scholarly journals The Odyssey of the J-2: Forty-Three Years of Trying Not to Go Home Again

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen W. Yale-Loehr
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
State Department ◽  
The United States ◽  
Immigration Law ◽  
Strong Argument ◽  
Legislative History ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Legal Opinions ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of

18 Georgetown Immigration Law Journal (2003-04)Naomi Schorr, and Stephen W. Yale-LoehrWe wrote this article to address one question: Should a J-2 nonimmigrant exchange visitor be subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement of section 212(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) if the J-1 principal is so subject? In trying to answer that question, the authors confronted additional issues that seem to have gone unresolved for close to half a century. If a J nonimmigrant is subject, be it J-1 or J-2, where can he fulfill the foreign residence requirement: in the country of his nationality or the country of his last residence? Does he have a choice? Where does a J-2 fulfill? In her J-1 spouse's country of nationality or last residence or her own? Can she combine periods that she spends in both? And how can she fulfill it? Do any periods of stay in the foreign residence count, or must there be a certain quality to periods spent in the foreign country? If a J-1 fulfills the two-year rule overseas but the J-2 remains in the United States, is the J-2 still subject? If so, why? And finally, who gets to decide if the alien is even subject in the first place?The article is intended to serve several purposes: (1) to lead to an understanding of how J-2 nonimmigrants became subject to the foreign residence requirement; (2) to sort out where and how the two-year obligation may be fulfilled; and (3) to provide the legal rationale and justification for a new regulatory scheme that would render the J-2 exempt from the two-year foreign residence requirement. Our research found that there is very little in the legislative history and nothing in the INA that compels the conclusion that a J-2 is subject to the two-year foreign residence requirement. In fact, a strong argument exists that the J-2 is clearly not subject. For these reasons, we recommend that the State Department and the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) change their current interpretations to exempt J-2s from the two-year foreign residence requirement.We decided to write this article after listening to the remarks of a senior State Department official at a recent immigration law conference. That official was very clear in his view that the foreign residence requirement should not be imposed on J-2 nonimmigrants.This article looks at the legal premises and processes we engage in, examines the legislative history of the exchange visitor program, reviews the questions about J-2s that have been raised in liaison meetings between the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) and the Department of State and the United States Information Agency (USIA), provides excerpts from some of the statements about fulfillment issues that have been made by representatives of those governmental agencies at a variety of AILA conferences since 1998, and analyzes case law, legal opinions, and relevant regulations. In so doing, it necessarily takes a long, hard look not just at the J-2 classification, but also the status to which it appends, the J-1.

The History of the Department of State: VII

1911 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 414-432
Author(s):  
Gaillard Hunt
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Legal Provision ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Secretary Of State ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government

Having considered in former numbers of this Journal the sometime and occasional duties of the Department, including among them certain contingent duties which it has never been called upon to perform, we may now advance to a consideration of its habitual functions.The organic act of the Department prescribed that the Secretary of State should keep “ the seal of the United States.” It is the mark of the supreme authority of the United States, and before the government went into operation under the Constitution, was in the custody of the Secretary of Congress, being used to verify all important acts, whether executive or legislative; but the debate on executive departments in the first constitutional congress indicated that Congress did not contemplate keeping the seal any longer, and thought it would necessarily pass to the custody of the Executive. The President did, in fact, take it under his control as soon as he assumed office and before legal provision had been made for it.

Creating Oportunity

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoltan J. Acs
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Economic Opportunity ◽  
Wealth Creation ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
Fundamental Tension ◽  
Opportunity Creation

This chapter describes the system of opportunity creation in the United States, which has been a series of inventions and reinventions of the means by which opportunity has been provided. It begins with a historical background on efforts to suppress opportunity—or at least keep a monopoly hold on it—particularly in Britain. It then considers how opportunity has been embedded in American-style capitalism in two fundamental ways. The first is by equipping individuals with the skills they need to participate in capitalism; the second relates to the functioning of innovation and markets, and to the ability of new industries, firms, and jobs to challenge the status quo—namely, creative destruction. It also highlights the fundamental tension between wealth creation and maintaining economic opportunity. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the role played by schools and education reformers in the history of opportunity and opportunity creation in America.

The United States and the International Criminal Court: Avoiding Jurisdiction Through Bilateral Agreements in Reliance on Article 98

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 1-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
Attila Bogdan
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
The United States ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Legislative History ◽  
Bilateral Agreements ◽  
General Obligation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Treaty Interpretation

AbstractState-parties to the International Criminal Court Statute have a general obligation to cooperate with the Court. The duty to cooperate represents the functional cornerstone of the Court's existence. A narrow exception to this duty is contained in Article 98 of the Statute, which provides for limited circumstances in which the Court must refrain from seeking a surrender of an individual to the Court. Following rules of treaty interpretation, as well as an examination of the legislative history of the ICC Statute, the article explores the scope of Article 98, the provision the United States relied on in concluding a series of bilateral agreements that are primarily aimed at preventing the surrender of any U.S. nationals to the ICC. The article considers the issue of what impact, if any, the agreements have in the context of extradition, and the U.S.' legal ability to fulfill the commitments made in the "Article 98" agreements.

