Category: News

“Travel Ban 4.0”, described more fully in this post, applies to refugees only, indefinitely suspending the ability of refugees already in the U.S. to bring over their “follow-to-join” spouses and under 21 year old, unmarried children who are still abroad, and temporarily suspended refugee processing of any refugees from eleven countries, including Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, North Korea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen.  (Update:  On January 29, 2018, the government announced that it is no longer suspending refugee processing from the eleven countries listed earlier,  but will subject them to intensified scrutiny – this, notwithstanding that refugees have long endured more scrutiny than any other category of immigrant to the U.S., going through identity, background, and other verifications that typically take 18 to 24 months.)

On December 23, 2017, a Federal District Court in Washington State issued a nationwide injunction blocking enforcement of Travel Ban 4.0 against follow-to-join relatives.  (The court also blocked enforcement of the ban against any persons from the eleven designated countries who have a bona fide relationship with a person or entity in the U.S., as defined previously by the Supreme Court, but that is now likely moot following the government’s January 29, 2018 decision mentioned above.)

On December 27, 2017, the government challenged the District Court’s injunction against implementation of the Travel Ban 4.0 against refugees who have received assurances from refugee resettlement agencies.

Bottom line:    Under the Federal Court’s ruling the government should continue to process  visa applications for follow-to-join relatives of refugees already resettled in the U.S. while this litigation continues.

NOTE:          As a practical matter, the government has put a stranglehold on refugee processing irrespective of any court decisions. Fewer than a third as many refugees were admitted in the first quarter of FY 2018 as compared to the prior three fiscal years as explained in this Wall Street Journal article.     Refugee resettlement agencies across the country are cutting staff because not only is this fiscal year’s 45,000 cap on refugee admissions the lowest number since 1980, but also at the rate refugees are actually being allowed in, barely half that number might actually arrive.  UPDATE:  In Maine, as of March 21, 2018, only 30 refugees had arrived for resettlement (compared to several hundred at the same time in 2016).

How does this affect Maine’s businesses?

• If you have refugee employees, be aware of their stress due to the uncertainty of whether this court decision will hold, and their worries about when their spouses and children, whom they may have been expecting to immigrate soon, will be able to reunite with them here in the U.S.
• Maine has resettled hundreds of refugees annually for decades.   Refugees from four of the eleven targeted countries – Somalis, Iraqis, Syrians and Sudanese – have been long been the majority of those resettled here each year. They become integral members of our communities, working, volunteering, and spending their earnings locally.   With Maine’s historically low unemployment rate and shrinking labor pool, we need workers. Refugees already were subject to more strenuous vetting than any other category of immigrant. Choking off this regular source of new immigrants to Maine will hurt Maine’s economy.

“Travel Ban 3.0” applies to people from Chad, Iran, Libya, No. Korea, Somali, Syria, Venezuela, and Yemen. This ban affected those applying for visas or entry as immigrants (permanent residents) and nonimmigrants (temporary stays). Read this post for more details about the specific immigrants and nonimmigrants affected. It does not apply to refugees.

On Dec. 22, 2017, the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the government and found that the President exceeded his statutory authority when he issued Travel Ban 3.0.   The Court issued a partial preliminary injunction of Travel Ban 3.0 while the case proceeds through the federal courts. The injunction would block implementation of the ban as it applies to persons from the 8 countries who have a “credible bona fide relationship with a person or entity” in the U.S. – including immediate and specified extended family members, and those with a “formal, documented” connection to a business or university etc.

However, the 9^th Circuit court then “stayed” its own preliminary injunction pending review by the Supreme Court, in deference the Supreme Court’s earlier decision on 12/4/2017.

On January 19, 2018, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the government’s appeal of the 9th Circuit’s decision.  Oral arguments are expected in the spring, with a decision by the end of June, 2018.

Update:  On February 15, 2018, in a separate challenge to Travel Ban 3.0, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, similar to the 9th Circuit, affirmed the Federal District Court of Maryland’s ruling enjoining portions of Travel Ban 3.0 , but stayed implementation of its ruling since the Supreme Court will be considering the case.

