Does trump's order for enchanting public safety interior US, makes removable with misdemeanor tresspassing 602(k)

[Ritu794]

 

If I have a misedemeanor treaspassing 602(k) 6 yrs back and got record clearance 3 yrs back , would trump's executive order section 5  [ enhancing public safety  in the interior of US ] makes me removable from staying in US.?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/25/presidential-executive-order-enhancing-public-safety-interior-united

Sec. 5.  Enforcement Priorities.  In executing faithfully the immigration laws of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)), as well as removable aliens who: 

(a)  Have been convicted of any criminal offense;

(b)  Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved; 

(c)  Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;

(d)  Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency; 

(e)  Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;

(f)  Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or

(g)  In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security. 

 Are the bullet points above subjected to a person who is already categorized as a removable alien or any alien who commits those. 

I'm very much concerned, please advise.

 

•  
•  
• Quote

[sam3215]

7 hours ago, Ritu794 said:

 

If I have a misedemeanor treaspassing 602(k) 6 yrs back and got record clearance 3 yrs back , would trump's executive order section 5  [ enhancing public safety  in the interior of US ] makes me removable from staying in US.?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/25/presidential-executive-order-enhancing-public-safety-interior-united

Sec. 5.  Enforcement Priorities.  In executing faithfully the immigration laws of the United States, the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary) shall prioritize for removal those aliens described by the Congress in sections 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)), as well as removable aliens who: 

(a)  Have been convicted of any criminal offense;

(b)  Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved; 

(c)  Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;

(d)  Have engaged in fraud or willful misrepresentation in connection with any official matter or application before a governmental agency; 

(e)  Have abused any program related to receipt of public benefits;

(f)  Are subject to a final order of removal, but who have not complied with their legal obligation to depart the United States; or

(g)  In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security. 

 Are the bullet points above subjected to a person who is already categorized as a removable alien or any alien who commits those. 

I'm very much concerned, please advise.

 

•  
•  
• Quote

If your case is dismissed without conviction or probation then you will be fine. This is scary because it says even if charged the person is removable or deported..

[pagladeewana]

Are you in US illegally? if yes then you need to be worried.

 

This only applied to illegal aliens 

[walrus80]

Is it confirmed it only applies to undocumented aliens?

[sam3215]

11 hours ago, pagladeewana said:

Are you in US illegally? if yes then you need to be worried.

 

This only applied to illegal aliens 

You are Wrong. This applies to legal illegal aliens in US who has comitted, convicted or arrested or charged with ANY criminal offense includes DUI , shoplifting or Soliciting prostitution or any misdemeanor or felony arrest. First deportation is for illegal aliens then 2nd priority are legal aliens in visas.

[pagladeewana]

12 hours ago, century_new said:

You are Wrong. This applies to legal illegal aliens in US who has comitted, convicted or arrested or charged with ANY criminal offense includes DUI , shoplifting or Soliciting prostitution or any misdemeanor or felony arrest. First deportation is for illegal aliens then 2nd priority are legal aliens in visas.

Can you provide your source? Legal immigrants cannot be deported unless they commit a CIMT, not all crimes are CIMT

[deep4228]

This Order is written loosely to cast a wider net and does not specifically say it is applicable to only Undocumented Aliens.

So it can be very well applicable to Legal Immigrants. If you are convicted it is gone be issue anyways.

But if your are just arrested and not convicted ( that Case dismissed without any fine/probation/pre-trail diversion) you should be Ok ,as you case is resolved and below  (b) Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;  is not applicable.But you may fall into  (c)  Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;  if  one is charged ( that why I say this Order written loosely).

Finally, Now Immigration Officers have got greater discretionary powers as per  (g)  In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security. 

 

All above will come into picture mostly when you travel outside US.I feel traveling is risky during this Administration even with just a arrest record, but if you are here ,none will round you up and deport , it is very unlikely especially if you are case is dismissed(Not convicted).

 

@Century_new - One cannot rely on your answers ,you may ask the very same question for which you gave answer ,somewhere else in this very same forum 

 

 

[JoeF]

4 hours ago, pagladeewana said:

Can you provide your source? Legal immigrants cannot be deported unless they commit a CIMT, not all crimes are CIMT

That is wrong.  CIMTs can result in deportation. But there are more things that can result in deportation. For example, in some states, a DUI can be a felony, and that also can result in deportation.

These things are complex, and the OP should discuss his particular situation with a good immigration lawyer.

[pagladeewana]

I beg to differ.  As long as you don't fall into 212(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 235, and 237(a)(2) and (4) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(6)(C), 1225, and 1227(a)(2) and (4)) or are a removable alien(a legal immigrant only becomes a removable alien when he commits a CIMT).

 

 

Legal immigrants need to fall into one of the above sub sections to be classified as removable alien . The  a,b,c etc points only apply to removable alien.

[sam3215]

7 hours ago, pagladeewana said:

Can you provide your source? Legal immigrants cannot be deported unless they commit a CIMT, not all crimes are CIMT

single CIMT has petty offense exception. Hence cannot be denied entry. Th order is written in such a way that if any hit in the POE or Visa interview the applicant will have tough time to get a Visa or entry at POE. I hope deportation will not be a priority for legal aliens, but the wordings don't say legal or illegal. So it applies to all aliens regardless.

[please_guilty]

12 hours ago, deep4228 said:

This Order is written loosely to cast a wider net and does not specifically say it is applicable to only Undocumented Aliens.