The History of the Department of State IX

1912 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-148
Author(s):  
Timothy Pickering ◽  
William R. Day ◽  
Wm. H. Taft ◽  
Elihu Root ◽  
Gaillard Hunt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of State ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Right ◽  
Special Circumstances

The highest duty of an American diplomatic or consular officer is to protect citizens of the United States in lawful pursuit of their affairs in foreign countries. The document issued in authentication of the right to such protection is the passport.Broadly speaking, the Department issues two kinds of passports — those for citizens and those for persons who are not citizens. Citizens’ passports are ordinary and special; aliens’ passports are for travel in the United States and for qualified protection abroad of those who have taken the first steps to become American citizens.The citizen’s passport is the only document issued by the Department of State to authenticate the citizenship of an American going abroad. The Act of August 18, 1856, makes the issuance to one who is not a citizen a penal offense if it is committed by a consular officer. Before this law was passed the Department did not issue the document to aliens; but it was permitted to this government’s agents abroad sometimes to issue it to others than American citizens. The Personal Instructions to the Diplomatic Agents of the United States of 1853 said: They sometimes receive applications for such passports from citizens of other countries; but these are not regularly valid, and should be granted only under special circumstances, as may sometimes occur in the case of foreigners coming to the United States.

scholarly journals History of and Aftermath from the Withdrawal of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Berliner ◽  
Jake Hecla ◽  
Michael Bondin ◽  
Austin Mullen ◽  
Kelsey Amundson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Arms Control ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Forces ◽  
Intermediate Range ◽  
Force Structure ◽  
Nuclear Stability ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of

On February 1, 2019, the United States and Russia withdrew from the three-decades old Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty. Events precipitating the withdrawal were allegations by both the United States and Russia of a variety of treaty violations. Until that point, the treaty had been a centerpiece of arms control and a key agreement of the global security architecture. The absence of such a pillar has the potential destabilize the status quo of arms control, creating significant uncertainty in global nuclear stability and security. In this paper, we present a historical review as overture to an analysis on the impacts of this development on force structure. This analysis examines the changes in U.S., Russian, and Chinese nuclear forces which may occur as a result of the treaty's demise. The article concludes with commentary on potential actions to preserve stability in a post-INF world.

The Status of Youth Coach Training in the United States: Existing Programs and Room for Improvement

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-251
Author(s):  
Bradley Fawver ◽  
Garrett F. Beatty ◽  
John T. Roman ◽  
Kevin Kurtz
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sport Participation ◽  
National Level ◽  
Organizational Factors ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coach Education ◽  
Coaching Model ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of ◽  
The University

The United States is one of the world’s perennial sports powers, yet the pathway to that success is littered with millions of youth athletes who either are not good enough to compete at a higher level or dropout from sport completely due to various personal, social, and organizational factors. These barriers are compounded by a win-at-all-costs mentality that pervades the U.S. sport culture and ultimately disenfranchises many youths from the opportunity to enjoy sport participation throughout their life. The authors argue that principle components in this flawed system are the lack of standardized coach education at the state and national level, weaknesses in the current curricula offered, and difficulties for aspiring coaches accessing existing training programs. In the current paper, the authors (a) briefly review the history of coach education in the United States as well as existing opportunities for coach education at the university, sport-specific, and private sectors; (b) provide a description of the strengths and weaknesses of the current coaching model; and (c) provide recommendations to improve coach education and training in the United States.

Part I United States, 1 The Rise and Fall of Lehman Brothers

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valukas Anton R ◽  
Byman Robert L ◽  
Murray Daniel R
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Global Economy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Lehman Brothers ◽  
The Status ◽  
History Of

This chapter begins by introducing the history of the status of Lehman Brothers in the financial world. It discusses the ranking of Lehman Brothers and the revenues recorded in 2007 and contrasts that to the status of the company in the following year. The fall of Lehman, the chapter argues, nearly took with it the entire global economy. The chapter goes on to argue that even though the company’s fall was spectacularly rapid, Lehman’s rise before that was far more storied and measured. It presents thorough detail on the rise of Lehman Brothers from the beginnings when Henry Lehman emigrated from Rimpar in Germany to the United States in 1844 to the time of the company’s dramatic demise in 2008. The chapter asks: why did Lehman fail? There were many reasons, the text of this chapter argues, and the responsibility for that failure is shared.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document