7 ms·

Update from USCIS: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B_Proc_Memo_FINAL.pdf https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B

by arn7av 1y ago

Update from USCIS: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B_Proc_Memo_FINAL.pdf https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B... "Clarification" from Press Secretary: https://x.com/PressSec/status/1969495900478488745 https://x.com/PressSec/status/1969495900478488745 1.) This is NOT an annual fee. It’s a one-time fee that applies only to the petition. 2.) Those who already hold H-1B visas and are currently outside of the country right now will NOT be charged $100,000 to re-enter. H-1B visa holders can leave and re-enter the country to the same extent as they normally would; whatever ability they have to do that is not impacted by yesterday’s proclamation. 3.) This applies only to new visas, not renewals, and not current visa holders. It will first apply in the next upcoming lottery cycle.

mgraczyk 1y ago
The problem here is that the proclamation says otherwise. It doesn't include any exception for current holders Trump has the legal authority to block anyone from entering for essentially any reason (see Trump v Hawaii) So it doesn't matter much what the white house says today. They are free to change their minds tomorrow. That's part of the strategy, if immigrants are afraid they will be arbitrarily extorted at the border, then only the ones whose employers have bribed Trump will even bother applying
- Tika2234 1y ago
  [dead]
nrmitchi 1y ago
A "White House Official" may be saying this now, but it is not what was in the EO that was actually signed. There were no exclusions for current holders, and the start date was explicitly September 21, 2025 (a date that does apply to the "next lottery"). They are more than welcome to roll back this asinine decision, but pretending that everyone else is just mis-interpreting is gaslighting. Either way, until there is an official, in-writting announcement that can be depended on, no one should be taking the advice of an unnamed White House source. In any situation, your best bet is to follow the direction and guidance of your own attorney.
- arn7av 1y ago
  I agree with the first part, but for the second, this is not an unnamed WH source, it is the Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt
  - nrmitchi 1y ago
    I was not aware that she had made this statement as well. All previous reporting from this morning seemed to report back to a Business Insider article that cited only an "unamed White House official who has been granted anonymity to speak on the issue". I missed that it was a reference to a tweet from her specifically (as opposed to one of the countless other accounts copy/pasting this everywhere). Note that Leavitt's words are any more enforceable though.
  - johnnyanmac 1y ago
    Not even the first time this week that this admin can't keep each other aligned. I'd follow the words of the proclamation/EO over what the mouthpiece says.
  - RyanCavanaugh 1y ago
    The Press Secretary isn't the Supreme Court. Her say-so doesn't change the plain text of the order, and you're rolling the dice as to which any given border agent is going to choose to believe.
    - ivraatiems 1y ago
      USCIS also says they are not interpreting the order to mean existing visa holders must pay $100k to enter.
    - Tika2234 1y ago
      [dead]
- ajross 1y ago
  > In any situation, your best bet is to follow the direction and guidance of your own attorney. Private lawyers don't know any more about this than we do. The administration will do today what the administration decides to do today, not what it previously said it was going to do. At best, the ambiguity will make for a better case that lawyer needs to file eventually. But she's not a mind reader.
kccqzy 1y ago
Nothing in the executive order says that those who already hold visas will not be charged, or that it will applies to new visas. And one can pretty much be sure that omitting that fact in the initial executive order announcement is intentional, because this administration wants chaos.
mrtksn 1y ago
Who knows what will happen next? Maybe his base will be unhappy with the current format, start a social media campaign and make the WH post even better clarification that explains exactly the opposite. They flip flopped on the foreign employees in hospitality and food production. The policies are driven by outrage, crypto purchases and early investors like Project2025 apparently. I don't think that there's any guaranties.
yibg 1y ago
Info from customs agents at airport is aligned with this statement. Specifically that it does NOT apply to current visa holders. How consistent that is, no idea.
- arn7av 1y ago
  Updated the comment with USCIS update: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B_Proc_Memo_FINAL.pdf https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B...
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  I smell another border control catastrophe this week. They already aren't respecting existing ViSAs
- ycombinator_acc 1y ago
  > it does NOT apply to current visa holders How about transfers? Transfers technically count as new visas and need to be petitioned. Will every new employer have to shell out 100K? If that's the case, H-1B holders are now actually indentured servants (they were not previously, no matter how many Redditors claim otherwise) because they are now stuck with the current employer with essentially no ability to transfer or find a new employer in case of a layoff.
  - tdeck 1y ago
    Elon Musk would love this. Even harder for his workers to leave.
darkoob12 1y ago
They don't tell her everything. She was clueless before. We have seen Trump making decisions that surprised his closest aids.
EasyMark 1y ago
That's what they're saying today. What happens Monday when Trump's not distracted by "Sunday Golf" ?

