First? Not likely, because now I'm going to say something about immigration lawyers.

There are a few good people practicing immigration law. But there are also a lot of scumbags. Why? Because after an immigration lawyer screws over his or her client, who's going to complain? These folks give the entire profession a bad name.

When I need to refer somebody to a decent immigration lawyer, the list is short. Or maybe I find a decent law school clinic. Or maybe a biglaw associate without work, who has handled asylum case in law school and wants a pro bono project.

If considering this line of work, beware that you're going to be fighting quite a stereotype.

first comment to not be removed by!

First to say "hola"

Congressman Joe Wilson was an immigration lawyer.

Immigration law seems to be a hotbed of chicanery. Nine times out of ten, when you hear about someone falsely holding himself out as a lawyer to unsuspecting clients, he's "practicing" immigration law. I guess it's easy to take advantage of people who are fresh off the boat.

Fragomen

What do these guys usually charge?

The ones who do the low-end stuff, I mean. Not the H-1B guys.

What do these guys usually charge?

The ones who do the low-end stuff, I mean. Not the H-1B guys.

Lat, can you please teach Elie how to write entries like this? ( namely, presenting an issue that you likely have strong opinions about (given your aunt's situation), but you nevertheless attempt to present the issue objectively, allowing for reasonable discussion with differing viewpoints. ) I thought this type of thing was forever gone from ATL.

I stil don't understand all this discussion about "practicing law." Why does someone have to practice that much? I hear some people practice their whole careers...and for what? Does anyone ever actually get to "do" or "play" law? (I'm not sure what the correct terminology is here, I'm not a lawyer, I'm applying to law schools right now). Any advice or insight would be much appreciated? PS Immigrants suck.

Es un fiesta in mis pantalones.

10 = racist.

Why do you always see 10 Mexicans stuffed into a beat up Honda civic?

immigration lawyers write the most horrible briefs ever... even worse than public defenders

1-25 = Racist.

I second 15's comment. Worst brief I ever read in my clerking days was from an immigration lawyer. And not just because it was terribly written -- although it really was -- but because he entirely missed the boat on the law. Had no clue, and was in over his head. Just some scum who was only competent at filing green card paperwork but felt free to take on complex asylum cases. He screwed his client over big time.

Second and third worst briefs I ever read were also by immigration lawyers. If you ever need to refer a client to an immigration lawyer, choose the pro bono department of a big firm, or a law school clinic.

7 - What do you know re: Fragomen? It's one of the elite immigration shops. How much do they pay?

They could call such firms swimming firms. Learn to swim and come to America, where lawyers will figure out a way to pervert the legal system so you can get benefits and a job, all without having to get wet every day.

Working for individuals as clients can be such a pain. They are very fee sensitive. They will quibble about every bill.

On the other hand, if you get a good result for your client, it can be more gratifying than when you win for a big corporation.

Tough field to practice in considering how inhumane our immigrations laws are. A 36 year old lawful permanent resident with a family, a job, children, basically your average american family man, can be deported for a conviction of being under the influence of cocaine when he was 19. Our laws consider creating a one-parent home, and removing productive residents > having people that at any point experimented with cocaine the way most of you probably have done while in your Undergrads.

Newsflash - the crime rate among non-citizens is substantially lower than that of citizens. The current percentage of foreign-born US residents is substantially lower than America's historical average.

Check your facts:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/pr-immig.html

And finally:

THE MAYFLOWER WAS A BOAT FULL OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS.

They need to bomb immigrants back to the stoneage!

-DOJ Secure

This area of law is highly complex and technical, due to the many amendments to statutes over the years. You would need to be one of the brightest minds in the profession to navigate it well. Sadly, most immigration lawyers are far from the brightest.

Why are day laborers always so short?

I was in Ft. Lauderdal once for spring break and saw 6 Cubans on a makeshift raft come on shore in serious need of medical attention. This made the local news and the immigrants were taken to the local hospital. Apparently, 4 of them were eaten by sharks on the way over. I thought, "wow, where they live must suck and they've taken more of an effort to live in the U.S. than I ever have." The next day more came in.

Apparently they were shooting for Miami but ended off-course. I told them to go live with my auntie and uncle in Bel-Air' I whistled for a cab and when it came near the license plate said Fresh and had a dice in the mirror. If anything I could say this cabe is rare, but I thought "Now forget it' - 'take my homies to Bel-Air.' The immigrants pulled up to the house about 7 or 8, and the cab said to them 'yo homies smell you later' They looked at their kingdom they were finally here, to sit on their buckets as the help of Bel-Air.

Immigration lawyers are scum.

Geez, every comment here is totally ignorant. Surprise surprise.

Anyway, newsflash #1: not all immigration clients are asylum seekers or "illegals." there are plenty of corporate clients and individuals who need to navigate the immigraiton system for their foreign employees. top-flight immigration boutiques serve this clientel (e.g., fragomen, maggio & kattar in DC) and there are biglaw firms with immigration law partners or groups serving this market niche as well.

Newsflash #2: yes, there are many terrible, bottom feeding immigration lawyers out there. they serve the market of poor people desperate to stay in this country. as you might expect, poor people do not get the best legal service and often get exploited by the system, including by their lawyers. concluding that the immigration bar is a bunch of bottom feeders based solely on these guys is like concluding that the entire defense bar sucks based on the abilities of some court-appointed yahoo sleeping his way through a death penalty trial in Texas.

