBP officer finds you eligible for admission, you will be admitted as a TN nonimmigrant. "The main point is this has none of the process usually related to "visas" and even if that term is sometimes used along with "TN status" it's its own special thing. Canadians don't need a Visa to visit the US and I am not a lawyer. Mexicans might be in a slightly different situation. Either way, the proper legal answer has no influence whatsoever on the points being made.
Being pedantic, the authorized admission into a country is a visa.
TN status is a special thing. A TN visa is just a non-immigrant visa given to a TN-eligible Canadian or Mexican citizen.
Canadian citizens don't need to receive a visa prior to their departure for the U.S.; they can get a form of "visa on arrival" through their TN classification. Mexican citizens need to get a TN visa in order to be eligible to get a visa on arrival when they arrive.
> Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer
This might actually violate EEOC. You would discriminating on the basis on nationality. The question that was asked was "Are you legally authorized to work in the US?" and Canadian have a limited legal right to work in the US under NAFTA.
> This might actually violate EEOC. You would discriminating on the basis on nationality.
This is laughably incorrect, and a good example of why you should get legal advice from lawyers instead of Internet forums.
EEOC is based on national origin not nationality.
The question is usually understood to mean "on an ongoing basis" and it's essentially lying. The system may not be correct or kind, but I'd have a lot of trouble trusting someone whose response to "the system isn't fair" is "I'll lie to get around it and achieve the outcome I believe is right" enough to hire him.
I could see that, but given that jobs are all at-will it's hard to argue the employer would have any damages for a contract that can be terminated with literally zero notice.
Most employment is at will, but salaried employees usually have specified severance in case of termination for convenience. Misrepresenting qualifications does in fact create a case for damages unless the employee is literally perfect. But civil aside, and ethics aside, it is fraud and could conceivably be prosecuted accordingly.
I personally wouldn't have a lot of faith in the abilities and judgement of someone who doesn't leverage an unfair system to their advantage despite there being basically no downsides to doing so unless im hiring a middle manager to sort through excessive bureaucratic bloat.
They're not allowed to work unless they have TN status. I agree with the OP that replying YES is dishonest.
> Answering "Yes" to 1 when you don't have a green card or US citizenship would be a way to guarantee that I would rescind your offer and make a mental note to never trust you.
I wouldn't trust you either. The question is ambiguous when it comes to NAFTA and applicants are worried about being filtered out despite not needing visa sponsorship. TN is not a visa it's a status based on a free trade agreement.
Ugh, arguing over the simple meaning of factual statements on the Internet is my biggest pet peeve. If you don't have an appropriate work visa, permanent residency or citizenship, and you answer yes to the question of "Are you legally authorized to work in the US", you are just a liar, plain and simple.
> If you don't have an appropriate work visa, permanent residency or citizenship
Well, TN is none of those, and here I am authorized to work legally. If I apply for another job elsewhere, the honest answer to this question is yes, despite the fact that I will be required to get a new TN.
Why do you think the TN is not a work visa? The US State Department website literally refers to it as "the TN visa", https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/employme... :
> The nonimmigrant USMCA Professional (TN) visa allows eligible citizens of Canada and Mexico to work in the United States as USMCA professionals in prearranged professional level business activities for U.S. or foreign employers.
When I looked at working in America several years ago, many people I spoke to and people commenting about it on Reddit/HN/Blind emphasized that it's TN status, not TN visa. They even suggested that calling it a visa when trying to enter the US could get your application rejected. I'm not sure if things have changed since then but if so there's probably lots of people who heard that same advice in the past and haven't learned the updated info.
Visa and status are different things and exist simultaneously. A visa is used to cross the border, a status is what enables one to be in the country. Many people on H1B don't have a physical H1B visa either as they have "adjusted status" from some other status to H1B without leaving the country and hence cannot possibly have a visa, which can only be issued in a US consulate, which don't exist in the US per se.
Colloquially people refer to a status granted through a particular visa category as "visa" e.g. "I am studying on F-1 visa", "H-1B visa employees" etc.
You’ve now been informed by an immigration lawyer that that is not an honest answer, so were you to answer “yes” you’d be demonstrating you’re either willfully ignorant or dishonest.
Wow, you're real proud of not understanding what a TN visa is or how to do the most basic of HR functions.
You’re doing anyone you don't give a job a favor.
If those are remote positions, why do you care about any of this at all? Make it clear that the applicant needs to handle taxation in their home country themselves, and that’s that. I know many software engineers working remotely for companies outside their home country. One would typically set up an LLC or equivalent, and be employed by that.
Any options agreement would be with the private individual to not mess up the cap table.
you should look at /r/tnvisa sub, dont get fooled and pay for money when you dont have too >.>
Legally, the correct answers are No and Yes.
Thanks Peter for your answer. I’ll be sure to apply this advice going forward.
With that being said, from seeing the replies to my original question, would you mind expanding on your answer a little more? I’m sure many of the other commenters in this thread would appreciate some more clarity here.
Peter already replied to this elsewhere in the thread. To a question
"Maybe a dumb question, but... I'm a Canadian who would qualify for a TN visa if I worked in the States, but don't currently have a visa or green card. On the online submission form for job openings, it always asks 'Are you legally entitled to work in the US?'. Am I meant to answer yes or no to that?"
Peter replies:
"Unfortunately, the correct answer is No because until you have the TN, you are not legally entitled to work in the U.S. Of course, this means that you will be excluded automatically for consideration of certain jobs."
Thanks! That definitely answers question 1) a little better.
He won’t answer the question from a strategic perspective. He will answer only from a legal standpoint. That’s the only perspective he is an expert in.
GP nowhere indicated to be looking for a strategic perespective answer, they're saying they want to know the legal reasoning.
Ok. I thought the other replies he was referring to were of strategic nature.
Can you expand on that? TN does not require sponsorship even though most companies do agree to pay an immigration firm to help the applicant.
I think It's not sponsorship in terms of what you hear about for h1b. But if you need a "Job Offer" before getting a TN (as someone upthread mentioned) that itself is a form of sponsorship, since you still need something from that company before you can work.
That's really interesting. Can you expand on why those are the correct answers?
"Sponsorship" is not a legal term but like an H-1B, it requires a job offer so it is not just an individual filing. Broadly, there are two ways to get a TN, one by applying with U.S. Customs and Border Protection with a letter from an employer and the other is for that employer to file a TN petition with USCIS. When the latter approach is taken, the employer must complete, sign, and submit forms as the petitioning (read, "sponsoring") employer and these forms are many of the same forms that an H-1B petitioning employer must submit. So, "sponsorship" by an employer is required for those seeking to work in TN status.
TN visa is not guaranteed anymore. I had to refile twice before getting approved, and I switched to an L1B to do so.
Appreciate the AMA. I'm curious about options for transitioning employees from the temporary (and now at-risk) Uniting for Ukraine parole status to something more stable and long term.
Is H1B lottery just going to be a Ukrainian's best bet? A lot of the advice and documentation seems contradictory, as 'parole' seems in some ways to be more a lack of status than a status itself. Leave the country and apply for some other type of more permanent work visa?
The task is to find another type of work visa, which would require departure at some point but this could be to countries other than Ukraine. For most Ukrainians, the visa options are going to limited to the regular H-1B, the cap-exempt H-1B, and the O-1.
There has been a bunch of chatter in Canadian founders whatsapp groups about people getting detained for long periods of time coming into the states either at SFO or pre-clear in Canada. Are you advising Canadians travel with any additional documentation these days?
There's no question that it's tougher now to get into the U.S., whether from Canada or another country via pre-clearance or via a land crossing, and there can be significant differences among airports and land crossings. Canadians are unique because they are visa exempt and CBP feels particularly emboldened to reassess their admissibility every time they enter. The keys are to avoid bad pre-clearance offices and land crossings and even more importantly to carry the right paperwork, which varies depending on the specific status being sought. There is also a huge difference between seeking entry as a visitor versus seeking entry as a worker with a visa, with the former much more challenging now.
Could you give some examples of "bad" pre-clearance offices?
The one that I frequently hear of as a layman (not a lawyer) is Toronto Pearson Airport's Preclearance, which has a very strict and narrow view of the TN Status eligible occupations.
Obviously anecdotal but I've had zero issues with preclearance at Pearson as a TN holder, both crossing and when applying for TN. They usually just ask me some combination of where I work for, what I do, and if I know when my TN expires, and that's it. My experience applying there has also been incredibly uneventful. I guess engineering is a bit easier to do though, especially if you have a strong application that's been done by lawyers.
I've been given hell by immigration about my TN when flying directly into US airports though.
Conversely, preclearance at Pearson royally screwed up my TN visa after claiming that the other ports of entries were doing it wrong. I have received multiple TN from HOU and, in general, I like the CBP at HOU. EWR was always friendly as well in my opinion. I personally prefer getting my TN at land border crossings because they tend to take the "gather all the facts" approach vs. airports have a procedural approach that feels highly dependent on the agent you get. My most recent TN was I-129 which I think is a waste of money but if someone else is paying for it and you have the luxury of waiting in the US, then it's a seamless experience.
I was thinking just for folks going down regularly on a B1, do you think it's worth having a copy of your lease or rental agreement in Canada or something similar? It seems most of the stuff I was seeing is about Canadians establishing roots using a B1.
The concerns on the part of CBP when someone is seeking admission as a B-1 business visitor are the appropriateness of the applicant's proposed activities and the applicant's ties to home/intent to return home (Canada). So you want to keep in your back pocket documents that address these concerns, such as a foreign lease agreement, foreign pay statement, and evidence of the purpose, such as a printout of the conference being attended or a letter of invitation. It's also really important to be prepared to provide specifics about your purpose, who, what, when, and where.
What if you're going to the US to participate in YC? Would a B-1 visa be valid?
