"USCIS had put a ‘hold’ on US-based green card applicants"

[Mmesa]

Why don't you contact them for your EAD? I thought you can contact them after 90 days of filling for an EAD.

Hey there, yes I contacted them they said there's nothing I can do apart from filing for an expedite, but I don't qualify for "loss of money" because my husband was lucky enough to keep his job during covid or "humanitarian" reasons.

(Because being status-less, unemployed, home assigned, and ignored in the country that gracefully turned down all warnings to eventually become the new epicenter of a repellent disease, and where getting a x-ray done will cost you the price of a new car, is definitely not "humanitarian emergency"... sorry the French in me again )

[ldinh91]

yeah- They have been waiving biometric for some applicants. I guess this waiver most likely applies for people who already have some biometric in file.

That’s true. I’m wondering when they start sending biometric appointments.

[ldinh91]

Hey there, yes I contacted them they said there's nothing I can do apart from filing for an expedite, but I don't qualify for "loss of money" because my husband was lucky enough to keep his job during covid or "humanitarian" reasons.

(Because being status-less, unemployed, home assigned, and ignored in the country that gracefully turned down all warnings to eventually become the new epicenter of a repellent disease, and where getting a x-ray done will cost you the price of a new car, is definitely not "humanitarian emergency"... sorry the French in me again )

You are in the same situation as mine. I am not qualified for loss of money because my husband did not lose the job and he even got a raise. I am pretty worried as it has been more than 100 days and we haven't heard anything for biometrics.

[000000]

You are in the same situation as mine. I am not qualified for loss of money because my husband did not lose the job and he even got a raise. I am pretty worried as it has been more than 100 days and we haven't heard anything for biometrics.

I thought i read several times on this forum this year that people managed to get expedited service for EAD if they showed proof of financial loss by virtue of a job offer. If you can get a job offer, you may be able to use it to expedite. They will ask you to fax this job offer as proof. Just a thought.

[Mmesa]

I thought i read several times on this forum this year that people managed to get expedited service for EAD if they showed proof of financial loss by virtue of a job offer. If you can get a job offer, you may be able to use it to expedite. They will ask you to fax this job offer as proof. Just a thought.

Yeah I wasn't sure it would work with a job offer, it's a bit tricky as you are not supposed really to apply to any job as long as you don't have a legal status, it's worth trying though... Maybe i should look into it!

I was wondering also if my French bank account on which money slowly but constantly vanished those last months (I still have a storage unit and other little charges over there) would help me qualify as "financial loss"?

[ldinh91]

I thought i read several times on this forum this year that people managed to get expedited service for EAD if they showed proof of financial loss by virtue of a job offer. If you can get a job offer, you may be able to use it to expedite. They will ask you to fax this job offer as proof. Just a thought.

Yes, my friend expedited her EAD using her job offer but as ASC was closed, her fingerprint is still pending, so even expedited request is approved, she can't get her EAD until her fingerprint is taken.

[Mmesa]

Yes, my friend expedited her EAD using her job offer but as ASC was closed, her fingerprint is still pending, so even expedited request is approved, she can't get her EAD until her fingerprint is taken.

This is so exhausting.

[verbose]

Mmesa Applying for a job without having work authorization in hand is fine. As long one has prospects of obtaining work authorization before starting work, employers will engage with you. Misrepresenting that you have work authorization when applying for work and/or working when you don’t have work authorization is illegal. To be compliant, all employers will ask for proof of work authorisation on the first day of your job before you begin working.

[manolo]

ldinh91 Your friend will probably get her expedite request denied because of lacking biometrics - that was the case for me. The next step for her would be to reach out to the office of her senator or congressperson to see if they can help her. That worked for me - I got my biometrics taken a few days ago and the expedite request is now being processed.

[ciculove]

ldinh91 Your friend will probably get her expedite request denied because of lacking biometrics - that was the case for me. The next step for her would be to reach out to the office of her senator or congressperson to see if they can help her. That worked for me - I got my biometrics taken a few days ago and the expedite request is now being processed.

Hi Manolo, did you call to ask for expedite, then they said they can't expedite cause you don't have your biometric? I'm reaching out to the congress women now regarding of my case. With her letter, can USCIS do anything without biometrics? Did the your congress person help you to contact USCIS to get you a biometric appointment? Thanks!

[Mmesa]

Hi there,

I don't know if I can share the link here, but you all should read yesterday's press-release/letter from Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley.
It says congress should immediately bail USCIS out BUT adds a lot of proposals on how to manage those funds and control them better through congress action.

It feels good to read that there might be a tiny-tiny-tiny chance for things to become better for us in the midst of this administrative panic, if only!

