28 ms·

U.S. State Department pauses immigrant visa applications

• jjk166 23d ago
  "We're not anti-immigration, we're only anti-illegal immigration!" * indefinitely pauses legal immigration *
  • darknavi 23d ago
    Slanted take here, but this is exactly what they are doing with the federal government. They like to complain that "big government inefficient and bad" while actively making it inefficient and bad. They are fulfilling their own prophecies. Similar to immigration I'm sure. If all immigration is illegal then it's all bad!
    • jachee 23d ago
      The right wing doesn’t want to run the government, they want to occupy it so it doesn’t run except to enrich themselves.
    • stouset 23d ago
      It’s not slanted, it’s accurate.
  • GetThemOut 23d ago
    [flagged]
    • diego_moita 23d ago
      The irony: many native Americans believe that all of your own immigrant ancestors should never be allowed to enter the US. If you really believe what you wrote then I'd suggest to "GetThemOut*" your own immigrant heritage out of the country. * as your trolling username says
      • xdennis 23d ago
        > The irony: many native Americans believe that all of your own immigrant ancestors should never be allowed to enter the US. And your lesson from this is that Native Americans should continue to be ignored and more immigrants let in? If you care about Native Americans (and don't just use them as a rhetorical device to argue with people on the internet) then surely, you'd support a reduction in immigration, right?
        • diego_moita 23d ago
          > And your lesson from this is that Native Americans should continue to be ignored and more immigrants let in? No, that is just the conclusion you want to make. Stop putting in my mouth the words I didn't say.
        • threecheese 23d ago
          “If you care about Native Americans, *and agree with the assertion I presented as fact that they/we are being ignored and that’s purely the fault of new immigrants, and agree with the implication I made that immigration has no value*, then surely …”. Surely.
      • pfannkuchen 23d ago
        There is no contradiction here. Different groups have different interests. The natives rightly attempted to fight off the Europeans. They lost. It does not follow that the Europeans here now should just let in whoever wants to come in, to the point that the Europeans themselves are outnumbered. If the Europeans fight and the newcomers win, so be it. But why should the Europeans lay down and let it happen? Especially when they trivially have the ability to stop it, unlike the natives. For now, anyway…
        • hardbass 19d ago
          People peacefully moving in and settling in a country is GENOCIDAL INVASION HOLY SHIT!!!
          • 12d ago
  • xdennis 23d ago
    If you're saying that's hypocritical, it's not. Being anti-illegal immigration and pro-legal immigration doesn't mean you want to flood the country with legal immigrants. That's the case in the UK, by the way, where the vast majority of immigrants are legal and it's the reason for the growing anti-immigrant attitude of the natives. People who are anti-illegal immigration and pro-legal immigration also have requirements like: - there should be a fixed number of legal immigrants - they should be well vetted (this may be lacking in the US and UK) - legal immigration should be points based - quotas for legal immigrants should be increased contingent on the number of illegal immigrants which are expelled - there should be checks to verify that visas are not abused (the way H1Bs are abused in the US with under qualified immigrants) - asylum should be abolished because it's abused. It can be replaced by paying poorer countries to permanently host asylees.
    • jjk166 23d ago
      It most certainly is hypocritical. You can not be simultaneously pro-legal immigration and support banning legal immigration. If you support banning legal immigration, you are by definition anti-legal immigration. > Being anti-illegal immigration and pro-legal immigration doesn't mean you want to flood the country with legal immigrants. If only there were something between 0 and unrestricted immigration, some sort of program where people apply for permission and the government issues approvals for individuals to enter its borders after meeting legal criteria.
      • xdennis 23d ago
        > You can not be simultaneously pro-legal immigration and support banning legal immigration. Nobody is banning legal immigration. It's being restricted. The headline itself says "pauses". Do you think no legal immigrant will be let into the US until 2028? > some sort of program where people apply for permission Yes, and if that program is being abused (just ask people here on HN about H1Bs to see how they feel), then you pause it until you figure out how to solve it.
        • unethical_ban 23d ago
  • HumblyTossed 23d ago
    Everything they say is a lie.
    • rvz 23d ago
      By "they" it is that every single politician lies. So of course that is the tiniest small print of every promise any politician makes, such that once it is a promise broken it is someone else's fault and not theirs. Therefore their entire job is to lie.
      • sagarm 23d ago
        This is a lazy take. It doesn't absolve you of being a poorly informed citizen.
        • rvz 23d ago
          My point is to expect politicians to always lie. As soon as they break their promise they usually blame someone or something else. You as a citizen have a choice to tolerate that or leave the country.
          • paulryanrogers 23d ago
            Or vote for other people and change the incentives that lead to broken/failed promises?
• totallygeeky 23d ago
  The US seems hellbent on destroying its own economy, immigrants have always played a key part in it. Looking forward to Trump yelling about how the radical left has somehow undermined the US economy in a few months.
  • reaperducer 23d ago
    Everything is someone else's fault. The buck never stops with him.
    • nielsbot 23d ago
      I’d guess Miller is the main driver of this given what we know about that loser (and freak).
      • timcobb 23d ago
        Huge freak
    • dogsgobork 23d ago
      I often think about how far the Republican party has fallen from Truman with his "The Buck Stops Here" plaque on his desk to Trump's "I don't take any responsibility at all" response to poor Covid testing in 2020.
      • FireBeyond 23d ago
        Meanwhile, just this week, he's taking credit for Biden's legislative efforts on cost reductions for pharmaceuticals that every single Republican voted against, and Trump campaigned against.
      • something98 23d ago
        Truman was a Democrat.
        • retvrn 23d ago
• gnuplustoejam 23d ago
  > closed for training So like the DMV then?
• OutOfHere 23d ago
  https://archive.is/cjW9v https://archive.is/cjW9v
• OutOfHere 23d ago
  As noted clearly in the article, this is a temporary pause while personnel are brought up to speed on the protocols. The real question is how just or unjust the refusals will be once it is unpaused. It's bad enough that the process is excruciatingly slow. Users keep downvoting my comment even though it is the only literal interpretation supported by the evidence, without any evidence to the contrary. I would rethink only if it lasts over three months. Note also that courts would easily overrule Trump if the pause became unreasonable.
  • DataDive 23d ago
    Or as the saying goes: nothing is more permanent than a temporary solution.
    • deleted 23d ago
      [deleted]
    • orthecreedence 23d ago
      Also, lol @ "the courts will fix it!" Fat fucking chance. I'm looking into my crystal ball: I see a 6-3 supreme court ruling supporting the administration's executive order to liquidate congressional power and fold it into the executive branch (as the founding fathers intended...)
      • OutOfHere 23d ago
        If you believe such nonsense, go bet on it on Polymarket. Put your money where your mouth is. Don't post such ridiculous assertions here.
  • eviks 23d ago
    You're obviously wrong, it obviously doesn't make sense to close down instead is implementing the training for the new protocols in parallel. And the current disruption is just as real of a question as the future refusals. And obviously courts couldn't do it easily. By the way, you also haven't provided any evidence for your opinion, why would you burden type replies with it?
• BatFastard 23d ago
  What will be next in Trump's destruction of the American Economy? So far he has driven away allies, put huge tariff on our most loyal allies. Driven away manufacturing by tariff policies. Driven away immigrants and academics. Pushed a last century oil based economy. Shown us how our exquisite weapon tech will fail (this might actually be good in the long run). Along with crippling our cybersecurity and state departments.