Bottom line: Travel Ban 3.0 remains in effect pending the Supreme Court’s decision. See this post for the impact of Travel ban 3.0.

Update: Government documents reveal that in deciding to terminate TPS, the Administration ignored the advice and reports of its own officials indicating that conditions in Haiti were not ripe for Haitian citizens with TPS to return.   A lawsuit has been filed challenging the Administration’s decision to end Haitian TPS.

____________

On January 18, 2018, the Administration announced that it will end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitians.  TPS was offered to Haitians already in the U.S., following the devastating earthquake in their country in 2010.

Congress created TPS to allow citizens of countries hard hit by natural disasters or civil conflict who are already in the U.S. to apply to stay and work here legally until our government determines they can safely return.  TPS is normally granted and extended in 12 or 18-month increments.

The decision to terminate TPS, following one final 18 month extension until July 22, 2019,  will affect about 50,000 Haitians who have been living and working legally in the U.S. since at least 2010.   Their TPS has been repeatedly renewed as Haiti’s recovery has been hampered by flood, hurricanes, and cholera.   The U.S. Embassy in Haiti’s own travel warning states that

The U.S. Embassy remains concerned about the security situation in the southern peninsula departments of Grand Anse and Sud following the devastation of Hurricane Matthew. Embassy employees are not permitted to travel to those departments without special approval for and official trips only.

Medical care infrastructure, ambulances, and other emergency services are limited throughout Haiti.

Data shows that 16% of Haitians with TPS have lived in the U.S. for 20 or more years.  They are parents to an estimated 27,000 U.S. children and their labor force participation is 81%, far higher than that of native-born U.S. citizens.

In Maine, Haitians with TPS work in agriculture, housekeeping, wreathmaking, elder care, hospitality, and myriad other sectors.  With Maine’s shrinking workforce and low unemployment, losing these individuals who are already fully contributing members of our communities is bad not just for them, but for Maine.

Congress must pass legislation to create a path to permanent residency for long-term TPS holders.  Various bills have been proposed to do just that.   Maine’s Congressional delegation should work to resolve this issue urgently.

The current Administration wants to drastically reduce family-based immigration to the U.S. and replace our current employment-based immigration system with a points-based one, as proposed in the Administration supported RAISE Act.    The Administration is also pushing to drastically cut family based immigration as part of any legislative deal to provide permanent status to those with DACA.

As part of its campaign for these reforms, the Administration uses terms that taint honest debate. First, referring to the proposed points scheme as a “merit-based” system infers that our current system is not already merit-based. In reality, immigrants through employment must meet strict educational and skill requirements. In most cases (with exceptions for immigrants already internationally renowned in their fields), the U.S. employer must prove to the government that the position requires highly specialized skill or professional education and experience, and that the immigrant it wants to hire meets or exceeds the requisite criteria.

Similarly, the Administration is wrong to describe family-based immigration as “chain migration” that floods the U.S. with immigrants’ extended family members.   In reality, immigrants can petition only for their immediate family members. Refugees and asylees can bring only their spouses and children who are unmarried and younger than 21. Permanent residents (“green card” holders), can bring only their spouses and unmarried children of any age.  U.S. citizens can bring, in addition to their spouses and unmarried children, their married children, parents, and siblings – in other words, their immediate family members.  The U.S., in fact, is more restrictive than some other countries.   For example, both Canada and the U.K. allow grandparent immigration, which is not allowed here.

For most of these immediate family members, the U.S. immigration process is punishingly long. For example, as of January 2018, there was a seven year wait for adult (over 21) children of permanent residents to immigrate, and the wait was only slightly shorter for unmarried adult children of U.S. citizens.  Married children of U.S. citizens waited nearly twelve years, and siblings of U.S. citizens waited over 13 years to immigrate. The waiting lists are even longer for certain countries.  A naturalized U.S. citizen originally from the Philippines must wait about 13 years to be reunited with her adult child, about 23 years to be reunited with her married child, and about 24 years to be reunited with her siblings.  A naturalized U.S. citizen from Mexico will wait over 21 years for his unmarried child, over 22 years for his married child, and over 20 years for his sibling to gain residency in the U.S.