The link just in case it's accepted on the forum : https://www.merkley.senate.gov/news/...ng-debate-2020


ps : thanks for the infos about job applications, I guess now I only need to find one

[manolo]

ciculove I called them to request they expedite my case, and tthe person I talked to over the phone submitted a request for me. A few hours later I received what looked like an automated email, saying: "Our records indicate that we are awaiting your appearance for biometric processing. Your case is currently in suspense or on hold until we receive your biometrics. [...] You may request expeditious processing again once we have received your biometrics.", and my case status changed to "expedite request denied".

If you can present a compelling case to your congressman/congresswoman or senator, they can reach out to USCIS on your behalf. Have a look at their website: There should be a section about assistance with federal agencies. In my case, USCIS called me a day later with a biometrics appointment. Good luck!

[000000]

Hi there,

I don't know if I can share the link here, but you all should read yesterday's press-release/letter from Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley.
It says congress should immediately bail USCIS out BUT adds a lot of proposals on how to manage those funds and control them better through congress action.

It feels good to read that there might be a tiny-tiny-tiny chance for things to become better for us in the midst of this administrative panic, if only!

The link just in case it's accepted on the forum : https://www.merkley.senate.gov/news/...ng-debate-2020


ps : thanks for the infos about job applications, I guess now I only need to find one

In the meantime it looks like DHS is getting 50Billion

I copied the link to the article but it was removed

Anyway, the article is from fcw dot com. Named House Appropriators pass DHS funding bill

• By Lia Russell
• Jul 15, 2020

A day after union workers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services highlighted the potential impact of furloughs on national security, the House Appropriations Committee passed the Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2021 funding bill, 30-22.

The appropriation would set aside over $50 billion in discretionary funding for DHS and its various agencies, with an addition $5 billion provided for disaster emergency relief. USCIS would receive $183.9 million, an increase of over $51 million from FY 2020 levels.

In May, USCIS asked Congress for $1.2 billion in emergency funding due to declining revenue from immigration applications and other associated fees, which fund a large part of the agency's operations.

The following month, the American Federation of Government Employees told FCW the agency had begun issuing furlough notices to its members , with impacted personnel set to begin a 30-day furlough period on August 3.

The number of furloughed workers was expected to make up to 75 percent of the agency’s total workforce.

AFGE National President Everett Kelley told reporters during a July 14 press call that the agency had seen a huge reduction in the number of visa applications it received, slashing the agency’s revenue by 50 percent.

Other AFGE leaders said that a large number of impacted workers performed duties such as background checks and fraud detection investigations examining applicants who applied for citizenship, work authorization visas or travel documents.

“Our background check and fraud detection units are most heavily hit by furloughs,” AFGE Local 3928 President Ruark Hotopp told reporters.

“We’ll see a lot of background checks not get done, which directly impacts all Americans and our national security.”

AFGE USCIS Council President Danielle Spooner said her union planned to file a grievance due to the agency’s handling of the furlough notices.

“We heard USCIS directorate managers were trying to dispute who [was] furloughed or not, and that the dispute may delay the furlough start for some,” she said during the call.

Despite the grim financial prospects, Hotopp said unions leaders were optimistic that Congress would step in.

“The things we’ve heard on [Capitol] Hill have been very good so far,” he said. “We’ve seen some movement. We still need more work from our congressional allies and friends but we’re hopeful.”

At the same time, the Appropriations Committee adopted several amendments that would neuter some of the White House’s more extreme measures aimed at curbing immigration.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) sponsored an amendment that prohibits Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Temporary Protected Status recipients from being removed from the country.

His fellow Golden State lawmaker, Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), sponsored a similar amendment that would prohibit Immigration and Customs Enforcement from using funding to change a policy that waives in-person class requirements for international students.

Roybal-Allard’s amendment came a day after the Trump Administration announced it was rescinding a previously announced policy that would have barred international students from attending U.S. educational institutions that were online-only in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The committee passed both amendments via voice votes.

Note: This article was updated on July 15 to correct the funding levels for USCIS.

[ldinh91]

In the meantime it looks like DHS is getting 50Billion

I copied the link to the article but it was removed

Anyway, the article is from fcw dot com. Named House Appropriators pass DHS funding bill

• By Lia Russell
• Jul 15, 2020

A day after union workers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services highlighted the potential impact of furloughs on national security, the House Appropriations Committee passed the Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2021 funding bill, 30-22.

The appropriation would set aside over $50 billion in discretionary funding for DHS and its various agencies, with an addition $5 billion provided for disaster emergency relief. USCIS would receive $183.9 million, an increase of over $51 million from FY 2020 levels.

In May, USCIS asked Congress for $1.2 billion in emergency funding due to declining revenue from immigration applications and other associated fees, which fund a large part of the agency's operations.

The following month, the American Federation of Government Employees told FCW the agency had begun issuing furlough notices to its members , with impacted personnel set to begin a 30-day furlough period on August 3.