  • cosmicgadget 23d ago
    Replacing Lisa Cook or Jerome Powell and cutting rates to 0.
    • tialaramex 23d ago
      It's funniest if the economic collapse begins with Republicans still in power everywhere to pretend that things are fine. Once Democrats are elected, even if they're not actually doing anything yet and so couldn't plausibly have any role in the problem the US media will insist it's their fault which is very boring to watch.
      • cosmicgadget 23d ago
        I think we are primed for the doublethink with six months of Iran being totally defeated and the Strait of Hormuz being open. But yeah, as we saw with covid, cutting rates and qe now means markets surge now and $15 burritos in three years.
  • Jare 23d ago
    Well at least you're healt... oh wait.
• hvb2 23d ago
  So for those that don't know, it's quite common for a visa renewal to be required to leave the country. Depending on the visa, you might have to do this every year. So just imagine, having a normal job in the US and you're asked to leave to renew your visa and this stuff happens. That's no more appointment, not even a new date and you're now very likely unable to work and possibly can't even enter the country to get your belongings if you were to leave. Just 'putting a pause' on people with existing appointments with no answer for when they might resume is.... Inhumane
  • aloknnikhil 23d ago
    Isn't this specifically for immigrant Visas? The work and student Visas (H1B / F1) are non-immigrant Visas.
  • drnick1 23d ago
    [flagged]
  • apercu 23d ago
    In Canada I had to leave and re-enter for my permanent resident status to complete. It’s not that uncommon - but it’s a pain.
    • PierceJoy 23d ago
      OP isn't criticizing the practise of leaving to renew. He's criticizing the this new policy of not letting you back in when you leave.
    • smnrchrds 23d ago
      In Canada you never have to leave to renew or change status; it's just sometimes faster to do so. It's always the applicant's choice. I went through the whole work permit to PR to citizenship pipeline without ever having to leave the country.
      • sanswork 23d ago
        I'm not sure if its the same in Canada but when I went through the process for Australia it depended on where you started the process. I started the process while outside the country so to activate my visa I had to leave and come back but if I had filed while in the country I could have stayed. I do remember Canada telling my partner she wouldn't be guaranteed reentry while they were processing her PR visa until it was finalised if we left the country though so we just ended up doing the Australian half first and I never went back.
• kylehotchkiss 23d ago
  Same ruling class that goes on a bunch of tangents about birth rates stops immigrant visa processing for US citizens who married abroad.
  • Dig1t 23d ago
    This is classic goomba fallacy. Right wing oligarchs want infinite immigration because they get a larger labor pool and lower wages. Right wing normies want less immigration because they don't want to compete with the entire world for a job and don't want to become a minority in their own country. Spend some time on X and you can see the two parts of the right wing attack each other over this issue.
    • majorchord 23d ago
      > don't want to become a minority in their own country. Yet in the next thread over, people are crucifying DHH for saying the same thing, except they are spinning it as "denying their right to exist"... somehow.
      • Dig1t 23d ago
        It's an obvious thing that anyone can understand, any group of people on the planet would behave the same way. It is natural to oppose becoming a minority, minorities are treated poorly and marginalized, by dint of human nature. The data showing it's happening are undeniable, the only way to defeat the argument is to shut it down by labeling the people who make it as hateful.
      • tastyface 23d ago
        What? Where is the contradiction? DHH is deplorably wrong for the same reason that these right-wingers are deplorably wrong. (Even more so in the US because none of them are "native" to the country in the first place. Their immigrant ancestors just got here a little bit faster.)
    • ajmurmann 23d ago
      Jobs will just move abroad then: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-11-11/trump-s-h-1b-visa-curbs-banks-to-add-more-finance-specialist-jobs-in-india https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-11-11/trump-s-h...
• dzonga 23d ago
  the current admin are working hard to destroy the U.S as if they're foreign agents. not only are they making it hard & unbearable for families of US citizens & PR holders to be together. while at the same time - discouraging talent to come to the US at a crucial time when talent is at a premium due to A.I development. last the backwards energy policy of banning renewable energy.
  • slowin 23d ago
    [flagged]
    • ajmurmann 23d ago
      Even if this was true how would it be in Israel's interest to weaken the US of all countries?
      • WakeUpPeople 23d ago
        [flagged]
      • unselect5917 23d ago
        You'd have to ask them: “Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away.” —Benjamin "Netanyahu" Mileikowsky
        • WakeUpPeople 23d ago
          That's the only source that I've heard for this quote: > U.S. intelligence sources report that the one Israeli who is considered an extreme threat to U.S. national security is former prime minister and current prime minister hopeful Binyamin Netanyahu. Not only has Netanyahu visited convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard in his North Carolina prison cell and advocated strenuously for his release, but he was once overheard by an ex-CIA agent as saying to a group of his supporters, "Once we squeeze all we can out of the United States, it can dry up and blow away." Considering the damage the neocons and their Israeli facilitators are causing for U.S. national security, Netanyahu may soon have his wish. (https://web.archive.org/web/20101121090204/http://onlinejournal.org/Special_Reports/092105Madsen/092105madsen.html https://web.archive.org/web/20101121090204/http://onlinejour...) I don't like Bibi and he should definitely go, but if that's your source... Enjoy.
• dyauspitr 23d ago
  50% of all American unicorns were started by immigrants. This is sheer stupidity to prevent the best of what the world has to offer when they are knocking at your door.
  • ipnon 23d ago
    [flagged]
    • GetThemOut 23d ago
      [flagged]
    • hn_acc1 23d ago
      What is a "normally skilled" job? Working at Home Depot?
    • dyauspitr 23d ago
      No one just starts companies as soon as they land. It takes decades of hard work and building yourself before they are at a point where they can start companies.
  • antonvs 23d ago
    It’s unquestionably bad for the United States, but it will be good for the rest of the world. Time for US dominance to end, and Trump is doing a good job of that.
  • geodel 23d ago
    And now they can be more evenly distributed all over the world. I'd call it a net win even if administration did not think it this way.
  • Synaesthesia 23d ago
    People think immigrants come to just take. When they can contribute to the economy.
  • paxys 23d ago
    The impact on academics and research has already been felt over the last decade. US used to be the default destination for academics and skilled workers from China ever since the cultural revolution. They engrained themselves in the country, studied/worked at top univerities, taught multiple generations of students, did key research, worked at top tech companies, and overall were major contributors to American technological superiority. Then starting ~2016 Trump and his DoJ made it borderline impossible for Chinese nationals to get visas, specifically targeting research universities. Since then new Chinese skilled immigration has slowed down to a trickle, and there has been a massive "brain gain" of existing talent in China's favor. The result - China now has a booming tech industry, Chinese universities have overlapped Amercian ones in research output, China is a very close 2nd in the AI race. And as skilled immigrants continue to be driven out of the US China in particular will enjoy the benefits.
• CincinnatiMan 23d ago
  I wonder if this has to do with the current economy and job market. Anecdotally I have found it very tough to find a new job (software engineering), though my previous employer continues to post job listings for green card applications as part of the required labor market test.
  • izacus 23d ago
    Are you... genuinely this naive and ignorant to what's happening in USA?
    • moomoo11 23d ago
      didn't big tech co's layoff thousands of people here and then filed for thousands more h1b ?