Dammit 26, you got me. Well played, Trebek.

Hey Fresh Prince dude-

You're not funny.

Sincerely,

All of the other ATL memes.

Hey 29, Suck on MY BIG WILLIE ROLL.

Did you hear the sad story? Four illegal immigrants died when their Honda civic went over a cliff

32, what's tragic about that?

Asylum cases were the most disappointing aspect of my Circuit clerkship. They take up almost 50% of the docket and are terribly lawyered across the board. Not only that, but typically, there was little reliable evidence to make a decision on. Almost every case involved an equally terrible Immigration Judge who tossed the application based on the tiniest inconsistentcy in the testimony of an applicant who could not even speak English.

I would straight up leave the law before becoming an immigration lawyer.

a honda civic seats 5

As a summer law clerk for ICE, I argued against an appellate brief whose strongest arguement was (and I quote) "We can assume that Congress assumed...."

And this man had one of the biggest immigration practices in Texas.

22- HistoryFlash!

The Pilgrims were not entitled to free healthcare, housing, food and education from the prior colonists (although they did exploit the charity of the Indians).

I'm a libertarian enough to think we should allow liberal immigration...but I have common sense enough to know that granting massive entitlements to everyone who shows up will bankrupt the government and sap the productive economy. You can either allow unchecked immigration or dole out welfare entitlements. Not both. If you think you can have both, you are an infantile utopian.

I would rate immigration lawyers on the same level as ambulance chasers. Many years ago, I was having dinner at the Rainbow Room and overheard an immigration lawyer boast about how he was raking in hundreds of thousands of dollars (chump change by my standards) by filing phony sterilization asylum cases for hundreds of chinese that were being smuggled into the United States. The lawyer was bald, obese, wore a pinky ring, a cheap pair of Johnston & Murphy shoes and a faded Perry Ellis double breasted suit. It was a dispicable sight yet as I made my way home that night, I was thankful that I would never have to debase myself by practicing the bottom dwelling area of immigration law. I am sure most immigration lawyers are fearful of Commissar Obama's plan to allow illegal aliens to roam free in our country without the fear of Immigration Customs and Enforcement rounding up these resource sucking brutes.

Lat- who is "we"? Seems to me that you were the only author of this article. And most of the "racist" comments must have been removed before I read the article and commentary, but it seems to me that it was quite expected and predictable that such a topic would receive those kinds of comments. Perhaps a warning in advance would have been useful (though probably not, because those commenter's are douches).

Otherwise, interesting question.

I think in the modern culture, immigration attorneys are a necessity. Sadly, there are a number of such attorney's who use the language and, often, educational background to the disadvantage of the client, and who take the money and run or do piss-poor representation.

But there are also a number of attorneys who do a great job and the industry is quite necessary, I think.

Good topic. Can't wait for Family Law.

Lat- who is "we"? Seems to me that you were the only author of this article. And most of the "racist" comments must have been removed before I read the article and commentary, but it seems to me that it was quite expected and predictable that such a topic would receive those kinds of comments. Perhaps a warning in advance would have been useful (though probably not, because those commenter's are douches).

Otherwise, interesting question.

I think in the modern culture, immigration attorneys are a necessity. Sadly, there are a number of such attorney's who use the language and, often, educational background to the disadvantage of the client, and who take the money and run or do piss-poor representation.

But there are also a number of attorneys who do a great job and the industry is quite necessary, I think.

Good topic. Can't wait for Family Law.

33 -- in your experience, were the pro bono attorneys taking asylum cases any better than the retained counsel? I had a similar experience in a Circuit externship but was impressed by some pro bono counsel. I had 4 externships in law school and the one asylum case I worked was by far the most gut wrenching for me. I agonized over that thing (not due to difficulty but because of what was happening to the asylum seeker).

25, poor nutrition.

Ths comment is address to poster @23:

Your schtick is a GALACTIC FAIL in all of its iterations. It is not funny in the least.

That is all.

30, I agree with you. This bel-air shit must be nipped in the bud. Perhaps we can get a couple of guys who are up to no good to start causing trouble in his neighborhood. When 26 gets into one little fight, his mom will get scared and say youre moving to your auntie and uncle's in bel-air

Ths comment is address to poster @23:

Your schtick is a GALACTIC FAIL in all of its iterations. It is not funny in the least.

That is all.

Presented without comment:

Latham's pro bono programs are very immigration-focused--asylum, domestic violence.

20 raised a good issue- "Working for individuals as clients can be such a pain. They are very fee sensitive. They will quibble about every bill."

How much should I charge for the retainer? To make sure I get paid for the work I do.

My husband is a solo immigration attorney and he graduated from a top tier law school. He went into this area of law because he truly wanted to help immigrants and provide them top notch legal services. It's not very lucrative but he loves his job, his clients love him and he he feels like he's doing something for the greater good. Not every immigration attorney is trying to take advantage of people and, in fact, these people are probably the exception to the rule. Unfortunately they are the ones we all hear about.

I can also say with certainty that an immigration attorney like my husband will provide much better service than a law firm's pro bono department. How many associates in big law are going to give their pro bono clients their cell phone number and talk to them at night or on the weekends? An immigration attorney that cares put their immigration clients first. The reality of firms is that billable work will always come first.

