This is one to watch closely:

"Trump, senators unveil bill to slash legal immigration to U.S."

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-idUSKBN1AI1ZU

- Under the new bill, the United States would prioritize high-skilled immigrants by setting up a merits-based system similar to those used by Canada and Australia.

Well since last November I have been predicting an end to sponsorship of parents as a back-door way to abolish the "anchor baby" problem.

I can't see this proposal getting through the Senate, not unless the GOP finally end the filibuster (which I'd be very surprised if they do, no matter how much Trump calls for it). Even then I think it'd be unlikely to pass, and probably won't pass the House either.

Moved to the Trailer Park as just general, not official info.

It was clear the days of "come one, come all" would end soon. It's just not sustainable and opens the door to immigration fraud. In my own situation, my marriage to my husband means that (barring financial and time constraints) theoretically 19 other people could immigrate in the first instance (both my parents, my four siblings, their spouses and between them they have 9 minor children). Subject to time, money and willingness to take US citizenship, if I did successfully petition those 19 family members they could subsequently bring in even more people under the current rules.

Since I am convinced that a large number of spouses from certain parts of the world only marry USCs to eventually obtain citizenship and bring their parents and siblings over, I wonder if these changes (should they go through) will reduce the number of spousal visas issued for those countries?

Or they could just change the law so that any amount of illegal presence in the U.S means you can never get a green card end of story. And also deny entry to people who attempt to enter the country whilst pregnant whether they have insurance or not.

Well that would just lead to illegals paying coyotes to trek them back across the border so they can be sponsored by their child That's not a bad idea, bit more than 30 years too late and in any case wouldn't stop a woman over staying and getting pregnant.

You will never stop people from have USC baby if they wish to. But they would be doing to purely to give the child a "better life" not to create a possible future life in the U.S for themselves. Besides the mother overstayed she could never get the green card under that legal change. It would be a lot easier than changing the 14th amendment.

Has anyone calculated how realistic the anchor baby issue really is? Having to wait 18 years and save up tens of thousands of dollars, it's one heck of a long con.

18?

I have seen many threads from people who are now able to sponsor there parents and are seemingly clueless that they need a qualifying relative for a I 601a

If the Parents entered with inspection they can of course adjust away.

How this bill would change the fate of people who are currently being sponsored for an EB green card? If approved, how long would it take to be implemented?

My prospective employer filed my PERM a month ago (EB3). With this bill I am worried I would have to give up the chance of moving to the USA, or face an ever longer wait than what it is now...

It's 21 years - the child must be 21 before being eligible to sponsor a parent.

Ian

It won't be approved... so you have nothing to worry about.

Ian

I thought I-601a relied on you being in the process of getting a visa anyway and just delays them kicking you out until it is complete. Are perpetual visa applications possible?

The anchor baby idea relies mostly on Mexicans crossing the border to give birth to a US citizen. They have to wait until the US citizen is an adult before they can be sponsored by them to become residents. Just looked it up quickly and 18 is wrong, the child has to be 21.

How? Urine tests at the airport? Or are you going to go by girth measurement? Many women don't show until their well into the second trimester. Can you imagine the complaints from overweight women that CBP had denied them entry on the basis of a suspected pregnancy.