Thank you Peter - always appreciate you give time to HN.
Im a Canadian and go to the US for work fairly regularly. Something I didn’t realize is that the laws are different in preclearance areas. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/P-19.32/FullText.ht...
For example, you are allowed to withdraw your application to enter the US and leave the preclearance area. Additionally you are bound by different laws for search and siezure.
At this point I am only going to the US through preclearance areas because you are still on Canadian soil and bound by Canadian laws. That doesn’t necessarily mean that USBP won’t break those laws, but the Canadian courts get to decide if laws were broken instead of the US courts.
One thing I have not found a straight answer on yet is if USBP can compel you to unlock your electronic devices in a preclearance area. My current strategy is if I am asked to do that in preclearance I will withdraw my application to enter because Im not letting anyone access to my phone.
Can you be block-listed if you withdraw your application to enter?
The ESTA form explicitly includes "withdrawn your application for admission", as part of the refused admission question.
So it's basically the same, and you will have to apply for a proper visa.
What's an ESTA form? I've never encountered one as a Canadian.
Canadian citizens are exempt but this is the program that allows non-visa travel to nationals of certain countries https://esta.cbp.dhs.gov/
I don’t know what the policy is, but you can be denied entry for any reason
That makes sense. The laws about removal creating an entry ban were written before preclearance was a thing. Withdrawal is a think at normal ports to, but since you’re already they, they can force “expedited removal” instead if they want to generate a ban. But preclearance isn’t US territory so removal isn’t applicable.
That’s only the Canada -> US leg, though. They can still grab your phone on the US -> Canada return trip, ne pas?
Historically the US has not had much "exit control".
For example leaving the Schengen area it's obligatory to go through "exit immigration" and get your passport stamped. Leaving the US, you show your passport to the airline, but usually there is no formal immigration check at all.
That’s because the airline updates your I-94 for you. If they don’t you risk overstaying. There is a website you can use to validate that they did everything correctly.
This does not apply to Canadian citizens.
They changed that.
Yeah, once upon a time you had to return your actual I-94 stamped to your passport to the airline, but today this is done automatically on the background
Every time I've crossed from US to Canada there's been zero interaction on the US side. Just drive up to the Canadian gate house and show papers.
Especially by land. I've walked into Mexico at an official crossing with zero passport / papers check by either side. In general land and sea travel can have differing rules though, where international air travel is governed by a set of international agreements with standard rules. For instance the full passport book is required for all international air travel.
You will get your docs checked about 10 miles inland Mexico. There you will go through customs and immigration. The border zone is treated differently in Mexico. Mexican customs is very strict: two laptops and you’re taxed 25% on the second one. Technically you can’t bring an iPad and a laptop without paying taxes.
IIRC, [a long time ago?] you MUST give a piece of paper to a guy/gal near the exit, so they remember to mark your exit in the database. I don't think they check too much, just collect the pieces of papers? (I don't remember the details, but if there was a scary warning if you forget to give it and they forget to update the database.)
This is part of the Canadian border control in my experience; i.e.
- Arrive in Pearson
- go to passport control, scan passport at kiosk, kiosk spits out receipt
- you flash receipt to a border officer at the stairs out of passport control
- go to baggage claim
- get bags
- go to customs
- hand passport with receipt to officer at customs
- welcome to Canada
I haven't had that experience when leaving other countries bound for the US; like GP said, I've had to show my passport to the airline to board, but I believe that's to fulfill the requirement that they made good-faith effort to ensure I'm capable of entering the US.
Sure. Or USBP could just be waiting for you as your flight lands in the US and then immediately detain you. You have no rights in a US airport.
I have not ever heard of that happening, but if I did hear about it happening to normal people (i.e. people without a criminal warrant) I would probably stop going to the US.
nit: USBP (US Border Patrol) is not at the ports of entry. Border Patrol is for the land border _between_ ports of entry. CBP (customs and border protection) is the organization that does immigration control at the ports of entry.
Where?
Driving across the border from the US back to Canada you don't talk to US border agents.
Flying from the US back to Canada you don't talk to US border agents.
I am not replying to the i94 side of this, just the "talking to" side.
There are massive data sharing agreements between US and Canada customs. US and Canadian sides can pull full criminal records, and a pardon means nothing. Exit data is shared in both directions as well.
I've crossed a few times between the two via plane since Feb and when exiting the US, they could not care less from my experience.
EDIT: I do remember hearing some cases of being searched when leaving through land borders, but that's more of cars being searched for smuggling IIRC?
This is why I only fly back from Europe via Dublin international.
And from Asia via Abu Dhabi.
It’s shocking to me that Heathrow doesn’t have pre-clearance.
Thank you for mentioning this!
"Founders" seems like an arbitrary term devised
Well yeah, it's because canadian "founders" have a ripe reputation of working in the U.S. while on visitor visas...
If you are a Canadian citizen you don’t need a visa — due to the visa waiver program — for business purposes as long as your stay is less than 90 days.
You cannot be employed in the US under these conditions, but as a founder you are most likely doing things which are permitted:
* negotiating contracts * business meetings * board meetings * conferences * purchasing property in the US
As someone who is a US Citizen, what is something about the immigration process that I probably do not know about, but causes a lot of issues/could be improved.
I have lots of examples:
* By law, the US can only issue 140,000 employment-based green cards per year, and no more than 7% to one country. This means people from India or China can face a 100+ year backlog, even after they have proved they qualify for a green card. There's no cap on marriage-based green cards.
* Processing times for many green cards (i.e. for people who have already qualified, but just need the physical green card), are 12-24 months.
* USCIS still expects many applications to be sent by mail. Some applications (like O-1s, EB-1s) require hundreds of pages of evidence, and it all needs to be printed out on 8.5x11" paper, for USCIS to scan it in on B+W scanners. This means that there is no error checking (e.g. on fee amounts), and if you have made a mistake, you might not know about it for weeks. Also, it means your petition cannot include working hyperlinks, webpages, or videos - the USCIS officer judges the petition by scrolling through a 400+ page PDF.
* The 'standard' post-graduate work visa is the H-1B. It's entirely lottery-based, not merit-based, and typically there are 400,000+ people competing for 85,000 visas. Many qualified people are forced to leave the US each year because they didn't get selected in the lottery.
Hyperlinks are often banned in various kinds of petitions and applications. Mostly to ensure that the entire application is submitted at once and does not change afterwards. Then you can process the application in multiple passes (maybe first for the formal requirements and then for the actual content), confident that the conclusions from the earlier passes are still valid.
The standard for employment-based permanent residency (green card) is extraordinarily high. As in, would likely place you in the top 1-5% of the most successful people in the country. That, or you have to invest $800k and create 10 jobs.
No other country in the world requires foreigners to be significantly more qualified than its own population. You can move to France with a regular paying job no problem or just a few thousand euros in savings. Impossible in the US. You have to be extraordinary (they literally call their criteria, "extraordinary abilities") or you have to make top 5% money (so if you work in tech, that would be at least $500k-1M/year in many cases).
The only other way is to get married. This means there is a massive discrepancy between the qualifications of self made immigrants, versus those simply lucky enough to fall in love. It's pretty unfair, but that's how it works. But that's also the reason so many immigrants are so successful in the US, the bar is so high, that it creates a massive motivation to succeed to become eligible for the criteria.
> You can move to France with a regular paying job no problem or just a few thousand euros in savings
Unless something has changed dramatically in the last decade this is patently false. Getting an EU work permit was historically very hard with employers having to demonstrate that a position can't be filled by an EU citizen before a non-EU citizen candidate can be considered.
The difference in the US is that it's (comparably) extremely difficult to change status from a temporary visa to a permanent one. Even if you are highly qualified. For example the most common academic visa, the J1, is explicitly a temporary exchange program and you can't have immigrant intent (on application). Most universities won't give out academic H1Bs even though they're cap-free.
In most European countries, once you're in, you can find a way to stay. One exception I can think of is Switzerland, which can be pretty annoying for temporary visas because they don't count for time accrual.
Austria has a pretty good system (RWR) that lets you job seek and is a pathway to permanent residency as a 3rd country citizen. I think there are similar programs in France and Germany.
For example "very highly qualified" in Austria is satisfied by almost anyone with a STEM degree, being under 35 and (amazingly) being an English speaker. If you have that initial visa, companies can hire you without worrying about sponsorship.
You could also use that as a route to the Blue card I think. I wouldn't say the bar is exactly low, but a lot of mobile people are sufficiently educated and are paid enough. As in, a typical European STEM salary would cover it.
But also the grandparent's comment is out of touch. Of course countries want people who are more skilled than local labor, that's the whole point. Aside from the benefit of attracting talent and higher tax revenue, it's much harder for your voters to argue that immigrants are taking your jobs this way.
Tell me more about Vienna or Austria please, I used to live there for like 3-5 years as a kid,
https://www.migration.gv.at/en/types-of-immigration/permanen...
Lots of info on the government website.
You are correct, however the criteria are a lot more relaxed in Europe comparatively. Most positions in tech, engineering and healthcare are often exempt from labor market tests. Also, there are plenty of options for "entrepreneurs" and self-employed digital nomads, often requiring some savings to prove sufficiency. I live in Portugal, and I believe the amount required when we moved was about 12k. In France, I believe it is closer to 21k (which is basically minimum wage multiplied by 12). Still dramatically easier than 800k in the US.
Indeed those are the rules but on a practical level it seems pretty simple to get a visa if the company had an even reasonably competitive process. Though I moved to Europe 12 years ago (and went through getting work permits twice), maybe it's gotten harder.
Nah it's still very easy. The logic is pretty simple. Europe could really use more talent... and the bar is quite low. Any developer/engineer of any grade will easily get a visa. Any retiree will also easily get a non-work long-term visa with just 1 year worth of minimum wage (around 20k in most of Western Europe) as savings to prove self-sufficiency. So it's extremely easy and almost a non-issue compared to the other side of the pond.