The only problem is what to do if we toss all the wetbacks back to Mexico or wherever. Who will take care of our yards, our kids, wash our cars, clean our clothes, wash dishes, work in fast food, build our houses, paint, replace shingles, and the list goes on and on. With all the welfare and tax credits available, the Americans of African ancestry won't work even if you pay them well. So, how will we survive without the wetbacks? Inquiring minds want to know.

48 here - One exception to my comment may be asylum cases. Individuals generally can't afford the fees for these types of cases (>$10K) but a firm can eat that without blinking. So, a lot of solos generally under-charge for these cases and I would imagine not put in the effort that is really needed to do a good job. This is definitely an area where pro-bono may be the best way to go.

48 here - One exception to my comment may be asylum cases. Individuals generally can't afford the fees for these types of cases (>$10K) but a firm can eat that without blinking. So, a lot of solos generally under-charge for these cases and I would imagine not put in the effort that is really needed to do a good job. This is definitely an area where pro-bono may be the best way to go.

Why are day laborers always so short?

Tall night laborer

48 here - One exception to my comment may be asylum cases. Individuals generally can't afford the fees for these types of cases (>$10K) but a firm can eat that without blinking. So, a lot of solos generally under-charge for these cases and I would imagine not put in the effort that is really needed to do a good job. This is definitely an area where pro-bono may be the best way to go.

48 - I bet your husband's briefs suck big time too

15

48,

Your husband is a despicable jackass. But not as big of one as you are, because you, after all, married him.

Many recent immigrants, legal or not, have little money, little familiarity with the legal system, and little trust in advice from public sources. Therefore they seek out someone from their home country, if possible, the same village, thinking someone in the community won't totally screw them--even that they are obligated by kinship, or something, to help them out. This is of course the wrong logic, because incumbent hacks have long earned easy money preying upon their FOB cousins. They keep their clients in the dark on their case, rack up big fees, and then tell them the government screwed them over as they are bundled into a van by DHS. (Walang hiya.)

I'm often set upon by immigrants in my extended family looking for advice and getting rather cross when I refuse, because I have no interest in losing my license with out-of-jurisdiction hackery. I'm sure many first-generation lawyers experience the same. I think that unlike Lat's my people and many others not from merchant or colonial-proxy classes value loyalty more than quality and are therefore not eager to hire some lawyer without a lacquered wooden clock carved in the shape of his home country on his office wall.

1: Be an immigration lawyer
2: ????
3: PROFIT

When are we going to have an open thread about unemployed wanna-be lawyers that don't know a damn thing about what they're talking about? Oh wait that's every thread.

It's truly embarrassing to share the same profession as many of you. Your ignorant and racist comments are just as disgraceful as the attorneys who take advantage of their immigrant clients.

57, they aren't around to post responses, because they're too busy taking it up the ass.

Dear 59,

You're one to talk, as the comments you authored and signed as "guest" are truly indicative of your evil character.

it is unbelievable how uninformed you all are about the true nature of immigration legal services in this country. a huge amount of the work is done by non-profits who have really really talented lawyers. the charge to each client, even if their cases last years and years, is around $40, usually to cover mailing costs. the lawyers make very little, but are dedicated enough to their clients and work that they make it work.

i didnt realize that others in the legal profession actually assumed that based on a few bad apples, the entire immigration law field was predatory. it is absolutely not. in fact, many immigration legal services orgs are doing outreach to help people steer clear of such predatory "lawyers".

Why does lat talk in 1st person plural? Surely, when he says:

"We have the warm fuzzies for immigration law because it got us a Second Circuit oral argument while we were in the U.S. Attorney’s Office."

he means "while I was in the U.S. Attorney's Office." Right?

Does Lat have an invisible friend that I'm not aware of?

Today's immigrants are whiners. When MY ancestors came here, we didn't have lawyers! We just went and worked in steel mills for abysmally low wages, suffered from horrible substance abuse problems, abused our children, lived 4 people to a room, were taken advantage of by everyone and anyone, and had to wait several generations before our people became educated and actually had a chance at making a better life. THAT'S the way it SHOULD be!

No but in all seriousness shut up. Immigration law is important and almost all of our families were there at some point in the past. I say God bless anyone who tries to help these people.

39 = learn the appropriate use of apostrophes immediately.

http://www.apostropheabuse.com/

Hey 22 - this quote: "..the crime rate among non-citizens is substantially lower than that of citizens..." Is not true. The crime rate of illegal non-citizens is 100% because they are here ILLEGALLY. How many 'legal' non-citizens are here? Not enough to bring down the rate overall of the non-citizens to be lower than legal citizens.

65

I dont know what you think is wrong with 39s' use of apostrophe's. Perhaps its "you" who are in need of the lesson!

As an immigration lawyer, I work with asylum-seekers, survivors of domestic violence, and trafficking victims. You know, the standard tired, poor, "huddled masses yearning to breathe free." Just as there will always be a need for undertakers, there will always been a need for immigration attorneys. Despite graduating last year, I was employed well before Bar results were released. Unlike many of my classmates, I'm still employed. It's not lucrative, but it more than covers my monthly expenses.

The problem with many immigration attorneys is that immigration is merely a side-practice. Their mistakes are simply deported (explaining why our malpractice insurance is so cheap). Sure, there are scum immigration attorneys. There are scum attorneys in every field. But, there are amazing immigration attorneys, too.