      • delecti 23d ago
        If it happened, there should be evidence (an article link). If it isn't supportable, then the implication is disingenuous to make.
        • MisterMower 23d ago
          “Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?” But since you asked, here you go: https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/microsoft-cut-4-800-jobs-130000440.html https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/microsoft-...
        • DaSHacka 22d ago
          From elsewhere in this thread: > Recently[1] Microsoft laid off several thousand domestic employees while simultaneously hiring a couple thousand employer-sponsored-Visa workers. > > [1]https://www.newsweek.com/microsoft-layoffs-2026-xbox-h1b-visas-ai-jobs-12162205 https://www.newsweek.com/microsoft-layoffs-2026-xbox-h1b-vis... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49457077 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49457077
    • 23d ago
• yalogin 23d ago
  This one doesn’t mention tourist visas, so I am guessing they will be issued? I don’t get what benefit they see by inconveniencing and potentially harming folks that are already in the country legally to just live their lives. I get that this administration’s goal is to completely shut down all immigration and potentially even remove folks here legally too but there will be a cost to bear for the country because of that. It will be slow to come and so they will be able to blame it on the next administration
  • HippoBaro 23d ago
    This is specifically for immigrant visas. USCIS distinguishes two broad categories of visas: immigrants and non-immigrants. Tourists are part of the latter group.
    • olivierlacan 23d ago
      That's not accurate. H-1B is a non-immigrant visa. It's not intended for tourists. From CBP's own website[1], emphasis is mine: An immigrant visa (IV) is issued to a foreign national wishing to live permanently in the United States. A nonimmigrant visa (NIV) is issued to a foreign national with permanent residence outside the United States but wishes to be in the United States on a temporary basis for tourism, medical treatment, *business, temporary work, or study*, as examples. Note: There are more than 20 different categories of nonimmigrant visa classifications. [1]: https://www.help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1027?language=en_US https://www.help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article-1027?language=en_...
      • kaashif 23d ago
        But this seems to be in agreement with the comment you're replying to. Tourist visas are nonimmigrant visas. So are H1B visas. Was the comment edited?
  • ks2048 23d ago
    "tourist visas" is in the sub-headline. "The State Department and Department of Homeland Security are reviewing all B-1 business and B-2 tourist visas, he said."
• cft 23d ago
  [flagged]
  • mcmcmc 23d ago
    Because if that were the case they should have just kept the existing staff that already had the requisite knowledge instead of letting DOGE fire 400 people from DHS who did this kind of thing. You have no backing for your presumption either. The Iran war was supposed to be short. The Trump admin is full of pathological liars. Stop giving them the benefit of the doubt.
  • sadengineer22 23d ago
    Yes, we should assume good faith, the Trump administration has a clear track record of being reasonable and sticking to their word.
  • FireBeyond 23d ago
    What, were they untrained before? Is there a reason this training would take more than (at most) 16 hours? It's a bullshit excuse that's barely more palatable than the truth, brought to you by the same people who paused immigration for almost all of Africa except for "Caucasian South Africans".
    • throwaway85825 23d ago
      Afrikaaners are a subgroup of what you refer to as Caucasians in South Africa.
      • FireBeyond 23d ago
        So an even narrower group, driven mostly by one man's claim that they were being persecuted and warranted refugee status at a time when we pretty much refuse refugee status to applicants from the rest of the world...
        • unselect5917 23d ago
• anonym29 23d ago
  This is really frustrating. I'm (native-born US citizen) naviagting the visa process with my future wife. She has no intentions of working (enjoys being NEET) and there's zero risk of her becoming a public charge (our hh gross income is closer to 7 digits than it is to 5 digits), very frustrating that we're getting screwed by this under the justification of labor market competition and public charge risk.
  • ab8 23d ago
    [flagged]
  • trallnag 23d ago
    [flagged]
• Razengan 23d ago
  Not just immigration, seems like travel in general is becoming difficult too. It's a real shame that just when we have the tech and infrastructure to allow people to travel anywhere in the world within a day, for a single person to be able to explore the entirety of this awesome planet for the first time in human history, that the worst among us have to enforce artificial borders and deny everyone this basic freedom. Travel should be codified as a human right. If someone can support themselves and doesn't harm anybody, what ethical justification does anybody have for denying a person from living where they want?
  • trgn 23d ago
    > to enforce artificial borders and deny everyone this basic freedom. a very postnational view, humanist in a way, lipsius or erasmus would recognize it. that sort of individuated cosmopolitanism only works for educated men and women with means, who have or have the capacity to self-actualize. not for the masses. the nation is still a cradle to protect and nurture the commonwealth, and given that they took hundreds to sometimes thousands of years to form, i don't think borders are artificial in the least.
    • Synaesthesia 23d ago
      There's no reason why we should worship borders, or the state.
    • UncleOxidant 23d ago
      > that sort of individuated cosmopolitanism only works for educated men and women with means, who have or have the capacity to self-actualize. So because not everyone can afford to travel freely we shouldn't let anyone do that?
    • Razengan 23d ago
      > and given that they took hundreds to sometimes thousands of years to form, i don't think borders are artificial in the least. "Borders" as they are treated today began barely 200 years ago, and only started being enforced so strictly since WW1 and then even worse after WW2. For the vast >95% of human history, if you could walk to somewhere and survive there, you could live there. The real ironic shit is that most of the travel and immigration restrictions of today are instituted by the descendants of people that invaded and occupied the lands of other people :')
• markdown 23d ago
  Is this in retaliation for a federal judge ruling three days ago that Trump's pause on Diversity Visa processing was unlawful? Or is this in retaliation for a federal judge ruling 6 days ago that Trump's ban on immigration from 75 countries was unlawful?
  • jachee 23d ago
    Yes.
• delraymisfit 23d ago
  [dead]
• delraymisfit 23d ago
  [dead]
• GetThemOut 23d ago
  [flagged]
• nekusar 23d ago
  Well, for starters, good. We all know this whole H1-B situation was to cripple wages and to get an indentured workforce. Glad its being "paused". Would love to it being modified to not being tied to a company, or gottennrid of for good. Sorry about the people who were using it, but also not sorry. Maybe we Americans can get some of those jobs the companies were scamming the govt with.
  • ab8 23d ago
    Why would you want to work for a scamming company?
  • typeofhuman 23d ago
    H1-Bs aren't being paused. This is for immigrant visas.
    • nekusar 23d ago
      Pity. Cause that's the system that needs overhauled or killed.
      • typeofhuman 23d ago
        I tend to agree.
  • airstrike 23d ago
    I encourage you to pause and reflect on how confident and wrong you are at the same time.
  • doom2 23d ago
    > we Americans We can also take a more critical look at the definition of what being American is. The 20th century, especially pre-1920, was rife with illegal immigration. Why should the descendants of those who skipped the line, who didn't come in "the right way", be able to now call themselves American and reap the unearned benefits of citizenship? They've taken and continue to take jobs from Americans who need them.
• eluusive 23d ago
  This is a response to the supreme court ruling on birthright citizenship. They're using the levers they do have, since that was removed. Anyone who agrees with the ruling should really read justice Thomas' dissent.
  • deleted 23d ago
    [deleted]
  • Terr_ 23d ago
    What is this "lever" you claim already existed and then got "removed", precisely?
  • cosmicgadget 23d ago
    No one should be subjected to a Thomas dissent. Especially that one.