Maybe for instant green card you have to be extraordinary, but for regular employment-based immigration you don’t have to be.
The path is H1-B -> Green Card -> US citizen (I have done it), and to get H1-B your potential employer gotta post that $60-80k/year job and show that there were no qualifying US applicants for it.
Not related, but to add some woes of the american immigration system.
There is no instant green card.
If a truly extraordinary Indian-born person (say a Nobel laureate or olympic gold medalist) files for a green card today, they will be waiting for 7-10 years to get a green card. At this point, it may be worse too, because this category's priority date has not moved a single day in 8 months.
This is true, I have omitted this path because I am not so familiar with it. The trouble however is that this only works for employees, not for self-employed or startup founders. So in some way I guess they make it kind-of easier if you just get a job, versus try to create jobs... which is pretty strange?
Many countries have quite strict limitations on immigration for work. Many countries do not permit any immigration without visa sponsorship. The U.S. permits sponsored immigration with a quite reasonable bar (e.g: H1B, L-1). Many countries have similar lottery systems, quotas and minimum salary requirements. Given the demand for immigration into the U.S., it's not too surprising to see the limits (and restrictions) be more prominent.
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is the extraordinary ability does not have to germane to your employment. I am aware of the the story of Gabby Franco - who appeared on a season of Top Shot years ago. She was on the Venezuela Olympic pistol team for the 2000 Summer Olympics in Australia. This status as an Olympian got her entry into the USA and eventually citizenship. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar%C3%ADa_Gabriela_Franco
classic case of supply and demand
If possible, I'd like to hear about your typical day/week of work (is anything "typical" in your line of work?). Thanks!
Edit: Typo
For me, I have about 15 30-minute calls each day with existing and potential clients during which we discuss their chances of getting temporary work visas or green cards and issues around international travel. The rest of the time, I'm reviewing applications and responding to emails from staff and clients. It sounds pretty mundane but despite the stresses of the job and the challenges associated with the new administration, I still really enjoy what I do because I have a wonderful team and I get to interact with really smart people doing super interesting things and help them realize their dream of living and working in the U.S.
I’m sure each case is unique, but there must be a lot of similar situations and repeat issues.
How often do you get a new curveball in the process? Though perhaps this is an unusual year to be asking that.
Good question. There are a lot of repeat issues but because every person's background is different and every person's circumstances are different, every case is different, which keeps our work challenging and interesting.
Have people gotten into trouble for having a nearly empty phone when they get searched? Like using a burner phone or doing a factory reset prior to the trip. I've wondered if that would be considered suspecious.
At least one person has been subject to secondary screening and ultimately denied entry on the accusation that they had two phones.
> I thought I was just going to be given my passport and sent on my way, or maybe asked a couple of questions, but they made some pretty outlandish accusations. They said, ‘We know you have two mobile phones. We’ve been tracking your calls. We know you’ve been selling drugs’.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/11/australian-w...
Oh my god, the story/stories from that post are awful. I didn't know it had came to the point where people with valid visas could be detained, rejected and visas cancelled. :(
If an individual is transgender, not a US citizen, and has a passport with an updated gender marker (or X), can they still get a visa? Or is submitting an official document with "wrong information" enough for a refusal?
What about existing visas?
The short answer is Yes, this individual can still get a U.S. visa. But I'd still recommend that this person speak with an attorney before applying for a visa or traveling to the U.S.
I was under the impression that guidance from the state department allows border agents to deny visas to visitors whose “apparent sex differs from sex at birth.” Moreover, “misrepresenting sex” (whatever that means) could be grounds for permanent refusal of entry, by this guidance.
Are you saying this is no longer the case?
See https://www.erininthemorning.com/p/marco-rubio-may-have-just...
Do you find it normal that you have to recommend a person to speak with an attorney before traveling to a country?
It's not normal. The vast majority of people travelling to other countries do not consult with an attorney before doing so. By recommending that someone consult an attorney Mr. Roberts has effectively cautioned this person against travelling to the US without politicizing the discussion.
I got a work visa to live in Luxembourg and a visa to work in India and in neither case did I consult with a lawyer, the process was well documented and easy to do.
It is a sign a deeply adversarial country if you send the signal you need legal consultation to work or live there.
I’m not the person you’re replying to, but I’m interested in your response to your own question if you’re up for sharing.
My uninformed opinion if you want it: No, it’s not normal for someone to speak to an attorney before traveling. That question is a tad rigged though since I do find it normal to talk to an attorney if you’re doing something abnormal[0] to a legal document, especially to a legal document used to (ideally) rigorously confirm your identity.
[0] uncommon is likely a better choice of words, but I hope the added indirection isn’t necessary in this format of discussion
No need to be needlessly antagonizing or blaming.
how is the comment antagonizing or blaming anyone? it's a simple question that should make us think about what the US is becoming
Questioning what the US becoming is what makes you antagonistic and a political enemy.
Hey Peter! I'm going to pose a question that I think is tangential, but still related.
With genAI and LLMs making way into every profession, how much of an impact have you seen on the immigration law side? Have these style of tools made your job easier, or are they adding more confusion and uncertainty?
Given the rapidly changing landscape (on the immigration side; what is valid today may not be valid tomorrow, and everything seems kind of up to the best guess of the practitioner) do you see these tools (potentially) causing more harm than good (to specific individual cases)?
I'm probably the last person to provide advice about technology but AI is helping immigration attorneys significantly, primarily in the drafting of arguments. That being said, there's still a critical role to be played by immigration attorneys to determine the best strategy, to provide advice on travel and other issues, and ultimately to review and edit anything that is "drafted" by AI.
I have a US passport and am a naturalized US citizen however due to some sort of clerical error my passport says I was born here (even though you have to staple your immigration cert to the passport application). I never even noticed it until I'd been in and out of the country a few times, my passport is about to expire and I'm worried about having trouble trying to get it fixed, what course of action should I take, I'd really like to have a valid US passport.
There's a procedure for fixing such a data error and you should be fine since you are a naturalized U.S. citizen: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/have-pa...
FWIW I had the wrong US state on my passport for a long time. Not sure how that happened but it didn't cause any issues traveling at all.
I called the national passport line for advice about this when renewing, and they said to mail in the correction form the other commenter linked along with the renewal form. I also included a letter explaining that I wanted the passport renewed, but that it had my wrong birth state, and I wanted that corrected along with the renewal.
I think I included my birth certificate showing where I had actually been born, also, but I don't really remember. I'd call the State Department national hotline to see what they suggest: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/contact-us/passpo...
A legally-uneducated read of 22 CFR 51.62 suggests that the State Department can revoke a passport that was "illegally, fraudulently, or erroneously obtained."
How likely would you consider the idea that the current administration would revoke existing passports for transgender Americans under the pretense that they were "fraudulently or erroneously" obtained under processes put in place by previous administrations?
The issue is whether a misrepresentation was material and whether it was done with the intent to mislead. I don't know the data because we're still early in this administration but a concern has been that the administration will increase efforts to reopen and revoke naturalization, which happened during his last administration.
If a male obtains a passport which states that his sex is female, or vice versa, then that is erroneous, isn't it?
One could make that argument, except that until the Trump administration the US government has made no distinction between sex and gender when it comes to sex markers. A transgender woman is a transexual woman is legally female. They have explicitly allowed updating passports and had a process of providing documentation from courts and doctors to prove that one has transitioned. So no one obtained anything erroneously or fraudulently and in fact were very upfront about it.
Where it gets awkward for everyone involved is when you have a trans woman say who is recognized female on her birth certificate and by her state now coming in conflict with a federal government that suddenly doesn't respect that. Where it gets even awkwarder-r is more trans people pass than people assume and it would cause more issues to have their chromosomal sex listed on their ID than not. If my friend who is a trans woman walked into the men's bathroom they would be like, "hey lady this is the men's."
Hi Peter, I’m currently on year 3 of H1B, and my company filed this march for the 3 year extension (with premium processing), which got approved.
Concurrently, they also filed form i539 for my wife on H4 to extend her status (her current visa stamp and status expire in July this year). She has no EAD as I don’t have an approved i140.
Her request is still pending, and given current processing times it likely still will be when her status expire.
To complicate things, we travelled outside the US for 10 days while her request was pending (after receiving the green light from my company lawyers saying it wouldn’t impact the i539).
Reading online we got mixed results, so we’re not sure if she can stay in the US until her i539 is approved, or if having left the country for a short period might cause USCIS to consider her application abandoned.
We could have her travel and to make arrangements for a consulate appointment before July, but we’d like to avoid that if possible.
My understanding is that is a bit of a legal gray area, so I wanted to hear your thoughts.
Thanks for the help!
If USCIS is paying attention, it will treat her departure as abandonment of her H-4 extension application. So it's important that she check her I-94 admission record to see when her current H-4 status expires and make sure that she departs before it expires or that she files a new I-539 before it expires.
Hi Peter, thanks for doing this AMA! I'm an EU citizen. I got my H1B in late 2023, but ended up not moving to the US after all. When I travel to the US for short business trips (same employer as back then), should I enter using this H1B or ESTA? And could this unused H1B become an issue now that there seems to be increased scrutiny at the border? Thank you.
That depends on a number of factors, such as your activities/purpose when you are in the U.S. (whether these activities constitute "employment" and if so whether they are in line with your H-1B position and job duties), your compensation when you are in the U.S. (are you getting paid and if so, how much and by whom), etc. The question here really is whether H-1B work authorization is required or whether ESTA business travel is fine.
Does being "busted" by Customs (i.e. carrying some items that should be declared, but going, and being pulled of from "Nothing to declare" lane) affects admission to the US at all?