At the end of the day, I'm happy. I enjoy my work and the clients. I see a lot of heartbreak, but the successes I have change lives.

Give Lat credit-- I mean at least he didn't put a nearly naked Philippino houseboy in front of the American
flag at the front of the article

This was requested before, so when is the thread on Admiralty Law coming?

66--

Be smart, for once in your life. Non-citizens include legal residents, and legal permanent residents.

And even if it didn't, you know very well what the statement is trying to say...so please, for the love of all that is intelligent, stop acting like an idiot.

Second 63.

Lat, maybe my intuitive sense of journalistic style is way off here, but I can't help but think you're crossing a line with your use of the first-person plural.

When something like a New York Times editorial uses the word, "we," it is doing so because a statement it is making reflects, more or less, the aggregate view of the editorial board.

Increasingly, when someone like a David Lat uses the word, "we," it is because he thinks he is British royalty.

Today's latest example is just too much:

"It’s also on our mind because our aunt from the Philippines, a green card holder with a question about filing a petition for her daughter, recently asked us for an immigration lawyer referral."

Are you serious? You, Elie, Kash and that Laurie Lin person you unearth from a fetid coffin every week or so to tell us which lawyers are getting married all share the same aunt who has immigration law questions?

Buddy, you're a smart guy and a generally good writer, so you should take the hint and mind the quirks. Now if there was only some way to also address this fixation with calling everyone with a high-end law degree (and I mean EVERYONE) physically attractive...

@71,

Agreed.

@66,

Act like you've got some sense.

I'm inthe Silicon Valley and i know some immigration attorneys that do VERY well financially. They help high tech companies secure TN1 and H1B work visas for Canadian and Indian high tech workers.

37 - numerous studies show that immigrants are in fact contributing more to the public purse than they take out. the idea that immigrants are a drain on public resources is a stereotype mascarading as economics. most immigrants don't come here for the welfare system - if they were interested in that, they'd move to canada.

71 - 66 here. I know 'non-citizens' include legal residents - that is why I made the distinction between legal & non-legal citizens in my post (perhaps you should re-read it). And if you are a lawyer, then try to write what you mean rather than having someone trying to interpret what you wrote. Who cares about your 'intent'. My post still stands. And instead of calling someone you do not know an 'idiot' because they pointed out false information in one of your posts, how about acting like an adult? You are an adult, are you not?

Used to work at Fragomen. Same biglaw, same shit hours, more mind-numbing. Only had corporate clients, so disagree completely with poster in article. Wasn't in it for the love of freedom and the American dream. Will agree, however, that the job sucked.

PE: You are a retard. Any new immigration proposal is premised on the creation of a new visa category (H-2C most recently). This will actually help to churn up business for immigration attorneys.

If you want to find a reputable immigration lawyer for a referral, look to the American Immigration Lawyers Association's directory of members. www.aila.org. Not all immigration lawyers are incompetent scum, just as all personal injury lawyers aren't ambulance-chasers and all disability lawyers aren't conniving cheats out to rob taxpayers. Okay, wait...maybe "we" should strike that last one....but you get my drift.

74 is describing the worst kind of immigration lawyers.

I summered at an Immigration Law Clinic after first year of law school. They charged very modest fees and did only family based immigration. I really enjoyed the work because I had never felt so appreciated. I'd worked at a Fortune 50 company as a mid- management corporate drone before law school so being thanked was unheard of. I left each day feeling like I'd helped someone even if it was just translate the questions from Spanish to English.

I am sure there are some unscrupulous attorneys out there who swindle clients but they exist in every area of the law.

79, this is 74. Please explain why you feel that way.

The racist and sexist comments on this site do nothing but reinforce the belief of most people that lawyers are scumbags. At such a terrible time for our profession, could we try and elevate the discourse and reclaim the dignity of the profession? The time for childish games has passed, and my tolerance for the ridiculous comments here along with it!

79 -

Really? They took er jobs! Get a life.

As an Immigration Attorney myself, I've found the lawyers who screw over their clients are the ones who maintain a practice in something else but will also take on an immigration case. Those are the ones who truly don't know the laws and take advantage of their clients, not the ones who exclusively practice Immigration Law.

Furthermore, just because someone does not have a legal status does not mean that there are not ways for them to get a legal status. Often these people, who are often at a lower education level don't have the ability to navigate the laws and apply for the benefits that would give them a legal status. These are precisely the people who need immigration lawyers.

37 - +1. But most of the people supporting open borders are exactly the infantile utopia seekers of which you speak, like 75. (Yes, that's right 75, let's let everyone in since they all contribute more than they take out, right? A day laborer or migrant farm worker who makes $8/hr pays enough in taxes to cover his children's schooling? You fail basic math.)

Bring me your poor, your tired, your hungry, and I will educate their children, treat them in my hospitals, and otherwise build and maintain the infrastructure and public services to support them for free!

This comment is addressed to 63.

You must be new here.

Lat does not have an invisible friend. He addresses himself as "we" because he has a little mouse in his pocket. He has kept this mouse in his pocket for many years. The mouse advised him on an asylum case he handled while at the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Please, get with the program.

22 - Let me get this straight. Illegal immigrants by defenition have broken the law. So they are 100% criminals. How does the rest of the population exceed this percentage?

85 -

1) The majority of migrant workers don't bring their kids; they send money home.
2) Since when do illegal immigrants or their children attend public school?

