Talk:United States Citizenship and Immigration Services

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kmarquez96.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Demogorgon777, W1527371. Peer reviewers: Demogorgon777, W1527371.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Maddiegear.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 12:00, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Restored some changes
Hello, I put back some paragraphs that were removed. They concerned the name changes and also level of efficency of the USCIS/BCIS/INS. I believe that these are relevent, worth mentioning, and reflect the on-going changes since Sept 11th in US Government. Also, I believe concerns regarding agencys performance are accurate, well known, and not a reflection of a bias or represent a hidden motive.

If people disagree (or agree!) I'd love to discuss it further. I'm kind of new to Wikipedia so I hope this is the correct way to do things!

Regards, Nycmstar 23:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

--- Hey there - I had removed it the paragraph the first time because it was a bit imprecise. I've taken another shot at modifying the language to make it more accurate.

Most importantly, USCIS is not the same as the old INS; it is only a piece of what INS used to be responsible for. The considerable enforcement functions, which include the Border Patrol, the Inspections Program, the Investigations Program, the Intelligence Program, the Detention and Removal Program, and the General Counsel, were transferred to different agencies within DHS (ICE and CBP). Therefore, it cannot be said that the INS was transformed into USCIS - the INS was actually abolished and its functions distributed among three new agencies of which USCIS is only one. Also, the use of "BCIS" is outdated, the agency should only be referred to as USCIS. In terms of nomenclature, DHS is a Department; USCIS is an agency (not the other way around).

INS' ineffectiveness is indeed generally accepted and could be included. However the reason shouldn't be attributed solely to "not screening applicants," though clearly that was one manifestation of the agency's (many) woes.in spanish

-

Hi there, Updated the new USCIS director information to reflect the new director Alejandro Mayorkas and removed the acting director Jock Straffon (sp?)

Recent changes and a few questions
Hello,

First, let me mention that I recently added a small section "USCIS Funding" to the page and included a couple of references. If someone has objections and/or comments related to this, please discuss them here.

Second, I have a few thoughts about the page in general:

1) I find it a little strange that there were no references on the page until now. Should the reference section perhaps be expanded?

2) Some minor comments regarding the statements describing the goals of USCIS.

For example: "The priorities of the USCIS are to promote national security, to eliminate immigration case backlogs, and improve customer services."

I am not sure if these are really their priorities. And are there other priorities, such as, for example, assisting family reunification and helping the U.S. businesses and the economy? Perhaps one should say instead "The stated priorities of the USCIS are..." or something like that. Do they mention anything about their priorities somewhere on their website?

My own experience with USCIS indicates that protecting national security (or at least how they perceive it) seems to be their overriding priority, which by supercedes by far all the other considerations, such as family reunification, economic growth, etc.

The same applies to the sentence "While core immigration benefits functions remain the same as under the INS, a new goal is to process applications efficiently and effectively." Is this really "a new goal" for them?

My understanding is that the main functional difference with INS is that some INS enforcement functions were taken away from USCIS ang given to ICE. (Maybe this should be mentioned explicitly?)

3) A small comment regarding the "Functions" section.

Is it really appropriate to list procedural requirements for naturalization (5 years, 3 years, 180 days etc) here? They seem a bit out of place in this section.

Regards, Nsk92 00:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Contact USCIS Citations
This section needs to include citations and drop some opinion statements. Is there an original editor who had sources in mind? MattHawke (talk) 19:45, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I have to agree. (Kmarquez96 (talk) 03:38, 30 March 2017 (UTC)Kmarquez96)

Tagging of Citations and Expansion
I went ahead and added the tags for citation and expansion. This artcile severly lacks the quality needed for an article on behalf of an agency of the US Federal Government. Comparing this article to other agencies within Homeland Security, it falls short. It has been a long time since the concerns regarding citaion were brought up, so I believed it appropriate to cite. Alex (talk)

I believe it is important to cite all sources before you submit an article. (Kmarquez96 (talk) 03:39, 30 March 2017 (UTC)Kmarquez96)

Two articles referent at the same US Federeal Goverment Agency??
INS must be redirect at USCIS because now is the Official name UNITES STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICE and add at the official name former INS  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yayoloco (talk • contribs) 02:47, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I disagree. The functions of the former INS are now divided between US Citizenship and Immigration Services, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and US Customs and Border Protection. As there are now three successor bodies to the INS, I believe that your proposed redirection would be misleading. --Jules7484 (talk) 18:50, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Acting Director of USCIS
Hello all.