The Administration also disparages family-based immigration by implying that these immigrants bring no talents and skills to enrich our economy and workforce. Throughout our recorded history of immigration, that has simply not been the case.   Whether they are Ph.D. researchers, engineers, and entrepreneurs, or caregivers, farm workers, and housekeepers, today’s  immigrants participate in the workforce at higher rates than native-born U.S. citizens, and like generations of immigrants before them, keep our country and our economy growing and vibrant.

MeBIC’s Beth Stickney was one of several immigration lawyers reacting in a Portland Press Herald article to the Department of Homeland Security’s January 8, 2018 announcement ending Temporary Protected Status for citizens of El Salvador. Learn more about the government’s decision here.

On January 8, 2018, the Department of Homeland Security announced that it will end “Temporary Protected Status” (TPS) for about 200,000 citizens of El Salvador who have been living legally and working in the U.S. with that status since earthquakes devastated their country in early 2001. The initial TPS designation sprang from that natural disaster, but TPS has been extended repeatedly for Salvadorans in 18 month increments because of instability from an economy still struggling to recover, one of the highest homicide rates in the world, and rampant crime and gang violence.  Despite the fact that these challenges continue (as indicated in this 2017 State Department report about the country’s capital, although the State Department appears to have recently scrubbed its website of its long-standing El Salvador travel warnings), Salvadorans are being given until September 9, 2019 to depart the U.S.

More than half of Salvadorans with TPS have lived in the U.S. for two decades or more. Many arrived when they were younger than 16 and have lived over half of their lives here. They are parents to approximately 200,000 U.S. citizen children, and have put down roots here, buying homes, starting businesses, contributing to our communities as workers, volunteers, taxpayers and consumers.

Salvadorans with TPS participate in the labor force at far higher rates than the native-born population (88% participation compared to 63%), and are integral members of our economy.   In Maine, they work in our hospitality, caregiving, food processing, agriculture, construction and other industries – sectors that are crying out for more workers as Maine’s unemployment rate persists at or below 4% for more than two years.

Forcing these long-term members of our communities to return to El Salvador is inhumane, and economically unsound as well.   Congress must work to create a path to permanent residency for Salvadorans with TPS before their status expires in 2019.

USCIS announced on November 14, 2017, that the cap of 33,000 H-2B non-agricultural seasonal work visas for the first half of FY2018 (Oct. 1, 2017-Sept. 30, 2018) has been reached.  Petitions subject to the cap with employment start dates prior to April 1, 2018 will be returned to the petitioners.  Cap exempt petitions will still be accepted, as will petitions for H-2B visas for seasonal employment that will begin after April 1, 2018.

H-2B visas are used particularly in Maine’s seasonal hospitality sector. A one-time 15,000 bump in the number of available H-2B visas created by Congress to respond to the shortage of H-2B visas during the second half of FY 2017 expired on September 30, 2017.

Maine employers who want details about which workers are cap-exempt,  or who want to check the number of H-2B visa petitions already accepted that count towards the 33,000 visa cap for the second half of FY 2018 (April 1 – Sept. 30, 2018) can check here.

On December 6, 2017, MeBIC participated in a press conference in Bangor urging Congress to act before the end of the year to pass legislation creating a path to permanent residency for those with DACA status.   Speakers included former Bangor Mayor Joe Baldacci, followed by Dana Connors, MeBIC Board member and CEO of the Maine State Chamber of Commerce, Megan Sanders, Esq, of Penobscot County Community Health Care, Jack McKay of the Eastern Maine Labor Council and Board member of the Maine AFL-CIO, and MeBIC’s Beth Stickney.