I was let go with just a warning for my "offense", but still the customs officer took my passport and make some note in the system. Should I expect secondary inspection next time I cross the border?
Yes, you probably will be pulled into secondary again but you should be able to get this cleared up in connection with future travel by filing a "complaint" with DHSTRIP. But you should only submit a complaint if and when it happens again; you shouldn't submit one preemptively now.
What's a good number to memorize if you get detained and have the right to ask for a lawyer?
See the ACLU guidance referenced in a previous comment. There's no right to counsel during routine admission. The right only arises when arrested or being investigated for a crime.
But you can (and should) ask if you're being detained on suspicion of a specific (criminal) offense, or not (e.g. officer wants to doublecheck your story, or background, or thinks there are irregularities), or (esp. for non-citizen) refusing to consent to unlocking your devices.
The answer to the above should give you some idea what's likely to happen, and what CBP has flagged you for, if anything.
Maybe a dumb question, but... I'm a Canadian who would qualify for a TN visa if I worked in the States, but don't currently have a visa or green card. On the online submission form for job openings, it always asks "Are you legally entitled to work in the US?". Am I meant to answer yes or no to that?
Unfortunately, the correct answer is No because until you have the TN, you are not legally entitled to work in the U.S. Of course, this means that you will be excluded automatically for consideration of certain jobs.
Not a lawyer but have been working in the US on a TN status for multiple employers and I would answer yes and discuss further with the recruiter or hiring manager.
TN status is conceivably something you could get without help from the employer (though even the smallest startup hired one to help me set up a package). What you need is basically proof that a company wants to hire you (offer letter), evidence that the company exists, and proof that you fall in one of the TN occupations.
Also not a lawyer, but wanted to second what jsbg said.
I've been through this process many times, and I would always say yes and then mention with the recruiter (even if I had to explain that the process was basically "asking politely for permission at the border").
The underlying question that employers really care about is "will you be legally allowed to accept a job offer without unexpected expenses or delays". Even if you file through USCIS (and not petition at the point of entry), you can (should) have an answer in 14 days and ~2k in fees, which is 1) a drop in the bucket for any hiring budget, and 2) not impactful to a hiring timeline.
Employers are subject to substantial penalties if they hire someone who is not legally permitted to work. I think they are woried about more than unexpected delays, though I admit I'm way out of my sphere of knowledge on this subject.
To be clear, I meant "unexpected delays (to work legally)". As in, waiting a year to submit, and hope for, an H1B to be issued, vs waiting 2 weeks for a TN to be approved.
No portion of my initial comment should have been interpreted to mean that employers do not do their own due diligence after actually hiring someone.
Hi Peter! Thank you for this!! A while back, ~10 months, I was rejected from a B1 visa in the US. However, I have now secured admission from Stanford and would need to apply for an F1 visa. What can I do to make my case strong and ensure that the previous visa application does not affect my current F1 process?
Unless there was a finding of fraud or misrepresentation, the previous denial shouldn't impact your F-1 visa application; the requirements/standards are different. That being said, because so much is at stake for you, I would recommend that you get an attorney involved. It should just involve one or two consultations so the cost shouldn't be much.
Thank you so much!
Thanks for doing this Peter. Quick question.
I'm in the US using E-3 visa since July 2024, working as a software engineer for a smallish non-faang company. I am fully remote in the Bay area and there is no office, but technically the company is based in NYC. New hiring for SWEs is outside the US. There haven't been layoffs in the last 12 months and it doesn't seem like there will be.
What is the best way for me to pursue a green card? I am aware that E-3 is not the ideal path, but is workable with some risks. My main concern is the state of the SWE market, with so many candidates looking for work.
I expect that any labour market test will fail as there will be suitable US candidates that appear. Is there any way to navigate this situation? What are the chances of success in this market? Would joining a big-tech company help?
Broadly, an E-3 visa holder can pursue a green card and we sponsor a lot but there are potential issues, most notably, when seeking to renew an E-3 visa while in the green card process. Alternatives to the PERM (labor market test) based green process are the national interest waiver and extraordinary ability paths, which are not tied to a specific job/employer but require a high level of achievement.
Not a lawyer but I went through exactly this route back in the Obama administration so it may have changed. But even then there were questions about whether you could file an I-485 while on what was technically a nonimmigrant intent temporary visa (this includes E3 and TN). There were a lot of people who said it wasn't possible. Those people were wrong.
Here's how I approached it: when my PERM was approved, I immediately went and renewed my E#. This required a trip out of the country. I went back to Australia. My employer was amenable. This was to avoid being out of status or needing a renewal when my I-485 was pending.
One thing to note is that the application for the E-3 doesn't ask you "do you intend to immigrate?". It asks "Have you filed an I-485?" and at that point I could truthfully answer no because I hadn't.
I arrived back in the US and almost immediately filed the I-140 and I-485 concurrently.and applied for EAD and Advanced Parole. Those arrived within a few months.
The only wart was USCIS asked me to file an extra form giving up my diplomatic rights because other E visas are for diplomats. My lawyer said this really wasn't necessary but the best path was simply to give it to them. I think I got my green card after 8 months.
Thanks Peter. I'm very unremarkable as a software engineer, no publications or anything like that either. It's unlikely I would qualify for NIW or O-1.
You seem to agree that PERM would be problematic in these times? Maybe you are seeing failures too? My thinking is that I don't want to try to persuade my employer to start the sponsorship process but then fail the market test (potentially repeatedly). Some SWEs are being successful in this though, so I'm wondering if it's also down to having a good law firm handle the process.
The PERM is still a good path generally but it's slow and cumbersome - and often the only option.
Thanks for this Peter!
I am on an L1-B and part way through the green card process via PERM Labour Cert (application was submitted in Jan)
What are my options if I was laid off/company went under/perm cert rejected?
How long are the Perm labor cert applications you are doing taking (from start till the green card being issued)?
Unfortunately, if you get laid off while in L-1B status before you are able to file an I-485 application, which is the last step in the green card process, you would need get no benefit from the PERM/green card process and would need to take an action within 60 days of the end of your employment to be able to remain in the U.S., by filing some type of application with USCIS. PERM processing is still really slow, over a year, but I'm seeing some indications that this might improve.
>before you are able to file an I-485 application
qq and i'm double checking what my own immigration lawyer has already told me just because i'm nervous on this point. Is filing the i-485 the point at which you can stay?
I've filed an i-485 via US spouse and waiting to hear back but the 60day period is looming and obviously nervous on this point.
The filing of your I-485 application allows you to stay and still marriage-based green card applications are being approved quickly.
I am on L-1A with an approved I-140 in EB1c. My priority date is not current yet. What are the options if they were laid off.
Unfortunately, the approved I-140 EB1C is no help here; for you to be able to stay past your 60 days grace period, you will need to get sponsored for another work visa (likely the O-1 but you need to have a discussion with an attorney) or file an application to change your status to B-2 visitor status during the grace period.
Thanks for the response Peter.
Thanks Peter!
Hi Peter, Im currently on H1B with I-140 approved. Im thinking of starting my own company and have other co-founders who are US citizens / GC holders. What is the path for me to have a visa while also being able to start my company.
Because you have cofounders, an H-1B might work. The other option is the O-1. You should schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney to determine the best path.
Did you observe a drop in H1B visa applications since the 2024 presidential election?
From my limited perspective, No although I have clients who have decided not to open operations in the U.S. and/or transfer employees to the U.S. because of the political situation.
Is opening operations in the US and hiring Americans such a terrible thing?
They've just decided that they don't want to be in the U.S. in the current environment. They just don't see it as good place for their business or their employees.
Hi Peter,
My I-140 was approved in June 2013 under the EB2 category (H1B). I later downgraded to EB3 and filed my I-485 when my priority date became current back in 2021. I received my EAD in 2022 and have been working on EAD since then.
According to the current visa bulletin, my priority date is expected to become current soon. However, I have a couple of concerns:
The job title I had when I filed the I-485 is different from my current role.
I have also changed employers since then.
I understand that I may need to submit a new I-485J.
Given that I was promoted and my current title is significantly different from the one in my original petition, could this pose any challenges to my I-485 application?
Yes, you and your current employer need to file an I-485J if proceeding based on the approved EB3 petition but whether you will have an issue because of the change in positions will need to be analyzed (although you probably are fine). Does your employer have an immigration attorney because this is something that he or she should analyze?
Yes, my employer does have an immigration attorney. I applied 485 as a Programmer Analyst. But now I work as a Director, Applications with a more diverse application suite than what I originally worked on. The labor and wage and roles/ responsibilities will not create any problems ?
Probably not but I can't advise because I don't have all the paperwork in front of me. The company's immigration attorney should be able to advise.
Are the current policies in the US making it noticeably more difficult for you to secure work visas for your clients?
Not yet. The main changes that we're seeing are with CBP at the ports of entry. CBP is being much more aggressive in questioning those seeking admission, including searching electronic devices and even detaining applicants. But nearly all our filings are still getting approved.
I've been through customs all over the world for the past forty years, and US customs are some of the worst human beings I've ever encountered. Why is that function such a shit show?
Very familiar with the need for LEO dumping grounds, especially at the federal level, so that's been my working assumption but I've never asked.
Because it can be, and nearly every administration has a ‘tough on illegal immigration’ stance - because the US is so desirable to go to.
A good Great Depression economic reset + insane facist government will reset that a little - but it will still be better than a huge number of places on the globe. Even if the gov’t targets immigrants.
A huge number of places with massive populations of people who would love to come over.
Are you saying the volume they handle precludes competence?
No, that the market demand (relative to supply) favors shittiness and extractive brutality over positivity.
They are quite competent at their actual jobs, which aren’t the jobs you think they are.
Think DMV. Or your favorite shitty cable company ISP.
What parts of the world?