    • DaSHacka 22d ago
      Right, because they might find themselves agreeing with it! Can't have that, democracy thrives in darkness with a closed and restricted 'marketplace of ideas'.
      • cosmicgadget 22d ago
        I definitely said we should make his (law clerks') dissents inaccessible.
  • samiwami 23d ago
    it’s a cut and dry constitutional amendment, it doesn’t matter if Thomas thinks the people that were in mind when it was drafted are not the same people it applies to now. if they want to change it, go ahead and get the states to ratify a new amendment. Supreme Court doesn’t get to throw out an amendment because it’s old.
    • enraged_camel 23d ago
• deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
• agnishom 23d ago
  Are H1Bs still being processed? They are dual intent visas as far as I know
  • ab8 23d ago
    Yes, they are. Immigrant visa = green card. Dual intent just means you are allowed to apply for a green card.
    • agnishom 23d ago
      So only PR applications are affected?
• vjvjvjvjghv 23d ago
  My company has a H-1B guy that travelled home to India a few months ago and since then can't come back because the next date he can get with the US embassy is next year. Seems he may get stuck even longer... I am to some degree on board with keeping a closer eye on immigration, but the way the current administration does it feels intentionally cruel. The guy at my company has a house, wife, and kids in the US; his visa is perfectly legal, so it seems it would make sense to process these people quickly. But instead, he is now in some limbo. Same for ICE. Clamping down on illegal immigration makes sense, but it doesn't make sense for ICE to behave like some unaccountable secret police that hires the biggest assholes they can find who can then do whatever they want.
  • refurb 23d ago
    Having the only appointment be a year or more out isn’t new. Anyone I knew wouldn’t take the risk of leaving the US if they didn’t have an appointment secured.
    • pm90 23d ago
      Did you read the article? They postponed all appointments.
      • genxy 23d ago
        The pro maga crowd has learned to take a less obvious, but just as callous approach to commenting over the last 6 months. They are trying to subtly slide the overton window in their direction.
        • refurb 23d ago
          Hilarious. My comment was replying to another comment that was discussing a different case, not the one in the article. Yet you throw around insults and labels at me. Who is the callous one here?
          • 23d ago
• bix6 23d ago
  > The State Department has paused all immigrant visa applications while it briefs consular officials around the world on a new policy that aims to keep out people who are considered potential drains on public coffers. From AP NEWS. Sooo Trump can get deported? Is anyone draining public coffers faster than him?
• icase 23d ago
  [flagged]
• kaveh_h 23d ago
  The political leaders (not just Trump) and their backers clearly are thinking that AI and robotics will replace most of the work force, so why keep importing new ones. The issue is American citizens will likely face similar but different developments. A future with almost no work in a country and political elite that detest social safety nets will lead to a societal breakdown.
• Danox 23d ago
  Just more distraction from a clown administration the most incompetent in American history.
  • yipinwong 23d ago
    A dumb political statement in HN without any justification on why or providing contexts.
    • nutjob2 23d ago
      Doesn't mean he's not right. The evidence is overwhelming.
• thelastgallon 23d ago
  Some of the comments are talking about H1-B which isn't impacted by this. Vivek Wadhwa, one of the staunchest supporters of H1B (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12489558 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12489558) is now recommending to end it: https://x.com/wadhwa/status/2090958079726927873 https://x.com/wadhwa/status/2090958079726927873
  • profdevloper 23d ago
    Yea, he sensed the heat that H1-B scab labor is getting now that the economy is in a downturn and AI is poised to take out a lot of high-tech white collar jobs. He wants to nominally end H1-B but really just wants to shift attention away from what these non-immigrant visas are doing to the people they are designed to replace. > These visas played a very important role in making America the world leader in technology and innovation. Citation needed -- it's as if we didn't have major technological advancements and a burgeoning tech industry in the valley before 1990 when the H1-B was signed into law and companies rushed to force Americans to train their (unbeknownst to them) replacements. > But the system became badly corrupted. Unethical body shops learned to game it. Who corrupted it? Certainly Vivek and his compatriots have some culpability here. I'm sure there are other examples but Cognizant was the most egregious where they were found liable in discriminating against non-Indians when deciding who to put on the bench and who to ultimately terminate.
    • liquid_thyme 22d ago
      >Who corrupted it? As usual, it started with Americans screwing over other Americans while getting you to blame the brown dude. Gosh, darn! Labor is no different than goods/services. Why should the world allow coca-cola, netflix, mcdonalds and hollywood access to their markets while their local equivalents suffer? Competition? Fuck that. Nobody wants their 401k to appreciate as US companies grow their customer base in overseas markets. Stupid, silly capitalism. FUck that, lets go all in, super mega great depression style.
  • dudul 22d ago
    H1B makes no sense anymore when the conversation is how many jobs will survive AI.
• jmyeet 23d ago
  I want to give some context to this because I know a lot about this system. You have to see it as part of the larger moves thi sadministration has made to restrict legal immigration. The most important thing to note is this for immigrant visas ie green cards. As yet, nonimmigrant visas such as visitor, student and employment visas are unaffected. That may change. It's also unclear if K1 (fiance) visas are affected because they're technically nonimmigrant but they'll probably be treated as immigrant visas. This has the most effect on family-based green cards. The most common type is a marriage-based green card but there are also green cards for parents, children and even siblings of primarily US citizens but also lawful permanent residents ("LPRs"). When a US citizen or LPR marries a non-resident and they wish to live in the US, you broadly have three routes to make this happen: 1. If they're within the US, you can do an adjustment of status ("AoS"). This is where you file an I130 and an I485. Generally you do this concurrently. If you're an LPR and not a citzen then you might not because you may need to wait for a visa to become available. There can be other reasons depending on the foreign spouse's immigration history, whether they're in removal proceedings and what other immigration benefits they've applied for; The I130 is filed by the sponsor (ie the citizen or LPR) and it basically shows that you both are free to marry and the marriage is legal. If neither of you have been married before, this is relatively straightforward. It can be difficult otherwise but an I130 is generally considered routine; The I485 is filed by the immigrant to adjust status. It can be based on an approved I130 or filed concurrently (within the US only). This is where USCIS will determine if they believe the marriage is bona fide, meaning there's no fraud taking place. This includes the submission of marriage evidence (eg joint bank accounts, bills in both of your names, a lease or deed in both of your names, photos, proof of the relationship and so on). USCIS makes a holistic determination based on the totality of your case and prior immigration history. For various reasons, you may have a bar on adjusting and may need a waiver; 2. If the foreign spouse is outside the US, you will generally need to do what's called consular processing. You file the I130 as per normal and once it's approved you apply with the consulate. Depending on the country it may take over a year to get an appointment and the embassy and/or USCIS may end up sitting on the case. This whole process can take years. If granted, you are granted a visa to enter the US. Upon entry, you get a green card; or 3. The so-called fiance visa (K1). In this case you are unamrried and the foreign fiance is outside the US. It's similar to consular processing. If granted, you get a visa stamp and can enter the US. You need to marry within 90 days of entry and then you apply for adjustment of status within the US. So, what has this administration done to block legal immigration? A ton, actually: 1. They've placed various bans on the issuance of visas to citizens of certain countries. There are 3 such bans in place now and they're called the 19, 39 and 75 country bans. I honestly forget which is which. What happens in consular processing and fiance visa cases is that you go through all the above steps including a consular interview and then... nothing. The