85 -

1) Most migrant workers don't bring their kids; they send money home.
2) Since when do illegal immigrants or their children attend public schools?

Lat has a nearly naked Philippino houseboy in his pocket.

87 - Immigration laws are administrative laws. Thus a person who would be here in violation of immigration laws would not be a criminal any more than someone who got a parking ticket would be a criminal.

91 is mostly correct. Criminal charges do apply, however, after repeated removals/failure to attend hearing, etc.

hey, 85 - sounds like your real problem is with government programs in general (your argument equally applies to american-born low-income workers). we're not going to resolve that debate here. in the meantime, wrap your mind around the idea that not all immigrants are day laborers. i am an immigrant and paid over $65,000 in taxes last year. how much did you contribute?
75

Lat's mouse gives him the "warm fuzzies."

Immigration firms pay sh*t. This summer, I saw an immigration solo based in Boston [the city of, not a subrub] looking for a full-time attorney to come on board. He was offering $28,000, no benefits. Holy fucking fuck!

"Is such criticism of immigration lawyers justified?"

Usually.

95 - What's even more pathetic is that I bet someone took the position...

92 - I agree. there are criminal penalties for failing to obey the orders of an Immigration Judge. But I was trying to rebut a comment that all Illegal Immigrants are criminals.

89

I didn't catch your sarcasm at first. Since when do illegal immigrant children attend public schools. Good one.

Seriously? Like a large percentage--I'm thinking 25+% of the West side schools in my small western metropolis are "undocumented" children.

There are plenty of well-qualified and competent lawyers working in immigration practice groups and at boutique firms.

It's like any other practice area - some people do it well, some people do it poorly and a few do it badly enough to be in the news. The vast majority, however, are committed not only to assisting clients and foreign nationals, but upholding U.S. immigration law.

There are plenty of well-qualified and competent lawyers working in immigration practice groups and at boutique firms.

It's like any other practice area - some people do it well, some people do it poorly and a few do it badly enough to be in the news. The vast majority, however, are committed not only to assisting clients and foreign nationals, but upholding U.S. immigration law.

91 and 92: If they are here illegally, how are they supporting themselves? By working. And do they pay taxes? Of course not.

It's just a reality - illegals commit crimes all the time because they cannot do things such as work, get a driver's license, get car insurance, etc.

102 - You're wrong.

Undocumented workers can apply for ITIN numbers from the IRS, which allow them to file tax returns like anyone else. Many do this in hopes that it will, eventually, be seen as a good faith effort if/when immigration law is reformed.

Laws re: driver's licenses vary by state. There is no hard and fast federal law regulating what documentation is required.

99-

Why? Because they're not white and speak another language?

*eyeroll*

Studies have shown that people often dramatically overestimate the number of undocumented foreign nationals in their communities.

79 -

Yes, it's so terrible that someone exists to help U.S. companies remain profitable.

One of these days people are going to understand that our country's apparent inability to adequately teach math and science makes it imperative that companies import foreign talent.

It costs upwards of $5000, not including legal fees from a decent firm, for a company to hire a foreign worker. You think they'd go through that if there were scads of qualified citizens just hanging around? No.

And before you start screaming about wages, know that for all H-1Bs and some TNs, you're required to certify the wage paid with the DOL.

103 - you're being painfully optimistic and rather unrealistic. I work in this area.

The truth is that they generally don't apply for these numbers because they are unaware that they can, they don't take the time to do it, or they're afraid to show the government that they're here illegally.

Additionally, to suggest that they immigrate illegally and then follow the rules when they get here completely belies logic.

Lat,

Did you have to pick such an inflammatory comment to craft your question? "Shrug your shoulders when the alien rapes someone." Is that really part of the debate on immigration law? Aren't criminal defense lawyers, including those who represent white collar criminals, also shrugging their shoulders at the law when they representing their clients?

8 USC 1325

Any alien who (1) enters or attempts to enter the United States at any time or place other than as designated by immigration officers, or (2) eludes examination or inspection by immigration officers, or (3) attempts to enter or obtains entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or the willful concealment of a material fact, shall, for the first commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 6 months, or both, and, for a subsequent commission of any such offense, be fined under title 18, United States Code, or imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.

106 , you're being painfully patronizing. I work in the area, too.

It seems we just work with different groups of people.

89/104

"Why? Because they're not white and speak another language?"

Well, if 75% of those attending certain neighborhood schools fit into the hispanic and recent immigrant category, then it serves to reason that a part of of that population is here illegally.

You're going to try to paint me as a racist or whatever. If that helps you sleep at night then good. My state is estimated to be about 12% Latin American, and estimates that between 3-5% of the total population of the state is here illegally. So in a neighborhood with 75% Latin American kids in the schools, about 1/3 of those being illegal doesn't seem too far off.

Certainly in the white flight schools you don't see this, but in the poorer neighborhoods, I don't think 25% is out of the question at all.

Do these people at the immigration clinics around town come from no where?

*eyeroll*

It's always funny when liberals trot out the tired old euphemism "undocumented workers" instead of "illegal aliens."

a) very misleading to call the group "workers" when not all of them are workers
b) they have documents. It's just that their documents do not qualify for US immigration rules and so they decide to break the law instead.

Instead of calling someone a "burglar," let's call that person an "undocumented guest." A carjacker can be an "undocumented test-driver."