Beginning March 6, 2018, about 8500 DACA holders each week will lose their legal protections and their work authorization, jeopardizing their ability to pay for college, to work, to serve in our military, and to contribute to their families and their communities.

It will take time for Immigration officials to get any new residency application process up and running. Congress must act before the end of this year to pass the Dream Act of 2017 or other durable solution.  Otherwise, DACA holders will face a gap in their employment authorization status that will force employers to have to lay them off, and cause the DACA holders and their employers undue hardship, even here in Maine.

See some of the media coverage here:

• Maine Public radio (quoting MeBIC Board member Dana Connors)
• Fox22/ABC7 TV
• WABI 5 TV

On December 4, 2017, the Supreme Court issued a decision allowing the Government to carry out the third iteration of its “travel ban” while the lawsuits challenging the ban make their way through the federal courts.

While the litigation is ongoing, those targeted by “Travel Ban 3.0” will not be able to get visas or enter the U.S. unless they can prove, among other criteria, that a waiver of the bar in any individual case would be in the national interest.   As a practical matter, the average person is unlikely to be able to meet that standard.   (As of Feb. 15, 2018, only 2 waivers had been granted out of over 6500 visas requested since December 4th).

Following this Supreme Court ruling, Travel Ban 3.0 bars U.S. immigrant (permanent residency) or nonimmigrant (temporary) visa issuance to or entry of nationals of the following countries:

• Chad, Libya and Yemen: All immigrants and, nonimmigrant (temporary) visitors for pleasure or business.  (Note: as this Update describes, on April 10, 2018, the Administration removed Chad from the Travel Ban).
• Iran: All immigrants and nonimmigrants, with the exception of student and exchange (F,M and J) nonimmigrant visa holders (who nonetheless will undergo extra scrutiny).
• North Korea and Syria: All immigrants and nonimmigrants.
• Somalia: All immigrants. All nonimmigrants will be subject to extra scrutiny.
• Venezuela: Certain government officials and their family members, traveling on pleasure (B-2) or business (B-1) nonimmigrant visitor visas.

The ban applies to people from the named countries who were outside the U.S. and did not have valid, previously issued, U.S. visas on the ban’s effective dates. (For some individuals, that is September 24, 2017, but for others it is October 18, 2017. Those needing further clarification should speak with a competent immigration attorney.)

It does not apply to:

• Dual nationals using the passport of their non-targeted country.
• Permanent residents (green card holders), or those who already have refugee, asylee, withholding of removal or Convention against Torture status in the U.S., who are from the targeted countries and are returning from travel abroad.
• Those already granted advance parole returning from travel abroad.
• Persons granted admission or parole into the U.S. on or after the effective dates.
• Diplomats or those with similar visas.
• Theoretically, it also does not apply to those fleeing persecution and seeking protection, but that exception may be meaningless in practice.

How does this effect Maine businesses?

• If you have immigrant employees from any of the named countries, be aware of their stress due to the uncertainty of when their relatives, whom they may have been expecting to immigrate soon, will be able to reunite with them here in the U.S.
• Any employees (whether naturalized U.S. Citizens, permanent residents, refugees or asylees, etc.) from the specified countries can expect a heightened level of questioning at U.S. ports of entry following any travel abroad, despite the fact that Travel Ban 3.0 is not supposed to apply to them.  They should be advised to consult with a competent immigration attorney before making plans to travel abroad.
• Any employee from one of the named countries who is here on a nonimmigrant work visa issued prior to the ban’s effective dates should consult with a competent immigration attorney before making any plans to travel abroad, especially if the visa would need renewal abroad before the employee could return to the U.S.

On July 11, 2017, one week before the new International Entrepreneur Rule (IER), discussed here, was to take effect, the Administration issued a final rule delaying implementation of the IER (the “delay rule”), and requesting public comments after the fact.  The IER would have created a pathway for certain international entrepreneurs to apply for up to five years of temporary legal status (called “parole”) in the U.S. to launch their businesses, and potentially gain permanent residency in the meantime.