I have found Asian countries, Japan and UK the same as US when it comes to customs experience.
Hey Peter,
Currently living in the US, I applied for a green card via marriage (partner is GC holder) in March 2023. I received my AP and EAD over a year ago, but there has been zero movement on the I-485..
What are the options here?
Given the current political climate, I'm not comfortable leaving the US until I have the I-485. Is this fear warranted? Would really like to travel overseas, but don't want to end up getting detained on re-entry..
I understand the above is specific to my case, but perhaps you can answer in a general sense for anyone else who finds themselves in a similar position..
Without knowing all the facts, the delay probably is simply the result in the backlog in that green card category. Is your spouse eligible to become a U.S. citizen because this could speed up the process for you. Again without knowing all the facts, regarding travel, you are fine to travel; just carry your passport, advance parole, and marriage certificate (in your back pocket).
He is eligible to become a citizen actually. What's the best way to move forward with a citizenship application?
It's super easy (the form is N-400 and instructions are on the USCIS website) and doesn't require the assistance of an attorney unless the applicant has a criminal record or has been outside the U.S. for extended periods of time while a green card holder (that is, more than 6 months at a stretch).
When it comes to Canadians working in the US on a TN, are we allowed to accept promotions (title, comp or both) without going through reapproval of our visa? Are there any nuances here like caps on how high a salary increase could be before needing a reassessment? Maybe increases in equity don’t count?
Also if the reassessment is denied does your original visa still remain valid or are you risking it all for the promotion?
There's a lot more flexibility in the TN context than in the H-1B context so generally it's not an issue to get an inline promotion as long as the core job duties remain the same as or similar to the job duties in the initial application.
IANAL but I had TN status. AFAIK there is no issue as long as your profession didn't change.
Hi Peter,
Thanks for all that great insight.
I'm currently a Swiss national on E2 with my own biz but looking at partnering with an American (the form could be a partnership or S-corp but it's not set in stone.. Recommendations welcome. State of CO or potentially Wyoming). All the work I do for them currently is consulting under my biz (SMLLC) as investment but apart from my biz paying for some PCB manufacturers there's no flow of money, just a lot of time.
Now my current E2 business has only me as an employee and I'm not sure how the chances of renewal look in 1.5 years if stays that way. End goal is a good partnership on the new venture and US citizenship but AFAIK there's no path from E2. Do you recommend reapplying for a new E2 with the new venture or extend the current one or something else entirely?
From what I understand from the last E2 is that the embassy prefers majority control from the treaty investor which we'd have to discuss if that's a hard requirement
Thanks!
There is an argument that it is harder to renew an E-2 visa when there are no employees and limited revenues than to get a new E-2 visa when there are no employees and limited revenues because a new E-2 is forward looking/potential. But I'd have to dig in deeper to the facts to make a firmer assessment. Regarding majority control, that's not correct; it's enough if your ownership is just 50%.
My wife recently got her O1 visa approved and I'll be getting an O3 as dependent. I currently have an app that I'm actively developing that generates $50-$100 per month. I might be able to stop development, but at the very least would need to support the customers. I also have some product ideas I'd like to build and potentially monetize.
What are my options?
Probably the O-1 for you as well but also look at the E-2 investor visa.
If you could make any 3 changes - unilaterally and instantly with no consequences - to US immigration policy today, what would they be?
Add thousands of immigration judges and CBP officers to improve the asylum process and improve the conditions of those going through the process, particularly children, do away with H-1B quotas, and do away with green card quotas and change to a point-based green card system.
Thank you very much for replying and making yourself available for the AMA.
Hi Peter, thank you for doing this.
I am on H1b visa and my partner is on H4 dependent visa. On H4, my partner wants to open a startup but is afraid if I lose my job then she has to stop working on the H4 visa as well.
I have my cousin who has a green card who is willing to be part of it, but I don't want to dependent on them.
What other paths are possible?
Cheers!
Being a founder is often a path to an O-1 visa so if your partner opens her startup and it does "well," then the O-1 might be an option for her if you lose your job. There's also an E-2 investor visa, which is another potential option for founders.
Thank you for replying Peter! That makes sense!
Should I apply for an H1B or an O1 visa if the end goal is to self-petition an EB-1A green card application?
Doesn't matter since the EB1A requires a separate assessment that is not tied to the underlying status. But between the two, because of the inability to travel on an O-1 visa while in the last stage of the green card process, the H-1B is slightly better.
Thank you for responding so quickly.
I asked this question in the first place because I heard/read that an EB1A application is a little more likely to be accepted if you already possess an O-1 visa. The reasoning behind this being the similarity in the eligibility requirements for the O-1 and EB1A applications make them more “compatible”.
What do you think of this?
It’s not true. There are two steps to EB-1A: the statutory criteria, functionally identical to the O-1, and a final merits determination where the examiner evaluates the totality of evidence to determine if you belong to the small percentage at the top of your field. This is a far higher bar than O-1. Additionally, each petition before USCIS is evaluated independently, except for subsequent O-1 petitions with substantially similar facts. In such cases, USCIS policy and the APA’s prohibition on arbitrary and capricious action generally require approval absent extraordinary circumstances.
Are O1 visa applications getting significantly more scrutiny nowadays?
I comfortably qualify for one, based on the USCIS criteria, but my employer (big tech company, big law firm for immigration) wants to wait one more year for another H1B attempt before trying this.
Hence I am wondering if switching jobs could potentially help here.
Big tech is risk averse and avoids pursuing O-1s unless there's no other option and the candidate/employee is highly valued. But I haven't seen any change yet in the adjudication of O-1 petitions. Nearly all our O-1 petitions still get approved and when we receive a Request for Additional Evidence (or RFE), the issues raised are the same issues that were raised before January 2025.
Is it true that most big tech companies and possibly the startups you work with strongly prefer H-1B transfers over candidates who might have held an H-1B in the past (with an approved I-140), but are currently on a B-2? In your experience/opinion, is such a situation disadvantageous to the candidate's competitiveness in attaining employment at these coveted companies?
If the company is paying attention and knows what it's doing, then the interim B-2 status of a candidate shouldn't matter; at worst, it just means that the candidate might have to depart and reenter to activate his or her H-1B status with the new employer.
Super helpful! Much obliged!
Makes sense, thanks.
O1 is an inferior visa, so they are right that you should be trying for H1B before going for an O1. I'm assuming that you are on OPT or some other visa category. There is likely no advantage to getting an O1 in your current situation.
> likely no advantage
Freedom to travel. Can't realistically renew F1.
Yeah, if your F1 expires before your OPT, it makes sense to try for an O1. It's a minor expense for the company. Escalate it through your management chain.
Seriously? I can't renew it? I'm just at the start of my OPT, I can't not visit home for 3 years ...
Well, in theory you can. In practice it gets rejected so often that it's not worth risking unless you have a solid backup plan.
Do L1B visa holders have reasonable chance of getting compelling circumstances EAD if their visa date isn't current for EB-3? I'm wondering if I should suggest that option for HR when they file the I-140 (or after if it's approved, whatever the process is).
USCIS rarely issues I-140 EADs based on compelling circumstances unless there are government/national interests at stake or significant humanitarian issues.
Okay, thanks. I was primarily wondering due to "Significant Disruption to the Employer" seems to be one of the possible categories and it's description sounded similar to reasons why one would get L1B visa.
Essentially disruption here means significant financial impact.
Are you seeing a downturn in people trying to come here for work. It's a shame, but I don't think any rational person should try to come here to study or work right now.
Gone are the days of attending a community college and dating girls from Korea and Japan.
And I can't blame anyone for not wasting to be destined indefinitely for trivial reasons.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/05/i-was-a-brit...
Your comment is about coming for work or study, yet you linked to a story of someone who clearly abused/misused a tourist visa and got caught. It was an egregious enough offense that the Canadian immigration officials wouldn't even let her enter Canada under the same pretense, which is what eventually led to her arrest.
She literally came to coach surf and house sit.
The woman is effectively a British nanny who did chores for friends. She doesn't look like a threat to anyone.
Maybe your afraid of British nannies baking pies and changing litter boxes, I'm not.
Anyway, the proper solution at most is a life time ban and the first flight home.Not indefinite detention.
To be burnt, this is a white woman who natively speaks English. If she's having a hard time, it doesn't bold well for anyone else.
Numerous other examples exist, in most of these cases people either didn't do anything wrong or it's something that could have been rectified with a quick flight home.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/13/world/europe/german-touri...
Come to America, spend your money. And if you watch a friend's pets for a few days expect some good ole indefinite detention!
The German person you link to was attempting to enter the US to work as a tattoo artist which is not allowed under tourist visa programs. I actually think the law should be more flexible and this kind of casual work should be allowed. However the law as it currently stands doesn't allow it and they were "correctly" denied entry.
The reason this person wasn't put on a "quick flight home" is because they (along with the British person) were detained at a land port of entry so there's no option to send them straight back.
In general, I think two things are simultaneously true. One is that Trump is cracking down on immigration. The second is that the media are suddenly reporting on a lot of cases -- like the German and British women -- that aren't actually new but were happening under Biden. It's just now the media has an angle and narrative such that these cases are deemed report worthy.
These are at most trivial civil matters.
The net effect is your talking about putting non criminals in detention facilities rife with human rights violations.
As a hypothetical, if you can visit two countries and one offers the risk of indefinite detainment , which is roughly dependent on how behind the customs officials are on their quotas. Or another country that at most will just send you home, I think most will pick the country that just sends people home.
What process would you design for handling people who are denied entry at a land port of entry?
They can figure out a way to get people to Venezuela faster than due process, they can figure out a way to get a British nanny back to London without detaining her indefinitely.
They could of had her home within 48 hours.
how about denying them entry, and turning them back to the country they were entring from (Mexico in your example), so that they can fly back home from there?
