Advertisement

April 19, 2014

Advocacy Groups Ask White House to Postpone Decisions Affecting Same-Sex Spouses' Immigration Status

According to The New York Times, over 50 gay rights and immigrant advocacy groups have written a letter to the White House asking President Obama to delay the adjudication of derivative lawful permanent residency petitions that would benefit the foreign same-sex spouses of U.S. citizens.

In their December 10th request, the groups are seeking a postponement of USCIS decisions until the Supreme Court issues a ruling on same-sex marriage in one of the two such cases it has recently agreed to hear next year. According to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), same-sex marriages do not bestow federal benefits, including those related to immigration. As a result, the USCIS has, to date, denied petitions that would grant legal permanent resident status to the same-sex immigrant spouses of U.S. citizens despite a January 2011 declaration that the U.S. Department of Justice would no longer enforce DOMA in the courts.

©2014 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Associate

Nataliya Binshteyn focuses her practice on global business immigration matters. Her experience includes representing political asylum applicants in immigration proceedings before Asylum Officers and Immigration Judges. Nataliya has experience conducting client interviews, researching country conditions and applicable laws, and soliciting expert testimony as well as drafting affidavits and immigration documents for filing with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.

703-903-7583

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.

The National Law Review - National Law Forum LLC 4700 Gilbert Ave. Suite 47 #230 Western Springs, IL 60558  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.