The number of furloughed workers was expected to make up to 75 percent of the agency’s total workforce.

AFGE National President Everett Kelley told reporters during a July 14 press call that the agency had seen a huge reduction in the number of visa applications it received, slashing the agency’s revenue by 50 percent.

Other AFGE leaders said that a large number of impacted workers performed duties such as background checks and fraud detection investigations examining applicants who applied for citizenship, work authorization visas or travel documents.

“Our background check and fraud detection units are most heavily hit by furloughs,” AFGE Local 3928 President Ruark Hotopp told reporters.

“We’ll see a lot of background checks not get done, which directly impacts all Americans and our national security.”

AFGE USCIS Council President Danielle Spooner said her union planned to file a grievance due to the agency’s handling of the furlough notices.

“We heard USCIS directorate managers were trying to dispute who [was] furloughed or not, and that the dispute may delay the furlough start for some,” she said during the call.

Despite the grim financial prospects, Hotopp said unions leaders were optimistic that Congress would step in.

“The things we’ve heard on [Capitol] Hill have been very good so far,” he said. “We’ve seen some movement. We still need more work from our congressional allies and friends but we’re hopeful.”

At the same time, the Appropriations Committee adopted several amendments that would neuter some of the White House’s more extreme measures aimed at curbing immigration.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) sponsored an amendment that prohibits Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Temporary Protected Status recipients from being removed from the country.

His fellow Golden State lawmaker, Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), sponsored a similar amendment that would prohibit Immigration and Customs Enforcement from using funding to change a policy that waives in-person class requirements for international students.

Roybal-Allard’s amendment came a day after the Trump Administration announced it was rescinding a previously announced policy that would have barred international students from attending U.S. educational institutions that were online-only in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The committee passed both amendments via voice votes.

Note: This article was updated on July 15 to correct the funding levels for USCIS.

I followed your instruction and read the article. It’s pretty helpful and seems like a good news to me. Thank you for sharing.

[Tibwa]

In the meantime it looks like DHS is getting 50Billion

I copied the link to the article but it was removed

Anyway, the article is from fcw dot com. Named House Appropriators pass DHS funding bill

• By Lia Russell
• Jul 15, 2020

A day after union workers at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services highlighted the potential impact of furloughs on national security, the House Appropriations Committee passed the Homeland Security Fiscal Year 2021 funding bill, 30-22.

The appropriation would set aside over $50 billion in discretionary funding for DHS and its various agencies, with an addition $5 billion provided for disaster emergency relief. USCIS would receive $183.9 million, an increase of over $51 million from FY 2020 levels.

In May, USCIS asked Congress for $1.2 billion in emergency funding due to declining revenue from immigration applications and other associated fees, which fund a large part of the agency's operations.

The following month, the American Federation of Government Employees told FCW the agency had begun issuing furlough notices to its members , with impacted personnel set to begin a 30-day furlough period on August 3.

The number of furloughed workers was expected to make up to 75 percent of the agency’s total workforce.

AFGE National President Everett Kelley told reporters during a July 14 press call that the agency had seen a huge reduction in the number of visa applications it received, slashing the agency’s revenue by 50 percent.

Other AFGE leaders said that a large number of impacted workers performed duties such as background checks and fraud detection investigations examining applicants who applied for citizenship, work authorization visas or travel documents.

“Our background check and fraud detection units are most heavily hit by furloughs,” AFGE Local 3928 President Ruark Hotopp told reporters.

“We’ll see a lot of background checks not get done, which directly impacts all Americans and our national security.”

AFGE USCIS Council President Danielle Spooner said her union planned to file a grievance due to the agency’s handling of the furlough notices.

“We heard USCIS directorate managers were trying to dispute who [was] furloughed or not, and that the dispute may delay the furlough start for some,” she said during the call.

Despite the grim financial prospects, Hotopp said unions leaders were optimistic that Congress would step in.

“The things we’ve heard on [Capitol] Hill have been very good so far,” he said. “We’ve seen some movement. We still need more work from our congressional allies and friends but we’re hopeful.”

At the same time, the Appropriations Committee adopted several amendments that would neuter some of the White House’s more extreme measures aimed at curbing immigration.

Rep. Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.) sponsored an amendment that prohibits Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Temporary Protected Status recipients from being removed from the country.

His fellow Golden State lawmaker, Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard (D-Calif.), sponsored a similar amendment that would prohibit Immigration and Customs Enforcement from using funding to change a policy that waives in-person class requirements for international students.

Roybal-Allard’s amendment came a day after the Trump Administration announced it was rescinding a previously announced policy that would have barred international students from attending U.S. educational institutions that were online-only in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The committee passed both amendments via voice votes.

Note: This article was updated on July 15 to correct the funding levels for USCIS.

This will have no impact on the current budget shortfall. The $1.2b is needed now NOT in October.