That sounds reasonable, though I’ve read online that Mexico generally refuses to take them back.
I have a company in my home country with revenues of $200k/year with 12 transactions per year from US clients. Can I apply for an E1 treaty trader visa and what are my chances of success?
I'm a Canadian moving to the US under TN status. Im looking for tax advice on what to do with my TFSAs and my American income, planning on returning to Canada in a few years. I've struggled to find an accountant who seems to really know what they're talking about. Any tips?
Also, the moving company wants me to get a visa before they book my movers, but the TN status thing happens at the port of entry. Can I get the TN status now even if I don't start for another 6 weeks? Can I get the TN "visa" from a consulate even as a Canadian citizen?
Regarding a tax accountant, email me and I can refer you a few good ones. Regarding the TN, the employer could file a petition with USCIS and then you could present the approval notice to the moving company but this process takes longer and is a lot more expenses (and also riskier from an outcome standpoint, depending on the position and your education) than the other path, applying at a port of entry. There's no longer advance approval at ports of entry so going this route means that you will need to get the TN and commence employment, even if just for a very limited period of time, before relocating to the U.S. with your stuff and then returning to Canada to actually move your stuff.
They are doing the petition at USCIS route... Hope it works out.. already sold my house
Hi Peter, I was checking my I-94 recently, and noticed that my travel history is missing one trip, an arrival. Basically, it lists two departures in row, couple months apart. Does it matter? and is there any way to fix it?
It doesn't matter unless it matters, which it doesn't appear to; the issue in an I-94 history is when a timely departure isn't recorded, not an arrival. There's also no effective way to fix this error.
Thanks for the AMA.
Recent change to H1B allow organizations that conduct research "as a fundamental activity" to be eligible for cap exemption status. Can you kindly share your opinion on this?
Do the startups you work with fit this criteria?
I don't think this has really expanded the organizations that qualify legally for cap exempt status (we essentially argued this before) but rather signifies a greater openness/flexibility on the part of USCIS to approve organizations as cap exempt organizations. Query, however, whether this openness/flexibility will continue.
With widespread layoffs in the tech industry, it’s worth asking what role is immigration really playing in meeting labor market needs? Are there truly skill shortages in the U.S.?
Many argue that programs like H-1B are less about addressing talent gaps and more about cutting labor costs. What’s your take?
In its current form, does the program actually protect the interests of the domestic workforce? Is it filling a legitimate labor need that can’t be met internally - or is it primarily structured to benefit investors looking to inflate stock prices?
I'm sure that there is abuse but from my limited perspective, I see employers using the H-1B program because they can't find qualified U.S. workers or because a foreign national is the best candidate. In essence, your question is whether the H-1B program protects the wages of U.S. workers and my feeling is that in practice, it neither protects nor undermines these wages.
Good afternoon. I am taking a break now and will return later this afternoon/evening to respond to any comments and answer any questions. Thank you everyone for a great and engaged AMA so far.
As a student moving to the US for uni and looking to utilize the Stem-OPT to find a job, what advice can you give?
Also do some jobs give you any sort of priority in the H1B lottery?
I'm not sure what advice you are looking for but at a minimum make sure that your degree is considered a STEM degree for STEM OPT purposes.
So how strict are immigration when they consider whether your job aligns with your degree?
And is there any way to improve your chances at the H1B lottery considering how low they are?
Can you clarify the current status of the U4U program? Is it limited to TPS only, or are there other pathways available? Also, what do you think the government’s broader intentions are with U4U?
Hey Peter, what are your thoughts on networks states and the methods tech CEOS and VCs are using to push the working class towards Techno feudalism? Do you think Peter Thiel using Palantir to mine US tax payers information, to help drive and target innocent civilians towards their vision, is legal? Should the constitution exist or do we need to be conquered and lead by monarchies? Most importantly, do you believe the supreme court should exist to serve its purpose in our system of checks and balances?
I’m sorry, I have no idea what you’re going on about. Help me understand how this pertains to immigration.
Certainly :) Immigration is actually directly related to how CEOs and VC intend to change the landscape for all things government related, and democracy as a whole. There is very much a subjective intent to tear down the rule of law, the rights that safeguard Americans as a whole, starting with immigration. IT's an entry point, a target to whittle away basic rights of the average American. Peter Thiel touches on this need for a tech revolution in his paper "The Straussian Moment", https://www.hoover.org/research/peter-thiel-straussian-momen..., who also funded JD Vance's rise to VP. These guys love the concepts written in Sirrivassan's book "the Network State", and want to replace our current government with distributed monarchies. Sirrivassan, Thiel, Andresen, and Curtis Yarvin actually have a documented plan to achieve this which is being executed, to a "T", which involves attacking immigration, not just as a distraction so they can attack the courts directly, but also cause it's part of their vision. Curtis Yarvin's writings include pointed attacks on immigration, both as a policy and as a reflection of deeper systemic problems. He uses immigration as an example to argue for the failure of democracy and to advocate for his preferred model of authoritarian governance. He also frames immigration debates as distractions from what he sees as the real issues-namely, the incompetence and self-serving nature of current elites and institutions.
How common is it for pre-Series A startups to sponsor H1Bs? What's the process like for EB2 on the PERM route, and how difficult is it to be successful in that process?
No issues whatsoever with respect to H-1B sponsorship but potential issues with respect to green card applications, particularly PERM-based applications because of the ability pay requirement and because of issues related to ownership/equity held by the employee.
What are those issues?
A company sponsoring an employee for a green card must show that it has the ability to pay the offered wage and this is more complicated when the company just has funding and no revenues or limited revenues. Also if the sponsored employee owns more than 5% of the company, USCIS could question whether recruitment process was done in good faith.
I'm a Brazilian citizen with an associate-equivalent degree and 15 years of experience in software engineering. I have an offer from a FAANG company for an IC4 position but I need to relocate to the US. Do I have any chances to get a work visa? I don't have patents, publications, or spoken at conferences.
When US firms apply for H1B or J-1 work visas for foreigners, what part of the process is the most critical part or where it's most likely to fail.
For the H-1B, it's really just getting selected in the lottery, the actual substantive requirements aren't difficult; the J-1 is easy but with limited exceptions it's not supposed to be used for regular employment.
Thank you for clarification. I wonder if there is any stat on how many initial H1B applicants make it to the lottery list to be selected. Is the process straightforward or does government/Labor Dept challenges a certain percentage of applicants.
I am currently a dutch citizen. I'm also a founder of a startup that has raised around 2.5 million USD. The company is delaware based.
What is the best option i have? Is E2 an option?
An E-2 would require some investment ($100k+) but Dutch citizens or Dutch-owned VCs but if this investment exists, then an E-2 could be a very good option. The other option would be the O-1 and as a founder of company that has had a good round of seed funding, you might qualify.
Would fund that we have raised count as investment in E2?
The fund would need to have been Dutch-owned for its investment to count for E-2 purposes.
How does a dutchman mingle around with local investors... and what series?
1) My son who turned 14 this year is a gc holder. Does he need to go for the biometrics to register. I am asking this question, since the government page talks about visa only. 2) One of my relatives went out country has valid green card and overstayed beyond 6 months and he was able to come back fortunately. However, he is skeptical to visit out of country now due to his previous overstay. Do you think he can visit ? He has valid gc.
Hi Peter - I'm on H1-B and not eligible for EB-1/2 or O-1. I filed for EB-5 through an RC and just got my EAD and I want to use that to start a startup in the US. If the underlying EB-5 petition is rejected after the startup is established, do you know if there is a path to re-sponsoring my H1-B through my own startup? I'm trying to understand whether I should wait for a proper green card before going down the startup route.
Yes, there could be a way to get an H-1B through your own company; the rules around this have relaxed recently.
Hi Peter, thank you for this AMA. I've been a green card holder for 1 year as the result of working for big tech in the US, originally via getting a L1-B 3.5 years ago. I'm planning on moving back to my home country in Europe permanently. Is there any way I can keep my green card or at least keep it for longer in case I start a startup in Europe and want to also have a US presence? I'm a Portuguese citizen.
Yes, there is a way to keep a green card while living outside the U.S. although at some point, if the green card holder truly has no intent of returning to the U.S., he or she will lose the green card. The protection is known as a reentry permit and the form used to apply for it is Form I-131. It's an easy application.
Thanks, Peter! What's the most viable visa for European to-be founders looking to move to the US (without affiliation to any institution / accelerator)?
I've been considering (a) going on a M-1 or F-1 master's student visa while working remotely my non-US company or (b) applying for an E1 Treaty Investor Visa. Are there other routes I haven't considered, and are there any unclear watch-outs around these two routes?
For European founders, the O-1, E-2, and E-1 are the most common options, each with its own requirements. What you propose while on an M-1 or F-1 visa really isn't appropriate.
For O-1s filed by startups, what are the most common weak points USCIS flags now? Are you seeing more RFEs around equity or funding documentation?
For the most part, O-1 filings for the founders or employees of startups are no more difficult than the O-1 filings for employees of established/large companies; the main issue is "distinguished reputation" (a component of one of the O-1 criteria), which can be harder for startups to show.
For a foreigner living outside of the US but interested in immigrating to the US in the longer term. Is it possible file the I-140, and while the application is being processed (or waiting for the priority date) apply for another nonimmigrant visa (B, F or J) for short term visit? Is it likely the application will be denied because of the "immigration intent" after filing the I-140?
Yes, there is a good chance that the applicant would have an issue getting a non-dual intent visa, such as a B, F, or J visa.
Hello! I do have concerns relating to the U.S. so I will put my questions out there. I know somebody who is a U.S. citizen, however they are originally from Perú. They have official citizenship meaning they went through the whole process and gotten those documents.
Are they at risk of losing their citizenship and being deported with the current administration's standing on immigration?
