Why are country quotas not illegal per the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965?

[mynewusername]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Origins_Formula

I recently came across the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965 (see links above). This Act essentially abolished country quotas in Immigration. How is it that this does not apply to those of us from India or China waiting for our dates to become current?

[JoeF]

I recently came across the Hart-Cellar Act of 1965 (see links above). This Act essentially abolished country quotas in Immigration.

No, it didn't. It abolished the national origin formula. It also overturned a ban on immigration from Asia...

And there have been lots of changes to the immigration law since, including the comprehensive immigration reform in the late 1980s, which, among other things, introduced the H-1B visa.

[mynewusername]

... reform in the late 1980s, which, among other things, introduced the H-1B visa.

But we aren't talking about H1-B visas here. And there certainly is no country quotas in H1-Bs, is there? In fact, country quotas are nowhere to be found in the United States except in the case of GC for India and China. Country quotas, at least, on the face of it, is discrimination. Why is it discrimination? Simply because, given 2 candidates with the exact same qualifications, experience etc., it takes one a few months to get his GC, while the other has to wait for years and years - his only fault being born in a certain country (something over which an individual has no control whatsoever). Please tell me how this is not discrimination and how come it continues to apply to the GC process? Forget Hart-Cellar, for a country which bases its constitution on individual rights and liberties, how are these country quotas not unconstitutional, forget being illegal?

[JoeF]

But we aren't talking about H1-B visas here. And there certainly is no country quotas in H1-Bs, is there? In fact, country quotas are nowhere to be found in the United States except in the case of GC for India and China. Country quotas, at least, on the face of it, is discrimination. Why is it discrimination?

It is not discrimination.

And the current immigration law says that there is a percentage limit on the visa numbers that can be assigned to any one country. Nothing illegal there. It is in the law.

[mynewusername]

It is not discrimination.

And the current immigration law says that there is a percentage limit on the visa numbers that can be assigned to any one country. Nothing illegal there. It is in the law.

Thanks for enlightening me that it is the law. That was news to me. As for "discrimination", this is how a popular dictionary defines it -

"

treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group,class, or category to

which

that person or thing belongsrather than on individual merit: "

now, in the case of country quotas, this is exactly what happens. let us say you have two candidates with the EXACT same qualifications (merit), one from India and one from, say, Somalia - the Somali gets his GC in a matter of months while the Indian waits for over a decade.

And again, thanks for educating me about the percentages for each country. I wouldn't have known about the 7% figure if it were not for your condescending highness. For all your condescension and patronising tone, can you care to explain on what scientific principles was the 7% figure arrived at?

and while at that, do yourself a favor and lose the patronizing tone. This is a discussion forum and if you have anything valuable to add, do so.. or sit back and relax.

[JoeF]

Thanks for enlightening me that it is the law. That was news to me. As for "discrimination", this is how a popular dictionary defines it

Irrelevant.

If you don't like it, feel free to sue the federal government. I am sure people have done that already.

The act you quoted has long been superceded. I suggest learning about how laws work.

[Desi Dude]

But we aren't talking about H1-B visas here. And there certainly is no country quotas in H1-Bs, is there? In fact, country quotas are nowhere to be found in the United States except in the case of GC for India and China. Country quotas, at least, on the face of it, is discrimination. Why is it discrimination? Simply because, given 2 candidates with the exact same qualifications, experience etc., it takes one a few months to get his GC, while the other has to wait for years and years - his only fault being born in a certain country (something over which an individual has no control whatsoever). Please tell me how this is not discrimination and how come it continues to apply to the GC process? Forget Hart-Cellar, for a country which bases its constitution on individual rights and liberties, how are these country quotas not unconstitutional, forget being illegal?

You need to get the complete picture, there is much more to this than you think. American immigration system is not a FIFO based system. The country you are born in actually matters. The immigration system does not want a large number of people from one country. It tries to maintain the flow and maintain the diversity.

Even though on the face of it, country limitation in employment doesn't seem fair, it actually satisfies the basic requirement of diversity. Right now Indians are one of the fastest growing populations in US. As long as there is ROW demand for employment visa, they will take precedence. The system is fair because it gives the spillover visas to Indians & Chinese !!

I used to think like you but then I realized this underlying concept and now I agree with it. Imagine if this was not true, there would have been 100 million Mexicans legally in US just coz they have easy access. The Immigration system is smart and they know what they are doing. They don't limit you from getting H1Bs.