A lawsuit was filed by several international entrepreneurs and investors challenging the delay rule (National Venture Capital Association v. Duke). On December 1, 2017, the Federal District Court for the District of Columbia ruled for the plaintiffs, and vacated the delay rule. The Government requested a stay of the decision which was denied.

As a result, the IER, originally intended to take effect last July, is now in effect.   The government announced that it will comply with the Court’s order, but in that announcement it reiterated that it still intends to rescind the IER, and is at work on a proposed rule to do so.   The government nonetheless will have to accept notice and comment before publishing a final rule.

While in theory, the Court’s ruling means that international entrepreneurs who meet specified eligibility criteria can now apply for parole for an initial 30 months to launch their businesses, parole decisions are always discretionary.

Given the Administration’s clear hostility to the rule, it remains to be seen whether applications under the IER will be adjudicated fairly, or whether USCIS will receive signals to discretionarily deny them.   This would be short sighted, given the impressive track record of immigrant entrepreneurs in the U.S.,  who will take their drive, creativity, and economic contributions elsewhere if the U.S. chooses not to make room for them.

International entrepreneurs and their U.S. partners or investors should consult with experienced immigration attorneys for further information.

• Why does this matter to Maine’s business community?

In a November 19, 2017 Bangor Daily News opinion piece, Maine State Chamber of Commerce CEO Dana Connors joined Cynthia Phinney, President of the Maine AFL-CIO, to urge Congress to pass legislation creating a path to permanent status for those holding Deferred Action for Childhood Removals (DACA) status, also known as Dreamers.  These are immigrants who entered the U.S. when they were children, who have lived here for at least ten years, and for many of whom the U.S. is the only home that they can remember.

Approximately 800,000 immigrants benefited from the DACA program before it was rescinded by the current Administration on September 5, 2017.   Without Congressional action, beginning on March 6, 2018, each week more than 8500 immigrants with DACA will lose their permission to live and work legally in the U.S.   The Dream Act of 2017 (S. 1615, H.R. 3440) would allow those who have DACA to apply for permanent residency, an option that doesn’t exist for the vast majority of them under current law.

Dana Connors is on MeBIC’s Board of Directors, and the Maine State Chamber of Commerce is a MeBIC Partner.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce,  on November 15, 2017,  renewed its call on Congress to act before the end of 2017 to pass  legislation creating a path to permanent residency, such as the Dream Act of 2017 (S. 1615, H.R. 3440), for the nearly 800,000 immigrants with DACA status.  Congressional inaction will result in over 8500 DACA holders each week losing their legal status and legal ability to work, starting on March 6, 2018.   By November 2018, about 300,000 DACA holders will have been forced out of the workforce, joined by over 400,000 more through 2019.  The costs to the U.S. economy in turnover expenses, lost tax revenues, and negative impact on the GDP are estimated to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars; not to mention the costs to our communities in which DACA holders are our neighbors, relatives, students, volunteers, workers and entrepreneurs.

Yesterday’s statement coincided with a day of action on Capitol Hill attended by over 100 DACA holders and additional business leaders.   The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has been a consistent supporter of a path to residency for these immigrants.

Following legal challenges partially blocking President Trump’s first two travel bans, on September 24, 2017, President Trump announced a new version, commonly being referred to as “Travel Ban 3.0.”   It was largely blocked one day before taking effect on October 18, 2017, by two separate decisions by the Federal District Courts of Hawai’i and Maryland.   These decisions were temporary, pending December hearings on the legal challenges.

On November 13, 2017, the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed parts of Travel Ban 3.0 to go into effect while the legal challenges run their course.

Current state of play (Note: this is not intended to be a substitute for individualized legal advice).