Really not at risk at all.
> Are they at risk of losing their citizenship and being deported with the current administration's standing on immigration?
No, they are not. I know this kind of thing is being circulated in social and traditional media. It is pure fear mongering and completely disconnected from reality. Stop listening to idiots trying to create FUD.
Oh well that's good to hear that they aren't at risk. But on that note, I suppose I shall further scrutinize my social media feeds, I might get off them for good.
Thank you good sir.
Hi Peter, thanks for the AMA.
I'm curious what gaps you see in firm operation software?
I work in legal tech and from what I've seen all of the software focuses on tasks and artifacts (e.g. the many AI letter drafters) as opposed to holistically understanding / optimizing business operation.
Does this fit your sense of the software landscape? Are there other opportunities here beyond case management etc?
Have a friend who quit his job and overstayed his TN visa during The Pandemic. After going back to Canada for visiting family, his next visit to the US was denied at CBP, and he was given a 10 year entry ban with option to appeal at a facility across the river from Buffalo, NY. What are his options? Is this situation fixable with a new work visa?
A work visa/status won't help. He has to deal with the overstay issue first, which he should be able to fix since presumably his overstay happened because he was unable to travel/depart before his status expired.
thank you good sir, much appreciated
Are there any difficulties in obtaining TN Visas related to the stage of the sponsor company?
More specifically, is it feasible for a Canadian operating startup to open a US entity and employ Canadian engineers under the TN Visa category? This would be an early stage non-VC backed company, but profitable and paying above prevailing market wage.
Yes, what you propose is very doable.
Hi Peter, thank you so much for doing this AMA! I'm currently trying to decide whether to appeal an EB1A decision - they agreed to meeting "plain language" for 3 criteria, but denied the application on final merit.
What kind of considerations would you advise your clients to think of when making this decision?
It's impossible for me to say without reviewing the filing and the decision but the final merits analysis is incredibly subjective and discretionary so generally speaking, appealing on this issue is not a good idea. Again, generally speaking, understanding and fixing the deficiencies in the initial filing/evidence and refiling is the better approach.
I'm looking to sponsor a family member (brother) to immigrate to the USA, have been told sibling sponsorship takes too long.
What is the minimum credible investment one is likly to need in order to apply for an E2 investment visa? What are the most common types of investments the USA government will find credible for approval?
That's correct, it could take at least 10 years through sibling sponsorship. The E-2 visa isn't available to everyone, it depends on the individual's country of citizenship, but if it was available to him, then an investment of $100k could be enough. But definitely consult with an immigration attorney because there are a number of requirements for the E-2 visa.
I'm a US Citizen who married a citizen of New Zealand, we met while she was a international student studying CS at the school I was studying at. Since graduating, we moved back to New Zealand.
Over a year ago we filed a for I-130 to move towards her getting a Green Card and being able to live with me in the US.
Right now the USCIS website estimates that it will be another 20 months until our form is processed. This seems like an absurd amount of time? I've tried reaching out to the White House, who passed my case onto USCIS, who told me to pound sand, and to my congressional representatives, who told me they would "look into it".
Is there anything I can do to move this process along?
Not much more, unfortunately. You could file a mandamus action which might help but also might just be a waste of $5k to $10k. Another option is for her to get some type of work visa and then for you to sponsor her when she's here on that work visa.
Would you recommend travel for GC holders in these coming months? How likely is that travel ban.
If there is a travel ban, then the specifics of the ban will matter (countries impacted, whether LPRs and citizens are exempt, etc.) but absent a travel ban, I still think it's fine to travel. Just be prepared to have your devices searched and your political views questioned.
What travel ban are you referring to?
Related answer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44006725
Hello, I'm currently on an H1B waiting on my priority date (I'm Canadian but born in China), my H1B hits the 6 year mark next year. My wife is currently on a TN which expires next year.
Should she switch to H4 EAD under my H1B instead of renewing her TN?
She has not filed a green card application so she probably won't have an issue renewing her TN but if CBP or USCIS connects her to you, questions might be raised about her intent which could undermine her ability to renew her TN. So, yes, an H-4 EAD would be safer (unless the current administration kills this benefit).
We are married so are there steps we can take to decrease the chance of them "connect" her to me? Should we avoid crossing the border together?
I can't comment on that unfortunately.
Hi Peter!
Given YC asks founders to apply for a batch just a few weeks (or months) before each batch starts, I am wondering if you run into issues with timing. Do you see issues with visa delays etc, that can cause founders to miss their batch?
Most consulates are willing to schedule expedited appointments for YC founders but still if you are an applicant for an accelerator and don't have a B-1 visa and are not from a visa waiver/ESTA country, then at a minimum, you should book a visa application appointment now.
Do you have any insights into how processing times are going to be going forward for legal immigration? USCIS is self-funded but hearing talk that the government seems to want to engage in their cost trimming layoffs anyway?
No real insights other than that the slow-down that was feared hasn't materialized.
I used to go to a as a simple tourist on the basis that we were trying to raise capital for a telecom start up. Delaware C, SVB bank account. They just asked questions and let me in for 6 months. Anything changed?
That is still an acceptable basis for admission as a business visitor but you need to be prepared to provide detail about your meetings and provide documentation regarding your intended activities, ability to support yourself while here, and ties to your home country.
As a practitioner do you feel that it was a waste of time to have studied the law? As you say, it is "rapidly changing", meaning the jurisprudence may not have been as majestic as students were led to believe.
The main thing you learn in law school is not the substantive law but how to analyze facts and issues and to understand the law and its application to specific facts.
What do you think about Nexus... Do you think Nexus holders enjoy the best of both worlds, less hassle at the border, 2 citizenships for 1 type of thing (but not really) as long as you don't have criminal charges?
Yes, I think that Nexus is great.
Are marriage-based green card applications still being processed at some pace when the petitioner's spouse is also a green card holder? I hear these days this category is ultra slow with no option to expedite.
There are backlogs in this category so the process is slow but once the sponsoring green card spouse becomes a U.S. citizen, the process is fast.
Hello Mr Roberts What happens if a positive asylum is not granted with a USCIS agent and the NOID is issued? Which could be the scenarios and also what happens if the appointment is before the 150 days. Thanks
Hello! I do have concerns relating to the U.S. so I will put my questions out there.
I know somebody who is a U.S. citizen, however they are originally from Perú. They have official citizenship meaning they went through the whole process and gotten those documents.
Are they at risk of losing their citizenship and being deported with the current administration standing on immigration?
And a separate question(You don't have to answer this, but I will ask it however)
Is this anything I can do about this? I'm not willing to see myself worse off in 4 years after this situation.
And I want to do something about it, I'm aware you are just an attorney; but I haven't been able to find an answer nor think of an answer to what I could do; but I really want to do something about this, so what could I do?
However, thanks again for doing this AMA.
Is asking about Recurse Center on-topic? I wanted to apply, but I genuinely don't consider it safe to travel to the US. As far as I can tell there is no comparable bootcamp-style retreat in EU :(
I am not sure if it helpful to you, but I did RC remotely and my experience was great
That is helpful to me! How did it work? I imagine a lot of RC interactions are kind of spontaneous, and I never understood how that would translate over the internet.
Why go to the USA then? The world is big. Go somewhere you don’t feel unsafe about.
I'm not going to the US - that is the entire point of my comment.
As an Spanish national and resident, can I found my company in the US without having any employee there? Would I be able to hire myself with a method other than Deel/Remote/others?
1) you don’t need any immigration permission to found a company, you can do that remotely via a lawyer or in person on a visa waiver.
2) if you aren’t working in the US, you don’t need to do any US tax paperwork to hire yourself. You need to register your foreign company under Spanish law and follow their procedures.
All correct. Thanks.
Hi Peter - why are international students on F-1 visa (not on OPT) being strongly recommended to not travel outside the US now? Is there a possible denial at the port of entry when returning? I for one am a F-1 student looking to travel to an academic conference abroad, but being advised to reconsider and stay back in the US by my DSO. I'm in the middle of my program, and my I-20 and visa are valid for another 3 years.
The concern is that USCIS is cancelling students F-1 status without the student being made aware of this because of some issue (prior arrests or convictions, political statements, etc.) but before you travel internationally, as an F-1 student, you will need to get a new I-20 endorsed for travel and when the school goes through the process of issuing a new I-20, it should see whether there is an issue and if there is no issue, you should be fine to travel.
Thank you so much for this AMA.
If I am on STEM OPT and my F1 visa has expired, what are my chances of renewing my F1 visa if I visit home in Serbia and want to return to USA to work in person?
It's possible to renew an F-1 visa while on STEM OPT but there's some risk because a consular officer could conclude that you do not have the intent to return home to Serbia after the end of your STEM OPT. That being said, F-1 students renew their visas while on STEM OPT all the time; it's just not risk-free so you would want to be well prepared for your interview.
Thank you SO MUCH for your response, and for taking the time for this entire AMA, it is very very much appreciated.
I am curious about what the interview might entail? I've applied for tourist and F1 visas and renewals about 6 times and I've never been asked any pointed questions.
hi Peter!
how long does 221(g) administrative processing take to complete in your experience? anything one can do besides waiting (Russian citizen working in tech, almost 1yr without adjustments)?
This really depends on the reason for the 221(g) and the applicant's country of citizenship or birth. Unfortunately, for those from certain countries, such as Iran and Russia, it has not been uncommon for such applications to go into a black hole and take 1-2 years. For those not from such countries, the process is relatively quick, from a couple of week to a couple of months.
Thanks for doing an AMA!
Should folks on H1B visas who have an ongoing green card application via PERM be concerned at all?
Would you advise not traveling until the i-495 is filed?
No, they still should travel. But they should consult with their company's immigration lawyer regarding the documents they should carry when they travel.
