<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Immigration Law Blog &#187; New Immigration Laws</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/category/new-immigration-laws/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com</link>
	<description>Attorney Farhad Sethna - Tel (330) 384-8000 or (877) 7US-VISA - www.Immigration-America.com</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 02:00:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>A Common Sense Approach to Padilla v. Kentucky- Competent Representation in Criminal Cases with Immigration Implications</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:09:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Court Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=195</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A lawyer advising a non-citizen client in a criminal matter has an added duty:  to advise the client of the immigration consequences, if any, of a criminal conviction. Failure to advise that results in a deportable consequence or some other immigration detriment, such as inability to naturalize or exclusion, could be the grounds for a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel under Padilla that could result in the underlying conviction being reopened and vacated.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/195/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Arizona Law SB 1070 Exposes a Disturbing Trend</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/191</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/191#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jun 2010 15:34:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Policy Updates]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=191</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arizona Law SB 1070 uses the logic of "immigration compliance" to needlessly trample on the US Constitution, harms US citizens and the non-immigrants alike and damages genuine law enforcement efforts to curb crime.  Severe flaws in the law subject it to strict scrutiny and possible injunction or reversal in the courts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/191/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US Supreme Court issues PADILLA v. KENTUCKY Decision on Immigration Consequences of Criminal Conviction</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Court Decisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Deportation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=187</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The US Supreme Court issues a landmark decision that could affect the reopening and reduction of criminal sentences if the alien was given poor advice or no advice on the immigration consequences of a criminal conviction. Notable is the concurrence (agreement) by Justices Alito and Roberts.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/187/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>E-verify has new teeth &#8211; Big Brother is Watching!</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/117</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/117#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 19:00:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>fsethna2009</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/?p=117</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[E-verify is a draconian system which has finally revealed its ugly side:  employer sanctions and employee arrests]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/117/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>E-verify: A Helpful Big Brother?</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/66</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/66#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 00:54:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/66</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Review and analysis of E-Verify program and procedures
Copyright Farhad Sethna, 2008
Question: should an employer adopt the E-Verify program?

Answer: Briefly, my answer is “no”. Here is why:
1.    The E-Verify program relies on a Social Security Administration database which by the SSA’s own estimate has a 4.1% error rate. Therefore, for every one hundred [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/66/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Recent Immigration Developments following the 9-11 attacks</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/51</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/51#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 10:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.s240101933.onlinehome.us/wp251/?p=51</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In other immigration developments stemming from the September  11th tragedies, there is much to report.
Foremost in the headlines has been the congressional plan to  restructure the INS. While the INS has been restructured many times, the current  proposal appears to be the most sweeping thus far. Congress proposes to break up  [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/51/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Restrictions on visa issuance</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/50</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/50#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 10:26:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[H1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.s240101933.onlinehome.us/wp251/?p=50</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Department of State, in response to the 9-11 attacks,  promulgated an interim rule which became effective on April 1, 2002. A close  examination of the rule is very important in order to protect individuals who  apply for a visa to reenter the United States.
In brief, keeping with its desire to ensure [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/50/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The LIFE Act of December 21, 2000</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/46</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/46#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 10:16:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.s240101933.onlinehome.us/wp251/?p=46</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[On December 21, 2000, (then) President Bill Clinton signed an  immigration legislation package called the &#34;Legal Immigration and Family Equity  Act&#34; (LIFE). The purpose of this article is to provide some background and  context to the provisions of the LIFE legislation, and to list some of the  benefits available under the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/46/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Immigration Reform Act, 1996</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/45</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/45#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 10:15:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.s240101933.onlinehome.us/wp251/?p=45</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As background, the IIRIRA was signed into law on September 30,  1996. It is a draconian measure aimed at controlling illegal immigration through  &#8211; in some instances &#8211; penalizing legal immigrants. I do not oppose curbing  illegal immigration. However, among other issues, I do object to the undue and  unnecessary burdens [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/45/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Immigration Reform in 2007?</title>
		<link>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/44</link>
		<comments>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/44#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 May 2008 10:14:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[New Immigration Laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.s240101933.onlinehome.us/wp251/?p=44</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Immigration Reform in 2007?
By: Attorney Farhad Sethna, Copyright 2007, all rights reserved
In November 2006, the voters of the United States handed control of Congress-the House of Representatives and the Senate- to the Democrats. President Bush is generally pro immigration. However, during his previous six years in office, he was not able to put his immigration [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blog.immigration-america.com/archives/44/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
