Client Payment Portal

Visa Denials Based on Communist Party Membership

Jan 20, 2020 | Investor Visas

By:  Joseph Barnett

Reports from China indicate that the U.S. Consulate General in Guangzhou has recently increased immigrant visa denials based on INA Section 212(a)(3)(D) related to membership in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), despite the fact that such membership is required and involuntary for most to advance in university, business, or employment.

These immigrant visa denials have been issued after applicants have been placed in administrative processing under INA Section 221(g) after completing an information sheet related to their employment and education history.  It is critical that visa applicants speak with experienced immigration attorneys prior to submitting a response to the Consulate, as this may be the only time to put forward an argument to the consular officer as to why this ground of inadmissibility does not apply.  For example, the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual provides relief for members whose membership was “non-meaningful,” as found by the U.S. Supreme Court in Rowoldt v. Pefetto, 355 U.S. 115 (1957) and Gastelum-Quinones v. Kennedy, 374 U.S. 469 (1963).

Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP attorneys have had numerous successes preparing legal briefs to rebut claims of inadmissibility under INA Section 212(a)(3)(D).  Our firm has also obtained waivers for immigrant visa applications by filing a Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Ground of Inadmissibility with USCIS after a determination of inadmissibility has been made.

If you or your family have been impacted by this ground of inadmissibility, contact a Wolfsdorf Rosenthal LLP attorney today to discuss your case.

Related Posts:

Bloomberg Article: Revival of the EB-5 Visa Program

The EB-5 visa program coveted by many wealthy overseas investors is being revived after changes aimed at curbing abuses. The EB-5 visa program has attracted $37 billion in foreign investments since 2008 and the queue of wealthy applicants from China to India is growing. Earlier this year, the Biden administration signed a law that steps up audits and site visits to deter fraud, while also creating a path for some to skip the backlog of cases if they’re willing to invest in rural areas or places with high unemployment. Roughly 100,000 EB-5 visa applicants with some $15 billion in committed investments had been in limbo since the program lapsed, trade group Invest in the USA estimates. The fresh rules are unleashing pent-up demand. Bernie Wolfsdorf, WR Immigration’s Managing Partner and a former president of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said his firm has been working overtime and hiring new staff to adjust to demand from countries like India, which has eclipsed the number of petitions filed from China. Drawing such investors could help prevent a brain drain, since many wealthy emigrants’ children study at top US schools, he said. Read the entire Bloomberg article here.

Read More

7 Things We Learned from New EB-5 Program Chief Sarah M. Kendall

By: Joseph Barnett Earlier this week, new Immigrant Investor Program Office Chief Sarah Kendall addressed the EB-5 community at the AILA/IIUSA EB-5 Industry Forum in Chicago, Illinois. We are happy to see this type of engagement by USCIS and are hopeful for continued dialogue to address the concerns of immigrant investors and regional centers. Here are seven things we learned from Ms. Kendall: 1. Minor Investors Ms. Kendall confirmed there is no age limit for minors filing as the principal investors but indicated that USCIS will continue to look at issues of contractual capacity and voidability of investment contracts. 2. Bridge Financing Ms. Kendall indicated it was difficult to provide specific guidance on the issue of bridge financing because of the “diversity of work and financial arrangements and structures.” She noted that the term of the loan, by itself, does not disqualify financing as a bridge loan that would receive credit for job creation purposed and that USCIS will look at interim nature of loan and contemplation of future receipt of EB-5 (or other) capital to repay the bridge financing. This is inconsistent with language in RFEs previously issued by USCIS. Additional guidance clarifying this important issue is required to provide certainty for […]

Read More