consulate is forbidden from issuing you a visa by executive order. Although it's never been estated, the administration tends to take a broad view of citizenship. For example, if you were born in Afghanistan and your family moved to Canada when you were 1 month old and you've never been there in your life, this administration treats you as an Afghan for the purposes of the bar. 2. The administration implemented a rule whereby you have to consular process in the country of your birth regardless of where you live. There's really no reason for this rule other than to make it harder for people from "shithole" countries to get visas because certain countries have incredibly long wait times for consulate interviews. And if your country of birth has no consulate, they'll assign you to another one and that may not be convenient or even possible (ie you may not be able to enter that country); 3. The administration released a policy memo that stated that adjustment within the US was an "extraordinary" rememdy and that most cases should consular process. They like consular processing because AoS can be challenged in federal court whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that the president has broad powers to limit immigration so consular decisions generally can be reviewed by any court. So the various bans will likely stop issuance of visas to citizens of those countries outside of the US until, at a minimum, Trump leaves office; 4. They're introducing a new rule that's typically called "public charge". This is a new standard whereby USCIS should reject visa applications from people who have been or they consider will be a "public charge", meaning rely on public benefits. You can guess the skew in what countries this does and doesn't apply to; 5. When you adjust within the US, you can optionally apply for an employment authorization document ("EAD") ie a work card. In earlier times, this would arrive within 2-3 months and allow a person to work legally while their I485 case is being processed. It seems like since January 21, 2025, USCIS has basically stopped issuing EADs to make life difficult for immigrants in most cases; 6. To adjust within the US, you need to be inspected at the border. People without this (eg they sneak across the border) are called entering without inspection ("EWI"). This administration has decided some previous programs under Biden specifically (eg CBP One and TPS) in most cases won't be treated as valid entries. This generally means you need a difficult to get waiver to adjust and if you leave to consular process, you're facing a 3-10 year bar and possibly a permanent bar depending on circumstances; 7. In certain circumstances to adjust within the US you have to maintain valid status the entire time or be in status at the time you apply. This administration is trying to take the view that TPS is not valid status for this purpose. This can be mean you're retroactively out of status and can be placed in rmeoval and/or face a bar if you leave and try and return; 8. Various humanitarian programs to parole in place ("PIP") have been ended, forcing people to leave the country to adjust and then face bans from certain countries, bars for unlawful status and/or inadmissibility; 9. There have been pilot programs, particularly in San Diego, to coordinate removals by ICE when people go an appointment at USCIS for an interview or check-in; 10. Judges in immigration court are not Article III judges like federal judges are. They can be fired by the executive for any rason. This president basically fires judges that approve too many cases; 11. Previously, people in removal proceedings depending on their circumstances could get out on bond. For a lot of people, this has been eliminated; 12. ICE will generally try and get someone out of the jurisdiction after picking them up to avoid getting blocked by a habeas petition in federal court. Often they're moved to jurisdictions with far friendlier judges (eg Louisiana). They can also be moved randomly to make it hard to family or even their attodrneys to find and talk to them; 13. There is a ton of evidennce that USCIS is sitting on cases to delay for really no good reason. For example, they'll approve the I130 and just not make a ruling on an I485. This can force people to pay even more money to go into federal court and get a writ of mandamus; 14. Naturatlization has a requirement for "good moral character". Up until thi sadministration, that's been treated as the lack of bad moral character, such as a conviction for certain aggravated offences. This administration takes the view that an applicant has to instead prove good moral character, which can be letters of support from citizens; 15. Denaturalization has historically been a very rare occurrence. It requires the government to go into federal court and make a case that you committed fraud to become a citizen. Historically this has been a few dozen casea a year at most. Now it's in the hundreds. That's still not a lot but people expect this to ramp up. They're also taking a broader view of grounds for denaturalization. For example, if you committed a disqualifying offence before you naturalized but weren't charged and convicted until after, they isometimes now go after that where they didn't previously; 16. They've implemented so-called third-country deportation. That is, you can be deported to some other country entirely if your home country won't take you or if it's deemed unsafe for you to return to that country. So, you can flee civil war in South Sudan and be deported to El Salvador now. Historically, we didn't do this; 17. This week they announced they were going to revoke the B1/B2 visas for asylum seekers issued in the last 10 years. For anyone who doesn't know, visitor visas typically allow you to enter the US for up to 6 months. It's up the officer at the port of entry and they just make it up, basically. People who seek asylum are generally forgiven for however they get into the country as long as they entered with inspection. There is a huge backlog in immigration cases from the mid 2010s that are still pending. Now those visas have long expired so what's the point? I have a theory. When you apply for a temporary visa, you're asked what it's for. So for a visit visa, it might be to go to the World Cup. At any point later on if they find you didn't do what you said you were going to do, they can view that as misrepresentation (ie immigration fraud). This is particularly the case for people who get a visit visa, come to the US and get married within a short window of time. A finding a misrepresetation can make you permanently inadmissible and that makes you ineligible to adjust. So what's the point of expiring old visas? I believe they're going to say certain asylum seekers committed immigration fraud to get into the country and they'll find them inadmissible and use that as an excuse to deport them, something we never previously did; Or, that evocation will potentially break your chain of maintaining status retroactively, making you ineligible to adjust in other circumstances; and 18. The latest: immigrant visas are being paused in consular processing cases, ostensibly for "retraining" in public charge scenarios.
• tmaly 23d ago
  I see this as a reaction of the administration to the judge’s injunction against their 75 country visa policy.
• final_aeon 23d ago
  This is good for Americans. I'm not sorry.
• clove 23d ago
  An immigrant visa is a privilege a country grants and can withdraw. It's not like two parties signed a contract, and the contract was broken. Applicants bet on a slow, arbitrary system, and now the odds are moving. I am one such "gambler" in this process, and it's happening to me too. I don't like the turn of events, but I also do not feel robbed. Playing victim bestows no benefit.
• flanked-evergl 23d ago
  [flagged]
  • DiscourseFan 23d ago
    This seems intentionally inflammatory
    • flanked-evergl 23d ago
      I mean this in the best possible spirit, but if it does seem intentionally inflammatory, then I think it's mostly a result of your political priors. The 4th top reply on this submission is: "the current admin are working hard to destroy the U.S as if they're foreign agents." If I were a less patient man I would also find this inflammatory, but I know the person saying it just says it because they genuinely believe it, they aren't saying it to make me angry. Furthermore, because of the political bias prevalent here, most people here would agree with it, instead of disagree with it, so they would not find it inflammatory at all and do not consider what people with other political views than their own think of it. I get more people will disagree with my comment than with the comment I quoted, and downvote my comment, but that is their choice. I posted it because that is my sentiment on this matter, this is what I genuinely believe. This to me is good news. As good as news can be. This is just the reality, and there is nothing intentionally inflammatory about reality. It just exists.
      • DiscourseFan 23d ago
        I think claiming that this policy is broadly harmful to the US economy is more factually grounded than claiming its a "generational W."
