Judge abolishes Trump-era restrictions on visas for skilled foreign workers

 Rules restricting H-1B visas were found invalid because they were issued under a Department of Homeland Security acting secretary who was unlawfully appointed to the role.

OAKLAND, Calif. (CN) — A federal judge on Wednesday permanently abolished Trump-era changes to H-1B visa rules that businesses and universities complained would make it harder to hire and recruit highly skilled foreign workers and students.

The Department of Homeland Security and Department of Labor issued rules in October 2020 that revamped the H-1B visa program. The rules applied to tech industry workers as well as doctors, accountants, professors, scientists and architects.

The Trump administration switched the H-1B visa system from a lottery that selects applicants at random to one that prioritizes higher-wage jobs — ostensibly to deter U.S. companies from replacing American workers with cheaper foreign labor.

Senior U.S. District Judge Jeffery White, a George W. Bush appointee, temporarily blocked the rules in December last year after a coalition of business groups and academic institutions led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce sued to stop them.

Judge White also last year halted a separate attempt by former President Donald Trump to suspend certain types of non-immigration work visas, finding he lacked authority to make those sweeping changes in a presidential proclamation.

The Chamber of Commerce and its co-plaintiffs argued the rules violated the Immigration and Nationality Act, which states that noncitizens should be issued H-1B visas “in the order in which petitions are filed for such visas.”

More here:

https://www.courthousenews.com/judge-abolishes-trump-era-restrictions-on-visas-for-skilled-foreign-workers/

Another Trump rule goes into the dustbin.




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

That Uplifting Tweet You Just Shared? A Russian Troll Sent It

Image
Here’s what Russia’s 2020 disinformation operations look like, according to two experts on social media and propaganda. By   DARREN LINVILL   &   PATRICK WARREN Internet trolls don’t troll. Not the professionals at least. Professional trolls don’t go on social media to antagonize liberals or belittle conservatives. They are not narrow minded, drunk or angry. They don’t lack basic English language skills. They certainly aren’t  “somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds,”  as the president once put it. Your stereotypical trolls do exist on social media, but the amateurs aren’t a threat to Western democracy. Professional trolls, on the other hand, are the tip of the spear in the new digital, ideological battleground. To combat the threat they pose, we must first understand them — and take them seriously. MORE: https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/russia-troll-2020-election-interference-twitter-916482/ Posted by Jamie B.
Read more

The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term

Image
The Nightmare Scenario That Keeps Election Lawyers Up At Night -- And Could Hand Trump A Second Term   (Photo: Photos: Getty Images) Americans will almost certainly go to bed on Nov. 3 without knowing who won the presidential election. Since millions of people will vote by mail, constraints on time and resources will slow ballot counting into potentially a weeks-long process. Voting patterns suggest it’s likely that President  Donald Trump  could end Election Day in the lead in certain key states, only to be overtaken by Democratic opponent  Joe Biden  when more votes are tallied.  This could create a nightmare scenario during the three months stretching from Election Day to the Jan. 20 inauguration: a battle on the state and congressional level over who is the legitimate winner. This could include Congress reconvening on Jan. 6, presided over by Vice President  Mike Pence , with no consensus over its potential role in choosing the next president. This is arguably the most likely of th
Read more

Philosophical Question #14 – Lifestyle Choices

Image
Here is an interesting question in my list of philosophical questions: 1.) Should governments have penalties for those who live unhealthy lifestyles? A list of unhealthy lifestyles would include things like smoking, drinking, illegal drugs, prostitution, and other “vice” type activities. I guess the “government penalties” would be referring to monetary punishments, withholding medical treatments (insurance companies would love that), possibly imposing/regulating very high (exorbitant) prices on things considered unhealthy in order to cut down on their use, and other possibilities. 2.) Or, would you say that living an unhealthy lifestyle, likely resulting in a LOT of eventual personal pain and suffering, should be punishment enough for unhealthy lifestyles? When people make bad choices in life, often in their youth where ignorance and immediate gratification takes them over,  3.) Should a society be obligated to help "fix" them, by way of tax money?   Is that part of
Read more