Saying someone is undocumented makes it sound like they merely misplaced their papers. Sort of like Velma and her glasses.

illegal U-turn = undocumented vehicle rotation

109 - and yet it doesn't bother you that they can't do it legally...

#110 - "My state is estimated to be about 12% Latin American, and estimates that between 3-5% of the total population of the state is here illegally. So in a neighborhood with 75% Latin American kids in the schools, about 1/3 of those being illegal doesn't seem too far off. Certainly in the white flight schools you don't see this, but in the poorer neighborhoods, I don't think 25% is out of the question at all."

I agree that probably the parents of 25% of those school children are illegal - but I suspect that many of them were born in the USA and, as a result, are US citizens.

For anyone who doubts this - drive around the schools in communities like Port Chester, New York: the children of the illegal day workers in Grenwich don't liv e in Grenwich. They live in the barrio in Port Chester.

Please do a thread on Family Law.

108 - obviously those are crimes, however there are people here who came in legally originally and have just overstayed their visas so that criminal statute would not apply.

I love that all these Big Law associates pretend that they know anything about immigration lawyers and our clients. I love that corporate and litigation associates are calling immigration attorneys scum for doing whatever we can to help our clients. How does that differ from what corporate and litigation attorneys do?

Yes, immigration law is fraught with pseudo-immigration lawyers that are not members of any State Bar. How does that say anything about legitimate immigration attorneys?

As for the comment about our clients avoiding deportation only to rape again. If you knew anything about immigration law, you would know that rape, murder, domestic abuse, stealing, and many other less serious crimes will ALWAYS result in deportation. In immigration law, we call those aggravated felonies, and there is no way to avoid deportation if you have an aggravated felony.

Stop believing everything you hear from Rush, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs. Research the immigration laws yourself.

I love that all these Big Law associates pretend that they know anything about immigration lawyers and our clients. I love that corporate and litigation associates are calling immigration attorneys scum for doing whatever we can to help our clients. How does that differ from what corporate and litigation attorneys do?

Yes, immigration law is fraught with pseudo-immigration lawyers that are not members of any State Bar. How does that say anything about legitimate immigration attorneys?

As for the comment about our clients avoiding deportation only to rape again. If you knew anything about immigration law, you would know that rape, murder, domestic abuse, stealing, and many other less serious crimes will ALWAYS result in deportation. In immigration law, we call those aggravated felonies, and there is no way to avoid deportation if you have an aggravated felony.

Stop believing everything you hear from Rush, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs. Research the immigration laws yourself.

88, are you joking? Children of illegal immigrants don't attend public school? Have you ever been to a public school in Los Angeles, San Diego, Santa Cruz, Monterey, or really any California county? The schools are FULL of children of illegals. My mom was a teacher at LAUSD until she retired recently, and my best friend's wife is a public school teacher and both have had illegals in their classrooms for years. Again, this would be that infantile utopia seeking thing - check your facts before premising your arguments on abjectly false assertions.

And 93, nice try, but you completely missed the point, or are more likely just choosing to ignore the unpleasant reality. You are well aware that you are not the average immigrant, let alone the average illegal immigrant, and adding to 37's apt description, even if we can afford to provide certain services to all of our citizens, including those whose tax contributions do not cover all of the services they consume, that does not mean that we can afford to take on large numbers of new residents who do not contribute enough in taxes to pay for their cost of the services they consume. I don't think you'd get much debate about opening the borders to people of sufficient financial means to guarantee that they will pay more in taxes than they consume in services, a practice which has actually been adopted in various other countries. But you seem to be arguing that since some immigrants can pay for themselves, we should open the borders to all - a response which is fallacious at best and seemingly consciously intellectually dishonest.

-- 85

Amen to 120. Lat is clearly a part of the Borg.

Where is the look at Criminal Defense?

120 - "I don't think you'd get much debate about opening the borders to people of sufficient financial means to guarantee that they will pay more in taxes than they consume in services, a practice which has actually been adopted in various other countries." And you'd be dead wrong. See the vitriolic debate on this site a few months ago when we were discussing H1-B visas. Opponents of immigration are remarkably consistent in their blanket opposition to foreigners "coming here to steal ARE JURBS," whether we're talking about PhDs or tomato pickers. On my part, I am consistent in my support for open immigration across the board (subject to national security-related restrictions). I don't think the government would do a very good job deciding which types of immigrants are good for society and which ones are not. This should be, and in some cases is, settled by the labor market (incidentally, for the first time in decades, the number of immigrants in the US has declined this year as a direct result of the crisis). In sum, while some immigrants may be contributing less than others, their impact is overall positive and decisions on who is needed and who is not should be left to employers, not the government. There is nothing fallacious or dishonest about that.

and as an addendum to my post at 123 - today's dishwasher may be tomorrow's restaurant manager and the parent of future ivy league alumni. you believe in entrepreneurship and social mobility, don't you? that's why blocking out entire social strata is foolish.

117: Not true. Those who overstay the time granted at the time of initial entry almost always had originally intended to do so. It's real simple; you land at JFK, and the first person you see is an immigration officer. He/she asks how long you intend to stay, etc. "Six months as a tourist, but I only have $100 and I don't know anyone here." This person has misrepresented their intentions to a federal officer. See where I'm goin' here?? Ditto the man/woman/child who crosses without inspection...they are ALL breaking the law! I'm really sorry that Mexico and a good part of the rest of this world are economic basket cases which can not support their populations. When did it become the United States' responsibility to house anyone who wants to live here? I am not opposed to legal immigration, but if your very first act is to flout the laws of this country, you ain't doing it right. P.S. Former employee of the Immigration Service, yes I DO know what I"m talking about. P.S. The Immigration "bar" is composed of some of the sleaziest, dishonest attorneys on the face of the earth, but they are not all bad....