Do you have any guidelines for the amount of $ expected for the investment required for people applying for the E1 Treaty Investor Visa?
That's the E-2 (the E-1 is the treaty trader visa and not based in investment) and most consulates require an investment of at least $100k regardless of the actual cost to get the company up and running.
Any ideas how Eb3 final action date will move in the future? I noticed that for 2023 onwards more than 80k perms were approved.
It's really impossible to predict; whenever I've tried, I've been wrong. This is in part because the movement is based largely on demand, which changes all the time and is unpredictable.
I won the DV lottery do you know of any companies that are willing to hire remotely and then help with relocation to the USA?
I don't have a list, unfortunately (and further I wouldn't be able to disclose names because of client confidentiality requirements).
I understand, thank you for answering
Are you seeing any changes in the difficulty of the EB1A, or is it about the same as in the previous administration?
I think the same. I think the major changes are with the NIW, which is now much more difficult to get.
I'm moving to the US on a K1 visa, is it possible to expedite an EAD on the basis of a job offer in an AI field?
Expedites are available for all USCIS filings and while it's worth it to request it here, your reason isn't like to meet the expedite requirements, which are listed on the USCIS website.
Is the correct term "Expedites", or "Expeditions"? Legal terminology seems to break language rules... The term for some (plural) things being expedited would be expeditions, but it seems from your response that, in legal terms, this would be expedites. This doesn't sound right. No source I could find agrees with the term "Expedites" as "plural of expedite". It generally returns something on the lines of "A third-person singular simple present indicative form of the verb "expedite.""
Expedites as a noun like invites, arguably not grammatically correct but in common use so correct from a usage standpoint.
Thanks, I've never come across it before. Guessing it's more common in the US than Australia. Same with Invites/Invitations.
Hi. Practically, do I need to be an oficially employee for my employer to file H1B, or contractor is ok?
You must be a W-2 employee while in H-1B status.
Were there any changes in requirements for O visa recently? Did they remove the job offer requirement?
What was quoted below is really just codifying what existed in practice, that is, founders/owners of companies getting sponsored by their own companies. To answer your question, a job offer/employment is still a requirement and I haven't seen any major changes yet in the adjudication of O-1 petitions.
I'm pretty sure the job offer requirement is still in effect, and will remain in effect, since the O is an employment-based visa. What made you think it had changed?
https://rjimmigrationlaw.com/resources/o-1-visa-update-new-e...
"USCIS now permits separate legal entities, such as corporations or limited liability companies (LLCs) owned by the beneficiary, to file O-1 petitions on their behalf. This change provides a significant advantage for entrepreneurs and self-employed professionals."
I am interested if it actually works in practice.
Hi peter, do you use any legal specific ai software ? Do you use ChatGPT in your work?
We're starting to test the use AI to help us prepare initial drafts of documents.
How hard is it to get approval for an o1 visa with no bachelors degree?
Education is irrelevant. A PhD in and of itself doesn't help but it usually means that the individual has published, engaged in original research/work, etc. but someone can have published, engaged in original research/work, etc. without a PhD or any degree. So it's about what the individual has done, not his or her education. That being said, there's no question that USCIS's view of an O-1 petition is colored by the applicant's education and there's sort of a presumption that someone with a PhD qualifies for an O-1.
It's doable but you need a lot, and I mean a lot of documentation proving that you are indeed an alien with extraordinary ability. Any press mentions of you and your company, articles, proof that you're working with known companies in the US and more evidence like that will increase your chance.
In fact I worked with Peter on obtaining an O1 while not having a degree, I was a CTO of a startup, moving from the UK.
Honest question. If I live in a country with little to no Capital Gain Tax, why would I want to move to US other than job opportunity?
How AI ( LLMs, Agents ) can help you?
If I forge birth documents, will I get caught?
Perhaps a different way to look at this is: what are possible future consequences of forging birth documents?
My guess is that these consequences are likely to be extremely disruptive to you
Hey Peter.
The details matter (the type of green card application, the green card category, the position held then, the new position, etc.) so it's impossible for me to comment. You should schedule a consultation with an immigration attorney.
Is there any way for immigrants to avoid the 27 vaccines mandated by the CDC?
There are medical, religious, and other types of waivers.
Hi Peter, thanks for doing these AMA's.
There has been so much in the news recently, both on immigration, birthright citizenship, potential suspension of habeas corpus, lack of due process, the effective setup of stateless regions (El Salvador), and other aspects that all boil down to a question that seems to be on a number of people's minds and centered on a single question.
While this is more of a generic question, it'd be nice to hear from an actual attorney that's practiced law.
When we speak of a 'rule of law', and its benefits to society, its generally understood from Civic's classes we all had to take, that there are components that must be met, which are not met under a 'rule by law'; the latter which is more generally understood to be common to totalitarian regimes where they do what they want with the tacit approval of kangaroo courts, usually with some sort of reference to Lavrentia Beria's infamous quote, "Show me the person I'll show you the crime".
While there is some debate on the specific components of a 'rule of law', they almost all require: Independent Objective Judiciary, Equality under the Law, Access to Justice, Fundamental Rights, and Transparency (if I'm remembering my civic's correctly).
The primary purpose and benefit to society of such being non-violent conflict resolution.
In many respects, in the past few decades, Judicial activism seems to have broken the first, Access to bring an action now requires access to a lawyer which in many cases is a retainer of an amount that exceeds the average person's yearly salary (unspent), Transparency seems to have largely vanished behind paywalls, bad laws, and contradictory readings.
The last remaining two are equality under the law, and fundamental rights which are directly tied to those other properties, and have been degraded by corporations in their legal actions and lobbying as a whole over time. The remaining components seem in dire jeopardy with stateless regions, which the court doesn't seem capable of addressing (given the other failures that have occurred over the past 20 years that remain broken).
I hear all the time that we have a country that has a rule of law, but that isn't what the average person is seeing when they look at these things objectively.
Just so you know, I've reached out to numerous attorney's for various contract issues over the years, the most recent related to professional certification where the company clearly failed in their obligations, but they also apparently have received broad indemnification via their government contracts. I mention this, so the perception is not just based on a trusted news initiatives media alone, but also backed by my own conversations seeking services that came from my state BARs referral service.
Is there something wrong with my understanding here? Do we actually still live in a rule of law? If my understanding is right, it doesn't seem like we do anymore.
These are trying times and I think the proof will be in the pudding, whether courts at the appellate level, including the Supreme Court, push back against totalitarianism and uphold the law. That's an open question. And then of course, the executive branch has to abide by the decisions of the courts, which also is an open question.
Thanks again for the response and listening.
I'll pray that we do somehow manage to push back against totalitarianism as a society.
Not legal advice but I'm a US citizen and when I've refused to answer their intrusive questions the worst that has happened to me is they imprisoned me, stripped me naked and searched me, got a fraudulent warrant for an internal body search, and then sent me the bill after dumping me at the border when they found nothing.
Enjoy.
Can you explain what fraud was used to obtain the warrant?
Yes.
They claimed a dog alerted on me. An anonymous dog, handled by an unnamed officer in the affidavit, which was used as 3rd party inter-species hearsay via a HSI officer to the assistant attorney and judge.
A dog did not alert on me. In fact it is against CBP policy to use dogs on a person, they are to be used on your articles.
I think you posted from a new account for privacy and then mistakenly posted from your original account?
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44006758.
Which entry point was that at, and did you enter by air or land?
In particular if it was entering the southern border by land, I heard CBP behavior is much more aggressive.
> and then sent me the bill
wow, what a horrible way to add insult to injury
Could be worse? [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_fee]
Bill for what exactly
All past Peter's AMA discussions:
https://hn.algolia.com/?query=I%27m%20Peter%20Roberts%2C%20i...
If you were an immigrant with legal status who lives in the US, would you feel OK traveling? What precautions would you take, what information would you memorize?
Yes. I still think that those with student or work visas or green cards should travel internationally. It's just a question of being smart and carrying the right documents. The right documents will vary depending on the status so I can't give a list but I'd recommend having a brief consultation with an attorney. Many like myself won't charge for a 15-minute consultation, which is all that this should take.
What would a green card holder need to carry other than their passport and greencard?
Maybe just proof of residence in the U.S., such as a lease agreement or deed.
What would happen if they didn’t have that?
I would guess unnecessary delays. Leases or property ownership can be verified with a phone call but probably needs to happen during business hours and if you are prepared everything will have a better chance to go smoothly. Property ownership is public record but a lease might be a bit more trouble to verify if the landlord is privacy conscious.
But I mean what is the conversation like?
“Here are the only documents I am legally required to show you.”
“I need to see a piece of paper with a random address and your name on it.”
“I don’t have that.”
What happens next? They are not able to not let you in.
Unless you're trying to prove a point, having everything they might want will make the process easier. If you want to get into an argument about what you are "required" to show, you may well prevail, but it may cost you six hours.
Are you seeing an increase in RFE/denial rates for EB2-NIW? What advice would you have if you get an RFE? This is for an AI researcher at one of the 3 foundation model companies.
What nationality and what is your current status?
Hallo Peter! Thanks for putting yourself out here.
You gotta look up another immigration attorney in the Valley, Rajat Kuver. He's a super cool guy and has for years done work on complex commercial and family immigration cases.
Good luck to all your endeavors and happy weekend.
Thanks for the referral!
Hi
Hey Peter,
On average, min and max - how many H1Bs do a Seed/Series A,B startups have?
From your experience.
Thank you for your time, Naren
I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. Do you mean the average per startup or the total number? All I can say is that startups usually can sponsor H-1Bs without issue.
Thank you for responding, Peter. Total number.
There's no limit legally; the only limiting factor is when an employer becomes an "H-1B dependent employer" and then the hiring of H-1B workers becomes much more onerous.