        • flanked-evergl 23d ago
          Good for the economy is not the same as good, bad for the economy is not the same as bad. Sometimes good things can still be bad for the economy, like outlawing child labour or slavery. That being said, I don't think there is any evidence that survives scrutiny that immigration has been a net positive for any western country, and if I take Norway as a specific example, we have good data that immigration has been a net negative [1]. And furthermore we have the peculiar problem that whenever a statistic does show that immigration has a net negative effect in Norway, that the government rapidly stops collecting the statistic as a mere coincidence [2]. I think we could potentially change our immigration policies so that immigration becomes a net positive, but I'm not interested in that. I just want it to stop. The people who sold mass immigration as being an economic benefit did not actually ever care about the economy, they just thought it's the easiest way to convince people, and they have already pivoted to other reasons for supporting mass immigration because the thing they want is the mass immigration and the resulting consequences. The people who sold mass immigration on economic grounds also never had any real data behind their claims that it is economically beneficial, and institutions like universities, media, entertainment pushed the unfounded claim uncritically, like good little soldiers, and then retroactively worked as hard as possible to only ever paint it in a positive light and to dismiss negative consequences. The result in me is a complete distaste for the very idea of immigration. I just want my country back. [1]: https://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/her-er-ssb-forsker-holmoys-nye-innvandringsrapport/s/12-95-3423386205 https://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/her-er-ssb-forsker-holmoys... [2]: https://www.nettavisen.no/artikkel/alle-overfallsvoldtekter-er-begatt-av-menn-med-ikke-vestlig-bakgrunn/s/12-95-3158180 https://www.nettavisen.no/artikkel/alle-overfallsvoldtekter-...
• snvzz 23d ago
  [flagged]
• deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
• jmward01 23d ago
  This is cruel. This is stupid. But more broadly important to this group, this will continue to push skilled workers out of the US and into friendlier countries. It will continue to erode our soft power since countries will have fewer economic ties with the US and fewer personal ties to the US. There are no redeeming aspects to this that I can see. This is a bad move in the short term and the long term.
  • yipinwong 23d ago
    [flagged]
• deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
• sandipankundu42 23d ago
  This is just plain and simple incompetence. It will hurt genuine and talented people so much.
  • yipinwong 23d ago
    [flagged]
• superdisk 23d ago
  I've been waiting over a year trying to get my wife into the country. Looks like I'll be waiting even longer now. The US immigration system is just so utterly cruel and broken.
• faceloss 23d ago
  [dead]
• faceloss 23d ago
  [dead]
• ciconia 23d ago
  26 years ago I was a post-graduate student in the US, I arrived a couple months before the 9/11 attacks. The current US government, beyond its idiocy and incompetence, is just so hostile, not only to immigrants but also to its own citizens, so it seems. If I were to go study in another country today, the US would simply not be an option.
  • jimmydoe 23d ago
    we are stuck where we are. imo even H1B didn't change, I wouldn't go all the way to study in a country that kills so many people abroad senselessly.
  • giarc 23d ago
    Podcaster Scott Galloway puts it best. The US is like a sports team that gets to draft the best players in the world and yet they are doing their best to stop that. Top talent from almost every country wants to come live and work in the US, producing incredible companies and advancing tech. But because most of them are not-white, the US wants to stop that.
    • rbanffy 22d ago
      > The US is like a sports team that gets to draft the best players in the world Americans tend to overestimate how attractive it is to live in the US. It's true you can make a lot of money, more than you would in Europe working for the same companies, but you'd also be willing to live in a very different society, with high inequality and almost no worker rights protections. There was a time I wanted to, but not anymore. I miss visiting the US though - it has wonderful places and people, but I wouldn't want to live and raise kids there.
  • dudul 22d ago
    Yes, the world today is not as it was 26 years ago. That seems pretty obvious. Countries change, governments change, national interests change. What was good for the US 30, 50, 100 years ago may not be good for the world of today. How is that a problem exactly?
• dcow 23d ago
  This is political warfare. War is cruel and inhumane. If you want to stop the cruelty, stop the war. There’s a lot of discussion about whether this is cruel or justified or legal—whatever. This sucks for people who get caught up in our immigration fight and ultimately it’s bad for all of us because it makes the US a less attractive place for immigrants. However, we are here (1) because US citizens voted for more scrutiny of the immigration process to make sure people immigrating are successfully landing in the US and not taking advantage of the systems we have in place. And (2) because a vocal minority is unwilling to enforce any of our existing immigration laws and is actively sabotaging the administration’s attempts to do so. Nobody has clean hands. In the US we do not approve visas for immigrants who we suspect will become dependent on our welfare system. This isn’t some new rule Trump made up to get rid of immigrants because he’s cruel, it’s existed for over a century. Fun fact: the current statutory language Rubio used in January to limit immigration from 75 countries comes from the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, a Democrat sponsored bill. The legal challenge honestly feels like a technicality which is probably why the state department responded as they did. A judge said we can’t limit the ban by country based on public-charge language, arguing that the public-charge consideration must be evaluated independent of nationality or in other words, it can’t be used to institute a country specific ban. So the state department removed the country specific ban and said fine all immigration is paused until we can properly train people to evaluate public-charge since the current training is ineffective. The state department tried the surgical path, judicial activism, whether technically correct or not, vacated the surgical path. So the state department escalated with a tactic that more literally adheres to the judges interpretation but also has more collateral damage. This bickering is dumb and shouldn’t be happening in the first place.
  • TwoFerMaggie 23d ago
    > Fun fact: the current statutory language Rubio used in January to limit immigration from 75 countries comes from the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, a Democrat sponsored bill. This bill was originally vetoed by Truman, but overridden by both house and senate by a 2/3 vote. However, in the house vote, democrats were split about 50/50, and republicans overwhelmingly approved. (https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/82-1952/h165 https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/82-1952/h165) Note that this is pre southern strategy and post new deal era. There was a conservative coalition of both democrats and republicans against the new deal. The majority of the Democratic Yea votes came from southern states where the conservative coalition dominated. Saying that it was a Democrat sponsored bill is missing some important nuances.
• motbus3 23d ago
  Genuine question for any american fellows: Is this a real problem ? Is this a really a priority problem in your pov ? If if is why ? In my country, we do have a policy of integrating people quite early on if they come from a fragile situation and for other people if they have jobs and can sustain themselves it is a bonus as they contribute with taxes and will have basically no benefits like retirement. I am not making any points here, I am trying to understand why people think this is a priority and/or problem.
  • dcow 23d ago
    Are you talking about general immigration or asylum? If general, what country do you live in? I’m going to plan an extended visit.
    • motbus3 23d ago
      I won't dox myself, but you'd be welcome if you needed to. Following World War II, we took in European immigrants who had lost everything. More recently, we have welcomed individuals from countries in the Middle East and South America. Within a few days, you would receive your citizenship and be integrated into the system. I believe there are some initial advantages, but based on what I've heard, the expectation is that you'll need to become self-sufficient very quickly because the financial support diminishes rapidly. Despite not having a community center or NGOs for that, the overall community would find out and help. You can find out where I am by searching for the single country in the world that continues to uphold all post-World War II human rights. My position to this policy changed when I encountered a refugee who had successfully integrated into the community. He has lost his wife and two daughters and his only remaining daughter was all he had when he got here. He rebuilt his life working his a* out to be able to provide to his daughter. We never know what people are going through.