123 - Your assertion that "their contribution is overall positive" is not only unsupported, but even if true, does not in any way support the assertion that open borders would not change this balance of contribution, since right now, as you point out, the H1Bs are only admitted if they can pay for themselves.

If we open the borders, do you really think the number of people who come in who are of means to pay for their consumption of public services will sufficiently exceed the number who are NOT of such means to balance the net required expenditure to support the two groups combined?

Seems like a mighty convenient (and unrealistic) assumption to me - if we open the borders, enough rich people will come to pay for all of the poor people. Yeah right.

126 - "If we open the borders, do you really think the number of people who come in who are of means to pay for their consumption of public services will sufficiently exceed the number who are NOT of such means to balance the net required expenditure to support the two groups combined?"
Yes, this has been documented by economists. I'll look up some studies for you, but in the meantime, use google.

126 - about 15 seconds of research yielded this paper from harvard business school. i hope you'll sleep better now, knowing the country is safe from immigrant leeches.

http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/09-013.pdf

LOL 127, "use google" is the response of someone who has no data to back up their specious assertions.

But of course, in the absence of hard data, I realize it's much more convenient for your argument to assume that for every tomato picker or dishwasher with 3 kids, there will be someone making $200,000 a year to pay for the services the dishwasher's family consumes. And of course, the number of people making $200,000 a year is equal to the number of dishwashers in society at large, right? And the incentive of people making six figures to emigrate to a new country is the same as that of the poor and uneducated, right? Again, I say to you, get real - your argument is disingenuous.

129 - read 128. is that data hard enough for you?

22, I don't believe your data. Also, as more mestizos become American citizens, the "native born" crime rate goes up, making the recent immigrant rate look lower.

Actually 130, that paper in no way addresses the subject of the probable composition of immigrants after a change to an open border policy, the question raised by 127 and for which data was to be provided. So, no, it isn't hard enough for me, because it doesn't even discuss the question. Perhaps you should actually read the papers you cite first?

You sound like one of the morons citing the WHO ranking for the proposition that U.S. health care is 37th, equal to the Congo, without even reading the intro and realizing that the ranking is primarily based on equality and distribution of available care and not treatment outcomes or even giving a moment's thought to whether the average person's experience of treatment in the U.S. is even remotely equivalent to that in the Congo.

105, right, because the Indian and Chinese math whizzes are just like the uneducated mestizos that pour in from Latin America.

123 and 124, what stupid posts. Yes, some children of peasants become rocket scientists, but most don't. To argue otherwise is foolish. Also, there is more to immigration than the labor market. You ignore the profoundly negative cultural effect mass third world immigration has. Further, as has been stated in this thread multiple times, you can't have a welfare state and open immigration. Obviously, employers want the cheap labor, because they don't get saddled with the costs.

ONLY elites can suggest that we need even LEGAL immigration at this point. We have plenty of Americans with low educational attainment levels, and many of them are unemployed right now. If you HATE low-wage workers, you should support amnesty and illegal immigration. If you HATE black America, you should support more immigration.

It's only those who wish to have a cheap-labor, exploitable workforce who support illegal immigration. Oh, and immigration ATTORNEYS who view illegal immigration as job security.

There's a high cost to cheap labor, and that cost gets passed on to the taxpayer. Immigration attorneys don't care about the cost of educating illegals in our public schools; immigration attorneys don't care about the "free" health care that taxpayers subsidize for businesses who don't pay it; immigration attorneys don't care about the DECREASING WAGES that increases in cheap labor brings.

Immigration attorneys hate the citizen. They also view sovereignty as thing of the past. They are dangerous.

Lawyers who complain about jobs being outsourced to India should think twice about supporting import of cheap labor; it's the little guys who are hurting when illegals come in and undercut wages.

You care about your job going overseas; you should defend the American worker who sees his job undercut here in the U.S. by laborers brought in with support from AILA, MALDEF, NLG, LA RAZA, etc.

Don't bother 136.

The elitist Obama voters campaigning to open the borders to unlimited Mexican labor could care less about the working conditions or wages of blue collar American workers. Those guys are the enemy - they live in "flyover country" to the coastal elite, and don't understand that the Democrats are just trying to help them by importing unlimited hordes of poor immigrant laborers. What's fair is fair, after all - they should be happy to lose their jobs or have their wages cut to compete with unlimited immigrants.

Long live The Party.

-59
-82

Well said. Those casting aspersions at immigration lawyers should stop and think about what this comment thread says about how narrow-minded, xenophobic, and hateful the posters are.

138 --

There is no constitutional requirement we have ANY immigration. In fact, the U.S. had a moratorium on immigration for a good two decades between 1925 - 45. It allowed the Great Wave time to assimilate.

It's very difficult to argue that we need massive amounts of cheap labor anymore. We're a different country than we were in 1900.

But immigration attorneys don't even think about this. They just want more and more, screw the consequences. And that's why they're a big problem.