I have recently checked to see who the current acting director is of the USCIS and I believe it is no longer Lori Scialabba, and now is James McCament. It looks to me like this change was done on the 31st of March. The page that shows who the current leadership is, is stating that it was last updated on 1/20/2017 This makes things confusing for me, but from what I can find googling, apparently she is retiring.

All in all, according to the main site for USCIS, James McCament is the Acting Director so I am going to change this over. (Demogorgon777 (talk) 02:26, 4 April 2017 (UTC))

Going further into History
I used some research to dive further into the History that lead up to the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. I found multiple sources that stated the same information to cross reference the validity of the section I added, and cited accordingly. Hopefully this will help the people who read this wiki page have a little more insight into this important agency. Please feel free to correct whatever needs to be corrected. (Demogorgon777 (talk) 06:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC))

Mission Statement
The February 23, 2018 change to the USCIS mission statement was an important story that was picked up by all major news outlets. User Corkythehornetfan undid my mention of this change and it is not clear why Corkythehornetfan feels this does not belong on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taquim (talk • contribs) 04:09, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I gave my explanation in my edit summary – WP:MISSION. I added WP:UNDUE on my talk page where you asked me. Mission statement's do not belong on Wikipedia. Corky  04:15, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

WP:Mission clarifies that an organization's mission statement does not normally belong on their page. In this case, however, the change to an organization's mission statement has been controversial and all major media outlets reported the story. WP:Mission in no way suggests that it is inappropriate to include this information on an organization's Wikipedia page. As for WP:UNDUE, I indicated in my edit that some groups supported the mission statement change while others did not. There is no bias conveyed in this edit. The current citation is for the NY Times article, but I'd be glad to add the Fox News article as a cite as well if you'd like. Please let me know if you have any suggestions on how this entry might be written better, and I encourage others to voice opinions on this. In the meantime, I will restore my edit. Taquim 06:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Taquim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taquim (talk • contribs)
 * I still don't see a reason to include it. It made the news, so what? How is it any different then what the other agencies are doing during this administration. In the meantime, you should not revert any further until a consensus is reached. Corky  06:28, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It made the news, therefore it has become relevant to the point that mentioning it in Wikipedia becomes mandatory. In the meantime, you should not revert any further until a consensus is reached. Taquim 06:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Taquim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taquim (talk • contribs)
 * Learn the guidelines. Nothing is mandatory, and just because it's in the news, doesn't mean it should be included. You need now starting to edit war, which is against Wikipedia guidelines. There is no consensus, and your edit has been challenged. My edits are vandalism simply because I disagree with you and due to your lack of understanding how Wikipedia works. If you revert again, which I advise you not to, then I will report you. Corky  06:59, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Ok, please do report, and save me the trouble of reporting you. Taquim 07:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Taquim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taquim (talk • contribs)
 * For what? Disagreeing with you? Oh man, that's a sin in and of itself right there. I haven't violated any guideline, yet you're the one who violated WP:3RR. This is probably your first time hearing the word "no" so you're considering it vandalism because you can't handle when others don't agree with you. Corky  15:41, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
 * To repeat myself again: This edit is not about posting an organization's entire mission statement; that has not happened. This edit makes mention of a change to the mission statement that reveals a very significant change in the organization's mission. You keep asking me to discuss but you refuse to address this basic point. I can't imagine why you are so opposed to the addition of these 2 short sentences. All major news outlets covered this change and consider it to be a major news event yet Corky believes this to be unworthy of mention in the Wikipedia article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taquim (talk • contribs) 09:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

What's up with the new mission statement for the US Citizenship and Immigration Services?
And added something about "honoring our values" that doesn't include the values carved onto the Statute of Liberty.
 * Deleted "America's promise as a nation of immigrants"
 * Deleted "providing accurate and useful information"
 * Deleted "citizenship benefits"

Who's stupid idea was this?