      • dcow 23d ago
        > the expectation is that you'll need to become self-sufficient very quickly because the financial support diminishes rapidly The US has this same expectation. It’s the long and short of what this reaction of pausing visas is about: bickering over how to make sure the expectation is being met during visa screening. I don’t see anybody anywhere even remotely implying that hard working immigrants shouldn’t be given the benefit of the doubt and be allowed to make their own way in the US. I do see people rightly upset that when given the benefit of the doubt a Somali fraud ring setup to extract money from the welfare programs we’ve set up to provide children with education and generally people with healthcare runs rampant. Stopping that indeed involves more “public-charge” scrutiny during the visa process.
• cogogo 23d ago
  It is only a matter of time before this administration does this to green card applications and renewals too. A permanent green card is not permanent. It needs to be renewed every 10 years. I am also worried about policies eventually directed at naturalized citizens. I sincerely hope I am wrong.
  • webo 23d ago
    This ‘pause’ IS for green card applicants (immigrant visa)
  • gorbachev 23d ago
    This is incorrect. The physical card itself expires every 10 years, but your status as a permanent resident doesn't. That can only be revoked by a legal process. Obviously if you do not renew the green card itself, you are going to face practical issues, because you have no easy way to prove your permanent resident status. So things like employment verification because of new employment and entering the country from abroad will become quite a bit more difficult.
    • ceejayoz 23d ago
      > The physical card itself expires every 10 years, but your status as a permanent resident doesn't. That can only be revoked by a legal process. They're working on that. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/doj-deploys-tactic-to-strip-naturalized-americans-of-citizenship https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/doj-deploys-tactic-to-stri...
    • yesb 22d ago
      SSN card + ID works for employment purposes. Simply applying for renewal or naturalization extends the card as well.
    • cogogo 20d ago
      It is pretty much the same. You are legally required to have the card with you at all times. The practical issues you refer to are non-trivial. Inability to travel is a non-starter for many. Think ICE will be friendly? They repeatedly show they do not care about legal technicalities.
• deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
• idiotsecant 23d ago
  The US better be careful how many games like this they play. Even in the last few years I have had a lot of difficulty at my employer attracting people from canada as the US is not seen as a safe and stable place to work.
  • yipinwong 23d ago
    [flagged]
• navs 23d ago
  Probably a good thing for many migrants. I mean who would want to migrate to a country that's so hostile towards anyone that looks and prays different.
  • yipinwong 23d ago
    > a country that's so hostile towards anyone that looks and prays different. You are making a bold claim that US is being racist here. US is THE melting pot, and no other country in the world has accepted all races living together like this.
    • nutjob2 23d ago
      Your statement is patently false based on the historical record and current statistics.
      • yipinwong 22d ago
        [flagged]
        • nutjob2 21d ago
          Sorry, I was too busy flagging and killing your posts. A total of 4 in just a few minutes! A new record for me. So satisfying watching your posts immediately going grey after clicking 'flag'. But seriously, anyone who has actually studied American history at a high school level knows you're posting nonsense, and that you're just a garden variety anti-immigration zealot. Your posts give you away. Anyway, the burden of proof isn't on me. Your claim requires your evidence.
  • y-curious 23d ago
    Yes, please stay and improve your home country. Those countries have severe brain drain, I’m sure everyone can be happy (including me)
• deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
• fenestella 23d ago
  [flagged]
• cingley 23d ago
  That doesn't sound too bad, it just means that workers who would otherwise have migrated to the US can enrich their home countries, or other countries they are more easily able to migrate too. From an economic point of view this may well end up being a positive policy decision for both sides.
  • orsenthil 23d ago
    > positive policy decision for both sides. Actually not. Harmful for US. US gains for more from the skilled immigrants (at their cost).
    • dudul 22d ago
      So the US is being very selfless here and deciding that all these "exceptional" migrants should instead improve their own country. Pretty noble of the US if you ask me.
      • orsenthil 22d ago
        Yeah, but unintentionally. I think, you were being sarcastic with your comment. I am okay with it, since we both arrive at the same outcome.
    • shimman 21d ago
      I don't really gain much when we bring people over here to write shitty java spring end points or react components, these are things Americans can do. Also the idea that the trillion dollar tech companies can't find talent should be rejected on its face. If they can't find talent they should train it here. They're about to find out why and it's going to go in places where they least suspect it.
  • hallgrim 23d ago
    “Hey, I disinvite you from my board game nights, so now your apartment can delight in your prolonged presence!”
• orsenthil 23d ago
  I see a lot of comments in this thread in support this stance, as if that is something good for Americans, and say it is not a political statement. One thing that changed my viewpoint was this book. Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism by Anne Case, and Angus Deaton. In it, they make a point that, almost all US economists agree that immigration, both legal and Illegal Immigration, is not the cause for American working middle class failure. It is lack of education, and capitalistic system wherein rich steal the money from the poor, which is like a reverse robinhood. Hacker news crowd can easily verify this by spot-checking. But still we fail for the false narrative and divisive exploits of immigration topic, which is certainly not aimed to solve the problem of American well-being at hand. Truth to be hold, politicians know this too.
  • y-curious 23d ago
    Do walk us through the spot checking path. Class warfare is hard to see, seeing your job go to a lower-paid foreign worker is not
  • yipinwong 23d ago
    [flagged]
    • orsenthil 23d ago
      Artifact ? What do you mean? I stated where I found this claim. > Deaths of Despair and the Future of Capitalism by Anne Case, and Angus Deaton. And all the references it has.
      • fedeb95 23d ago
        the point is that almost nobody will read the book just to verify an internet comment. If you can provide some resources cited in the book it would be better... but this reasoning can be applied to 99% of comments here. At least you provided a book.
        • yipinwong 23d ago
• softwaredoug 23d ago
  This is the upshot > Melissa Chavin, a London-based U.S. immigration lawyer, said she expects the pause to be temporary. “I don’t think that they’ll leave this indefinitely, especially for wealthier developed countries,” she said. Applicants from developing countries might find it harder to progress their applications under the new guidance, she added. This comes after one judge ruled the 75 country travel ban was illegal[1] My sense is they’re trying to get some of that travel ban back through other means 1 - https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2026cv01883/292940/17/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/distric...
  • deleted 23d ago
    [deleted]
• simianparrot 23d ago
  I am so jealous of the American people. You might not all understand it, but this is what putting your own people first looks like.
  • dopple 23d ago
    Does putting our own people first look like using immigration officers to kill its own citizens? Or is that okay because now there will be less brown people here.
  • ChrisRR 23d ago
    Putting you own people... You seem to be missing a word there Your sentence could go one of two ways, but I suspect I already know what it is
• xyzelement 23d ago
  As a relatively centrist American, I find this reasonable. I live in a very blue state (NY) and still 43% of my neighbors voted for Trump, with immigration cited as a key reason. So changes to immigration policy are to be expected. With regard to temporary visas, the article cited a few types of issues. For example the scenario where someone obtain a temporary visa (promissing to return is a part of the application) and then files for asylum once here. This is broadly understood to be an abuse. More broadly, because HN is a tech crowd we tend to understand that H1-B visas are often used to supplant American labor cheaper (vs - "filling jobs that Americans aren't willing to fill.") The same dynamic is seen outside of tech as well. Representative example: last year we stayed at two hotels in upstate New York. One was a family run operation that hired local teenagers and older people. It was awesome. The next place right next door, is owned by a larger operation and every single employee was central European - recruited over there and brought here to work the hotel for the summer. I don't think that's a reflection of lack of local labor (said teenagers and older folks) but a business strategy (ab)using temporary worker visas for cheap labor. I think Americans intuitively understand that this doesn't benefit Americans - except the business owners hiring the h1-bs and similar. So because the system is perceived to be abused and not serving the people's benefit most people are fine with a pause and re-evaluation. Obviously there are sympathetic stories of people caught with uncertainty at the moment and we hope it resolved well for them. At the same time this is a sign of a problematic system in place - the fact that someone here on a temporary visa has an expectation of indefinite renewal means we have created and reinforced such expectation and that probably isn't right.