by arn7av 1y ago

mgraczyk 1y ago

The problem here is that the proclamation says otherwise. It doesn't include any exception for current holders Trump has the legal authority to block anyone from entering for essentially any reason (see Trump v Hawaii) So it doesn't matter much what the white house says today. They are free to change their minds tomorrow. That's part of the strategy, if immigrants are afraid they will be arbitrarily extorted at the border, then only the ones whose employers have bribed Trump will even bother applying

Tika2234 1y ago
[dead]

nrmitchi 1y ago

A "White House Official" may be saying this now, but it is not what was in the EO that was actually signed. There were no exclusions for current holders, and the start date was explicitly September 21, 2025 (a date that does apply to the "next lottery"). They are more than welcome to roll back this asinine decision, but pretending that everyone else is just mis-interpreting is gaslighting. Either way, until there is an official, in-writting announcement that can be depended on, no one should be taking the advice of an unnamed White House source. In any situation, your best bet is to follow the direction and guidance of your own attorney.

arn7av 1y ago
I agree with the first part, but for the second, this is not an unnamed WH source, it is the Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt
- nrmitchi 1y ago
  I was not aware that she had made this statement as well. All previous reporting from this morning seemed to report back to a Business Insider article that cited only an "unamed White House official who has been granted anonymity to speak on the issue". I missed that it was a reference to a tweet from her specifically (as opposed to one of the countless other accounts copy/pasting this everywhere). Note that Leavitt's words are any more enforceable though.
- johnnyanmac 1y ago
  Not even the first time this week that this admin can't keep each other aligned. I'd follow the words of the proclamation/EO over what the mouthpiece says.
- RyanCavanaugh 1y ago
  The Press Secretary isn't the Supreme Court. Her say-so doesn't change the plain text of the order, and you're rolling the dice as to which any given border agent is going to choose to believe.
  - ivraatiems 1y ago
    USCIS also says they are not interpreting the order to mean existing visa holders must pay $100k to enter.
  - Tika2234 1y ago
    [dead]
ajross 1y ago
> In any situation, your best bet is to follow the direction and guidance of your own attorney. Private lawyers don't know any more about this than we do. The administration will do today what the administration decides to do today, not what it previously said it was going to do. At best, the ambiguity will make for a better case that lawyer needs to file eventually. But she's not a mind reader.

kccqzy 1y ago

Nothing in the executive order says that those who already hold visas will not be charged, or that it will applies to new visas. And one can pretty much be sure that omitting that fact in the initial executive order announcement is intentional, because this administration wants chaos.

mrtksn 1y ago

Who knows what will happen next? Maybe his base will be unhappy with the current format, start a social media campaign and make the WH post even better clarification that explains exactly the opposite. They flip flopped on the foreign employees in hospitality and food production. The policies are driven by outrage, crypto purchases and early investors like Project2025 apparently. I don't think that there's any guaranties.

yibg 1y ago

Info from customs agents at airport is aligned with this statement. Specifically that it does NOT apply to current visa holders. How consistent that is, no idea.

arn7av 1y ago
Updated the comment with USCIS update: https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B_Proc_Memo_FINAL.pdf https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/H1B...
johnnyanmac 1y ago
I smell another border control catastrophe this week. They already aren't respecting existing ViSAs
ycombinator_acc 1y ago
> it does NOT apply to current visa holders How about transfers? Transfers technically count as new visas and need to be petitioned. Will every new employer have to shell out 100K? If that's the case, H-1B holders are now actually indentured servants (they were not previously, no matter how many Redditors claim otherwise) because they are now stuck with the current employer with essentially no ability to transfer or find a new employer in case of a layoff.
- tdeck 1y ago
  Elon Musk would love this. Even harder for his workers to leave.

darkoob12 1y ago

They don't tell her everything. She was clueless before. We have seen Trump making decisions that surprised his closest aids.

EasyMark 1y ago

That's what they're saying today. What happens Monday when Trump's not distracted by "Sunday Golf" ?