But go ahead and call people names. That's what ALIA, MALDEF, La Raza, et. al. do best.

That's why you had better find a new job. Immigration will soon come to an end, and there will be NO NEED FOR IMMIGRATION ATTORNEYS!

BTW, 138: Look back at the comment ATL posted at the very top in the blue box. The commenter noted that immigration attorneys "Call anyone who supports the rule of law racist."

I think you've proven him right.

There's no money in immigration even when you are helping companies bring in workers. The workers still have to pay for part of the costs and individuals don't have money. Immigration is a money losing section of law firms.

141, tell us how you know this?

Also, could anyone say what the average new associate makes at a large immigration firm like Fragomen, BAL Corporate, or Foster Quan? Anyone know what you can expect to pull down at a smaller immigration firm in the 10-20 attorney range?

141, tell us how you know this.

Also, could anyone say what the average new associate makes at a large immigration firm like Fragomen, BAL Corporate, or Foster Quan? Anyone know what you can expect to pull down at a smaller immigration firm in the 10-20 attorney range?

I have a sincere interest in immigration law, but I learned zero from these comments. People need to get a grip and vent elsewhere.

Many employers keep illegals off the books and pay them in cash. They aren't contibuting much in terms of tax revenue.

I worked for four years at a "boutique" immigration firm in DC. First year salary was ~55K. I didn't mind it because I was doing appellate work which I thoroughly enjoyed. I ended up leaving due to disagreements with the managing partner. In my years of interaction w/ other immigration attorneys, I met precious few that I would recommend to a friend. And, in reviewing files of new clients, I found a distressingly high percentage of immigration lawyers who had no grasp of grammar, spelling or basic reasoning skills, much less case law or blue booking.

In my first career before law school, I employed over forty people in low wage service industry and had extreme difficulty finding legal workers. Quite often, I would hire someone with a green card and SS card only to get a letter the following year from the SS Administration saying that the SS # was not valid. Yet these employees (usually long gone by then) paid their taxes - of which they will not see a cent of benefits. It is not the illegal workers that are a drain on society - it's the unscrupulous employers who wink and nod and pay the workers under the table in cash, typically for below market wages, knowing they have the upper hand.

In my experience, the illegal workers get shafted by the system either way - it's a sad statement that living in a foreign country where they know they are not wanted, working like a dog for less than prevailing wages, and living in constant fear of removal - is still better than staying home.

I won't get into whether it's "morally" or "ethically" right to enter the U.S. and work without authorization - it is patently not legal. But I understand their motivation. And, yes, I am a 1.5 generation immigrant.

Unfortunately 146, what you may not have seen was that many of the social security numbers they used belonged to actual citizens, and that many of those people subsequently ended up fighting with the IRS and having their lives profoundly disrupted due to this identity theft.

You can decline to pass judgment, but the way I see it, if they come here and work or consume public services illegally, they are hurting people - other people who would have taken those jobs, people whose social security numbers they used to falsify documents, people who they hit-and-run in their cars because they are afraid of being picked up, people who pay for the schools their children go to (and pay a lot more in both dollars and quality of education for ESL catchup) and pay for the hospitals they're treated in - to decline to pass judgment is no different than to decline to pass judgment on stealing. If you take something that comes from the pockets of someone else without their consent, you are stealing, and when criminal migrants come here to get what they can, you can feel for how their lives might suck back home and understand why they do it, but don't let that distract you from the fact that when they get here, the rest of us very often pay and pay dearly for what they take.

141 here - I say that immigration is a money loser because the law firm where I work just eliminated the entire section - every single person in that section is gone. Immigrants owe the firm hundreds of thousands of dollars - and these are immigrants who work in professional jobs.

Thank you 141. I had the sense that this is true to a certain extent. I looked at the firms coming to OCI that had immigration practices and saw that associates had been around 15 years or more without moving to partner or of counsel. So that was a red flag. But still, to pay an attorney 250-300K a year in a practice area that doesn't turn a profit doesn't make sense. So why do/did large law firms have these practices at all? Perhaps a corporation that goes to a firm for employment legal work doesn't shop around and brings the immigration matter to the same firm (though it makes more sense to either keep that work in house or send it to a boutique). Maybe firms take the loss in order to keep the client. But why have the firm outsource it? Maybe they weren't taking a loss before, but now that clients are demanding lower rates, they are, which could explain why large firms are shutting down, or at least not replenishing, these practices.

I'm just trying to figure all this out, and I'm not sure whether any of this reasoning is true. If you don't mind taking another minute, would you consider responding as to why you think this is and the future of corporate immigration practice? Thanks in advance.

141-148 here - in our firm's case we do other types of work for these clients - labor, employment, professional malpractice, non-subscriber, EEOC work, etc and to help them out with immigration issues of employees seemed logical.

When the department was being run by efficient paralegals, the business was okay. Once the firm started having attorneys do the work, it became a money loser. Plus, I think the immigrants talk to each other and the firm got a reputation for not aggresively collecting outstanding money owed to it.

I didn't work in the immigration section, but sat by some of the folks who did. It seemed like a horrible job. You know how frustrating it can be to talk to people who don't have much English and they have heavy accents? That's all this was - painful efforts to communicate on the telephone.

The equity partner who was "in charge" of immigration actually did no immigration work whatsoever. It was all associate and staff work. I can't imagine a partner doing that type of work. It had a very call center type feel to it.