You're not actually wrong, but your phrasing makes it sound like that somehow excuses this travesty of justice.

I can only assume that's accidental. You're the 17th most active person on HN, so I'm certain you've seen an overwhelming amount of evidence of how skilled immigrants are immensely beneficial to the US economy.

The H-1B is not the only path to a green card. There are many ways, every case is different, and pretty much all of the paths suck, even if you do everything right.

This decision only makes all of those paths worse.

▲

rayiner an hour ago | parent [-]

> evidence of how skilled immigrants are immensely beneficial to the US economy.

That's irrelevant. "Justice" means following the rules. Congress gets to decide the immigration laws. Congress has never created a real system for skilled permanent immigrants. The term "H1B" actually comes from 8 USC 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(B).

Subsection (a)(15) literally defines the term "immigrant" to exclude people in the subsequent subsections, including (H)(i)(b). Subsection (a)(15)(H)(i)(b) then reiterates that the category is for someone "who is coming temporarily to the United States to perform services." Congress didn't hide the ball.

It's just an example of how the immigration laws have been a bait-and-switch for decades: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/29/podcasts/the-daily/electi...

	▲	airstrike 15 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Everyone who has applied for an "adjustment of status" is following the rules. It's literally a procedure you submit to USCIS. People who have done everything by "following the rules" are now seeing the US backpedal on what was promised to them via an administrative memo published by USCIS at the behest of the president—not through new legislation enacted by Congress. I don't know where you're getting your information from, but it's factually incorrect. And as someone else said, "justice" does not mean following the law. That's the definition of "legal". It's important to anchor these topics at a certain level of understanding of Law and Economics to discuss optimal policy, otherwise we'll just talk past each other with uninformed political views.
	▲	digitaltrees 35 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Justice doesn’t mean following the law. It is possible to have an unjust law. Like red lining or slavery. Or civil forfeiture. Etc