So it can be very well applicable to Legal Immigrants. If you are convicted it is gone be issue anyways.

But if your are just arrested and not convicted ( that Case dismissed without any fine/probation/pre-trail diversion) you should be Ok ,as you case is resolved and below  (b) Have been charged with any criminal offense, where such charge has not been resolved;  is not applicable.But you may fall into  (c)  Have committed acts that constitute a chargeable criminal offense;  if  one is charged ( that why I say this Order written loosely).

Finally, Now Immigration Officers have got greater discretionary powers as per  (g)  In the judgment of an immigration officer, otherwise pose a risk to public safety or national security. 

 

All above will come into picture mostly when you travel outside US.I feel traveling is risky during this Administration even with just a arrest record, but if you are here ,none will round you up and deport , it is very unlikely especially if you are case is dismissed(Not convicted).

 

@Century_new - One cannot rely on your answers ,you may ask the very same question for which you gave answer ,somewhere else in this very same forum 

 

 

 

[please_guilty]

 

YUP  for long time ago I started to ignore Century_new   comments.

since he  is confusing  many forum members  I request moderator to review all his question/comments  before approval.

FYI  for past one year below  repeated questions.

a)  Asking questing whether you finger  for all forum member question

2) Its not CIMT

3) Its CIMT

4) if you attend  pre -trail and case dismissed --No impact

5) if you attend  pre -trail and case dismissed  its impact

5) blob blob /etc, etc

 

 

 

 

 

[Prathiba89]

212(a) 2 describes what? Only one crime for Person who got sentenced to jail more than 6 are inadmissible right? So petty exception applies . Can any confirm.

but the other conditions mentioned are meant to deny petty exception for only one crime in the record. It's confusing a lot

[Ritu794]

I was intially charged for petty theft pc 408 , then charges were reduced and convicted to misdemeanor trespassing 602(k). Not sure if immigration will look for the initial charge or the convictied charge. Hope I don't fall under any of the above sections  mention under sec5 .

[pagladeewana]

18 hours ago, JoeF said:

That is wrong.  CIMTs can result in deportation. But there are more things that can result in deportation. For example, in some states, a DUI can be a felony, and that also can result in deportation.

These things are complex, and the OP should discuss his particular situation with a good immigration lawyer.

Agree. If its a felony then its a different ball game .

 

Yes op should consult a immigration lawyer. 

[deshpremi]

Members, please don't mislead others if you don't know the full details. It's good to consult good attorneys for this. I have consulted with an experienced immigration attorney. What I was told was, trumps exec order can affect those legal residents who are considered to be deportable, otherwise called as removable legal aliens; who have been convicted of crimes that are subject to deportation and doesnot qualify for the petty offense exception. This remains to be same as before and There has not been any change to that, AS OF NOW. Only difference could be, now the forced deportation of removable aliens may be followed more rigorously. This is not my view. This was told to me by the attorney I consulted. Again if may or may not be completely correct. 

[pagladeewana]

3 hours ago, deshpremi said:

Members, please don't mislead others if you don't know the full details. It's good to consult good attorneys for this. I have consulted with an experienced immigration attorney. What I was told was, trumps exec order can affect those legal residents who are considered to be deportable, otherwise called as removable legal aliens; who have been convicted of crimes that are subject to deportation and doesnot qualify for the petty offense exception. This remains to be same as before and There has not been any change to that, AS OF NOW. Only difference could be, now the forced deportation of removable aliens may be followed more rigorously. This is not my view. This was told to me by the attorney I consulted. Again if may or may not be completely correct. 

Completely agree. That's what i was trying to say . Even my company attorney told the same thing

[Ritu794]

On 2/15/2017 at 0:00 PM, deshpremi said:

Members, please don't mislead others if you don't know the full details. It's good to consult good attorneys for this. I have consulted with an experienced immigration attorney. What I was told was, trumps exec order can affect those legal residents who are considered to be deportable, otherwise called as removable legal aliens; who have been convicted of crimes that are subject to deportation and doesnot qualify for the petty offense exception. This remains to be same as before and There has not been any change to that, AS OF NOW. Only difference could be, now the forced deportation of removable aliens may be followed more rigorously. This is not my view. This was told to me by the attorney I consulted. Again if may or may not be completely correct. 

Thanks for the response,  it gives me lil relief.

[DesiManas]

I am based of New York and was charged under the Petit Larceny 155.25 and received a summon - Desk Appearance Ticket. Please note that I was not arrested and did not go to the Police Station. 

So, in the immigration question do I still have to mention that I was ever arrested and reveal the incident?

My attorney guided me to attend the class even before appearing in the court which I did and the case was dismissed under section 170.55 and the case is even sealed within two months. I did not have to do any community service.

According to the recent post of yours as below, do I still fall under any of this category. According to the judge the case was dismissed and sealed so was I still convicted according to the INA?

https://www.murthy.com/2017/09/25/pretrial-agreements-may-qualify-as-convictions-under-the-ina/

I am in the phase of transferring the H1B visa to the new employer so do I have to reveal this to them?

Will there be any possible issue under the current circumstances, as I am afraid the new company may back off if I will reveal this to them due to the H1B transfer.

The new company requires a lot of travel, so do I have to reveal the truth? and what are the consequences if I travel outside the country for the H1B stamping?

Please note that the case is already closed and sealed in March 2017.

Please guide me!

[pontevecchio]

Why not retain the firm of Murthy or any of your choice to guide you appropriately?