Old version: USCIS secures America’s promise as a nation of immigrants by providing accurate and useful information to our customers, granting immigration and citizenship benefits, promoting an awareness and understanding of citizenship, and ensuring the integrity of our immigration system.”

Xenophobic version:    “U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services administers the nation’s lawful immigration system, safeguarding its integrity and promise by efficiently and fairly adjudicating requests for immigration benefits while protecting Americans, securing the homeland, and honoring our values.”

https://www.uscis.gov/news/news-releases/uscis-director-l-francis-cissna-new-agency-mission-statement DOR (HK) (talk) 13:00, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Needs History section
When and why formed, by whom, etc. This article is incomplete without that basic information.--47.32.20.133 (talk) 13:32, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Citizenship Ceremony Lawsuit
Hi:

I'm doing research on behalf of a client, and I would like to propose adding something to this page about the recent class-action lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania asking the courts to authorize “judicial oath ceremonies or immediate administrative naturalization by USCIS” to assure that all approved candidates for naturalization are sworn in by late September. Though my client is not mentioned in these articles, the information could potentially benefit them and the work they do assisting immigrants in applying for citizenship. So, I want to err on the side of ethical practices. I would appreciate someone weighing in on, 1) if this is an appropriate addition to this page, and 2) if I should make this edit myself, or if I should make a CIO request. I'm conducting research because my client would like to add an article about themselves to Wikipedia. The way in which I see this possibly helping my client is through a Wikipedia intra link.

Lawsuit article links below.

https://www.rollcall.com/2020/06/12/immigrants-sue-government-over-delayed-citizenship-ceremonies/ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/17/us/coronavirus-naturalization-citizenship-voting.html

Thank you for your review and consideration LeepKendall (talk) 19:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi. I'm not sure how often this page gets attention. So, I'm calling on a few of you who have assisted me in the past to see if you would consider weighing in on my question/request. User:Nardog, and User:Ibadibam if you have the time to review and weigh in I'd greatly appreciate it.
 * Thank you LeepKendall (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's figure out where this information could go. Given that there is not an existing section in this article on litigation involving the USCIS, to add this case alone would constitute undue weight (if you have the time to write a more comprehensive summary of the agency's legal history, go for it!). Neither would I put it in History of laws concerning immigration and naturalization in the United States, because this case involves an administrative issue and at first glance doesn't appear to challenge statute. How about Immigration policy of Donald Trump? That already has content about recent administrative hurdles to visas and green cards. It seems like this new information would fit right in.
 * As for conflict of interest, I don't think you necessarily need to make a formal edit request, but you might again raise the topic on that article's talk page and see if there are objections. For this content, I don't anticipate a COI issue as long as you refrain from editorializing and stick to the facts as presented in your sources, both of which are reliable. In particular, I'd follow the sources' lead on avoiding any allegation of animus on the part of the administration. As to the proposed article about your client, it will require the full scrutiny of the Articles for Creation process. Ibadibam (talk) 20:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much User:Ibadibam. I will definitely look into your suggestions! Yes, we plan to run our client's new page through the proper creation channels. Best, LeepKendall (talk) 18:28, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Race, Law, and Politics
— Assignment last updated by Dorbwe (talk) 16:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Who appoints the director?
How does one become a director of USCIS? Obviously Congress must have passed a law saying USCIS was to be established and would have a director. Normally it would say who appoints the director. Sometimes they say it's one of the heads of departments of the federal government—the Secretary of Whatever, who is a member of the president's cabinet. Sometimes they say the president appoints the person, with no need for confirmation by the senate. Sometimes they say the president appoints the incumbent subject to confirmation by the senate. Sometimes maybe it would be some other alternative.

How is it done in this case? Michael Hardy (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2024 (UTC)