  • rkozik1989 23d ago
    You do understand these rules impact Americans who petition for the visas of their foreign spouses, right? Its not just people coming into this country for work purposes only. Its awfully heartless to assume that the only immigrants coming over here are doing so to solely make money.
    • xyzelement 23d ago
      This was not mentioned in the linked article so I wasn't specifically holding that (nor did I see this mentioned in a lot of comments?) Without knowing much about it - that sounds likewise like a something to be sympathetic about but also makes sense that it's part of the overall visa process.
• catigula 23d ago
  >AI will replace you ahahahahahaha!!!!! hahaahaha! Seems like this policy is a long time coming? Why do we need workers?
• slackfan 23d ago
  Good. Need a bit of time to reset.
• gwbas1c 23d ago
  > ...and seek to prevent foreigners from traveling to the U.S. to give birth. FYI: It doesn't come up in the news often, but birth tourism is a real phenomenon. A lot of rich people in poorer countries travel to the US to have their child, and their child goes home with a US passport, or is raised by relatives. Leaving the child with relatives, (or otherwise allowing an American family to adopt the child,) doesn't bother me, but going home with a US passport does.
• anon467 23d ago
  [dead]
• xvxvx 23d ago
  They’re doing what they should have been doing all along: enforcing the visa rules. The system is being gamed so they have to crack down. There are around 10-15 million illegal immigrants in the US, not including mass visa fraud. It cannot continue.
  • darkstar999 23d ago
    "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
    • ddtaylor 23d ago
      To be fair that's a poem written a hundred years later.
    • xvxvx 23d ago
      A poem on a plaque on a foreign statue, written 107 years after the formation of the United States is neither legally binding nor central to what the US is. And the poem doesn’t endorse visa scammers.
      • wan23 22d ago
        It's not legally binding, but it is central to what the US is and has been. That's why they put the poem there, and that's why Americans welcomed the gift and erected the statue, and that's why it has been considered to be one of our most cherished symbols ever since.
• justonepost2 23d ago
  Why do we need “talent” when we have a country of geniuses in a data center?
• deleted 23d ago
  [deleted]
• qgin 23d ago
  The main thing that has made America exceptional has been that we attract all the smartest and most ambitious people from around the world. They work side by side by all of the smartest and most ambitious people born in America. We have won by having a disproportionate percentage of the world's smartest and most ambitious people, those born here + those who choose to come here. So now, we're just throwing that all away and becoming a merely average country with an average amount of smart and ambitious people. Throwing away our key advantage for literally no benefit.
  • dudul 22d ago
    The smartest and most talented can still come, there are specific visas and pathways for them. Also, let's not be as childish as assuming that policies that were good 100+ years ago for a country should be good ad vitam eternam. Countries change, their interests change, therefore their policies should change accordingly.
• 1vuio0pswjnm7 23d ago
  Alternative to archive.is No risk of CAPTCHA or geo-blocking No Javascript or cookies HTTPS optional curl -A "" -Haccept: https://assets.msn.com/content/view/v2/Detail/en-in/AA2aXEw9 \ |grep -o "<p.*</p>" \ |tr -d '\134' \ |sed '1s/^/<meta charset=utf-8>/' > 1.htm firefox ./1.htm
• FuckCanadians 23d ago
  [dead]
• sinecure 23d ago
  Educated, young Americans are pissed off because the life they were promised when they went to college is not attainable for a majority of them. Inflation caused by the government's pandemic response has devastated US consumer buying power and increased the cost of everything in life, while simultaneously Americans are being forced to compete with the entire world of professionals for US jobs, driving down wages. Everything is more expensive, jobs are harder to find and wages haven't kept up with inflation. On top of that, if you're a young white guy, it was the specific policy for the last decade of massive American companies to minimize the hiring of your ethnic group. So you have a lot of really pissed off young people, on both the left and the right, looking to politicians for a solution. On the left it's essentially socialism and in the worst cases communism and on the right it's American job protectionism and the removal of racist anti-white policies from American institutions... and a whole lot of deportations. Young Americans do not want to compete with the entire world for jobs and houses and SBA loans, so you're going to see the right push very hard to look like they are appeasing them, when in reality they will not do anything because the corporate oligarchy that finance our politicians and the stock market that feed their primary boomer constituents. On both the left and right, all the boomers want is for the stock market to rise and their home value to rise and they don't care if it disenfranchises a generation of Americans... but it will definitely create a millennial political machine that will be pushed to the extremes of Communism and Nationalism when that generation rises to power... so we will see how it all plays out.
  • mikewarot 23d ago
    This boomer would be quite happy if the price of his home went back to it's purchase price, the cheapest house in town by far. I just hope Social security holds out. We were promised socialized medicine, we got socialized insurance oligarchy instead. I'll never forgive Obama and especially Rahm Emmanuel, his chief of staff, for that.
  • deleted 22d ago
    [deleted]
• IHateCanada 23d ago
  [flagged]
• marcelo_pr 22d ago
  Another impact in some countries is the fact that these appointments typically happen in one location (where the embassy is based), and people with appointments often arrange travel and sometimes lodging around these appointments. For a lot of people, this will have some extra financial impact.
• tristor 22d ago
  This is a really stupid decision. As someone with mixed feelings about our current immigration situation (which feels at least somewhat out of hand), it's also /very/ clear to me that immigrants in highly-skilled roles have made America a better place. Not only do these immigrants contribute to the economy, they are generally good neighbors and community members that emphasize values that improve the society around them like focus on education, the arts, civic responsibility, and the importance of skilled work. There needs to be a viable, reasonable, and legible path to residency and citizenship for highly skilled immigrants, while at the same time reforms on the current overly complex system which has failed to properly address challenges with folks who seek economic asylum or who violate immigration laws. Pausing these applications doesn't seem to serve either end, it seems like a stupid decision that is self-harming and unnecessarily cruel and capricious.
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [dead]
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [dead]
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [dead]
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [dead]
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [dead]
• meta_gunslinger 22d ago
  [flagged]
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [flagged]
  • liquid_thyme 22d ago
    Right.. Microsoft, Google, Amazon filled with mediocre Indians writing mediocre code and about to go out of business any minute now. Oh wait, how does reality work again?
• disorder2025 22d ago
  [flagged]
  • liquid_thyme 22d ago
    Yeah.. America started declining after when they allowed non-whites to immigrate. Worst economy ever starting 1965. No golden era nothing. Go look at the people doing the science & research in universities at post-doc minimum wage salary. Maybe just say thank you, and go on about your day.
• disorder2025 21d ago
  [dead]
  • liquid_thyme 21d ago
    I see, looks like you found something to aspire to. Good job!
• disorder2025 21d ago
  [dead]
  • liquid_thyme 21d ago
    Oh no, exceptional compound growth! The sadness!
• fenderblender 19d ago
  [dead]