GUWonder

I would tend to agree but there are certain things that already took place and are systematically in place even for people with J and F category visas that will remain different for them than for those outside of the US seeking to be located to the US as a refugee. It's just the way it is and has changed already. Iranians with J and F visas are in a better position -- marginal as it may or may not turn out to be -- than Iranian refugees seeking to be settled in the US. For example, the allocation of staff resources has already changed for the latter but not for the former.

TheBOSman

I'll try to hew outside of PR best I can here while staying on subject:

While perhaps not sufficient for Trump's desires, Iranians (and other nationalities covered here) with J and F visas have already been vetted to some degree (likely significant) by the US Government. Many refugees have not. And this executive order appears only to affect entry of the affected visa holders; it does not affect those already in the country. However, it has already been confirmed to me by at least one group that has a number of nationals from the affected countries that they are strongly recommending that those involved with the group from those countries do not travel outside of the US during the validity of this executive order, no matter their visa status, and many of those involved with the entity would be under a J or F status assuredly.

GUWonder

90 day change for select non-refugee travels and 120 day change for refugee program are different restrictions on their face. Even if both were to have been set for the same number of days, the differences in what it means would still go the way mentioned in my prior post. Our government has a way of functioning that doesn't all get changed so easily and immediately even by executive orders. It's something that all recent Presidents ended up learning (or at least being exposed to) after initially playing to the peanut gallery.

Here is the text as supplied by the Administration:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/01/2...der-trump.html

For those Iranian students (and even other foreign students of Iranian heritage) in the US, staying put in the US as students for the duration of their program may indeed be advisable if the course of study is the priority.

The Admin seems to have been adding a bit more wiggle room for itself (or setting itself up to do so) on this matter too as time went/goes on. A reality of governing is that even the governor may realize there are things that require compromise and adjustment if not wanting to sink their own ship.

catocony

I believe the current process to get refugee status takes 18-24 months, and includes just about every check their could be short of an "enhanced interrogation" at Gitmo for every applicant. We know a lot more about a Syrian or Iranian applying as a refugee then we do about most other visitors.

GUWonder

A bunch of American companies have international traveling employees with US visas (immigrant or non-immigrant visas) or (perhaps less likely to be impacted) US permanent residence permits that are potentially impacted by this travel ban. Some of those who live in the US but are or were outside of the country have been rushing back (to try to get into the US) upon hearing of this executive order being signed.

Given some such people have families with young kids who live in the US, traveling abroad and being hit by a travel ban while outside of the country can seriously tear apart a law-abiding family. It's also likely to damage some careers.

televisor

Are LPRs actually affected? The order bans immigrant and non-immigrant entry, but once you're an LPR do you still count as an immigrant (you're considered a person after all)?

(One news story is claiming LPRs are being denied entry, but there's little proof of anything in there.)

redadeco

<deleted by moderator>

On a sidenote an Iranian friend on a J visa has just come back yesterday from a 10-day stay in Mexico, no issues at all upon arrival at SFO.

GUWonder

<deleted by moderator>

Yesterday may be different than today.

Today, several Iraqis with US visas were denied travel to the US with at least one airline saying -- whether true or not -- that they got a message to deny US-bound travel to citizens of these countries.

I'm just waiting until the Admin decides to do this to foreign citizens from Pakistan and perhaps even Bangladesh too. At that point, the numbers of people impacted will be way more than double the current numbers.

televisor

Reentering the US from Mexico and Canada (at least on a J or F Visa) is quite different to a normal entry - which will further muddy the waters (nevermind that this policy is very recent).

E.g. reentry from neighbouring countries doesn't even require a valid visa anymore (under certain parameters), so I can imagine this whole scenario in general is quite special.

RTW1

First reports are already in where airlines refuse to board passengers.

GUWonder

The US visa waiver program is not applicable to most (or is it now all?) citizens of the blacklisted countries. Re-entry from neighboring countries does require a lot of non-Canadians and non-VWP countries' citizens to have a valid US visa to travel to/enter the US.

Indeed, but whether or not it was required of the airlines (by the USG) is something that I've not had checked out. But with reports like this

http://nypost.com/2017/01/28/two-ira...ecutive-order/

it doesn't look good for a lot of people with otherwise valid US visas.

Markie

Sydney Morning Herald:
There were further reports that five Iraqi passengers and one Yemeni had been barred from boarding an EgyptAir flight from Cairo to New York as the US ban on entry of citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries came ito force.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/refugees...28-gu0p5o.html

There is a lot of detail in the articles about who/where people have been turned back or detained on arrival.

televisor

Wrong, and it's even on the CBP website:
https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/det...T1FrVl9QOW4%3D

Admittedly some of the currently banned countries aren't eligble for automatic revalidation, but far from all of them.

(Moreover I've seen documentation stating that travel validation signatures aren't required for travel to contiguous territories on J-1/F-1, which is what is more relevant in this case- but I can't find that online currently.)

GUWonder

Which of my words in that quoted post of mine are exactly wrong? This ought to be interesting.

While it is indeed possible for many to have an expired visa and valid I-94 for re-entry, the visa is in effect still valid. If the visa is invalid and even not yet expired on its face, then is the I-94 still valid for re-entry? I wouldn't be so sure about that.

"Iran, Sudan and Syria are not eligible for automatic revalidation of an expired visa." And it's practically more extensive than that.

GUWonder

The dual-Canadian-Iranian citizens being hit by this is interesting as Canadians don't use the US VWP to enter the US and mostly enter the US without a visa. The Toronto-area Persian Canadians often use BUF to get cheaper flights to meet their US domestic and international travel plans by air.