The following people from the targeted countries will not be issued immigrant (permanent residency) or nonimmigrant (temporary stay) visas or be allowed to enter the U.S.,  unless they can prove a “credible claim of a bona fide relationship with a person or entity” in the U.S., as explained further below:

• Chad, Libya and Yemen: All immigrants and, nonimmigrant visitors for pleasure or business.
• Iran: All immigrants and nonimmigrants, with the exception of student and exchange (F, M and J) nonimmigrant visa holders (who nonetheless will undergo extra scrutiny).
• North Korea and Syria: All immigrants and nonimmigrants.
• Somalia: All immigrants. All nonimmigrants will be subject to extra scrutiny.
• Venezuela: Certain government officials and their family members, traveling on visitor or other non-diplomatic nonimmigrant visas.

The ban applies to people from the named countries who were outside the U.S. and did not have valid, previously issued U.S. visas on the ban’s effective date.  It does not apply to:

• Dual nationals using the passport of their non-targeted country.
• U.S. Permanent residents (green card holders), or those who already have refugee, asylee, or withholding of removal status in the U.S., who are from the targeted countries and are returning from travel abroad.
• Diplomats or those with similar visas.

Waivers of the ban may be issued if determined to be in the national interest, among other criteria.  As a practical matter, waivers will be virtually impossible to get.

A “bona fide relationship with a person or entity” in the U.S. in the family context should include: parents, spouses, children of any age, siblings and half-siblings, and these step-relationships, as well as fiancée(e)s, sons and daughters-in-law, grandparents, grandchildren, brothers and sisters-in-law, aunts, uncles, nieces nephews, nieces and cousins.

A “bona fide relationship” with an entity should include students accepted to study at U.S. educational institutions, persons offered employment at U.S. employers, and those invited to attend conferences or to speak at lectures, etc. However, the definition currently excludes those accepted for resettlement by a U.S. refugee resettlement agency who have not yet received their refugee visas to travel to the U.S.

How does this effect Maine businesses?

• It is unclear how generously the government will interpret the exception for those with a bona fide relationship to an “entity.”   Universities and businesses hoping to bring a national of one of the targeted countries to the U.S. to lecture, study, present at a conference, or to work, should expect the visa issuance process to take longer than usual, and should work with an experienced immigration attorney.
• Any employees from the specified countries, whether naturalized U.S. Citizens, permanent residents, refugees, asylees, or nonimmigrants with unexpired visas,  can expect a heightened level of questioning at U.S. ports of entry following any travel abroad, despite the fact that Travel Ban 3.0 is not supposed to apply to them.  They should be advised to consult with a competent immigration attorney before traveling abroad.
• If you have immigrant employees from any of the named countries, be aware of their fear and worry that their relatives, whom they might have been expecting to immigrate soon, may not be able to come, despite the exception to the travel ban for those with family members already in the U.S. under the current injunction.
• If you have an employee who needs to renew her/his work visa abroad, the process may be more complicated and take much longer than usual because of the need for an in-person interview at the relevant U.S. consulate.

11/13/2017 Update:  Today, a federal class action lawsuit was filed challenging “Travel Ban 4.0″‘s  suspension of the processing of refugees from the 11 countries mentioned below, and of the spouses and children of refugees already resettled in the U.S.  MeBIC will update this page as the case progresses.

__________________________

On September 24, 2017, the Administration published its determination of the number of refugees that will be allowed into the U.S. during FY 2018.   Then, on October 24, 2017, President Trump issued an Executive Order (referred to as EO-4 or Travel Ban 4.0) announcing changes to the implementation of the federal Refugee Resettlement Program.

• What are the changes to the U.S. Refugee Resettlement Program?

Lower total numbers admitted: For FY 2018 (October 1, 2017, to September 30, 2018), the Administration  will cap refugee admissions at 45,000, the lowest number since Congress passed the Refugee Act of 1980. In comparison, last year’s cap was 110,000. The average cap since 1980 has been about 95,000. With a record high of over 65 million displaced people in the world currently, including 22.5 million refugees, this low ceiling greatly diminishes the U.S.’s commitment to provide protection at a time of unprecedented humanitarian crises worldwide.

Refugee admissions from eleven predominantly Muslim countries temporarily suspended:  During a 90 day “review period”, refugees from 11 countries will not be resettled in the U.S. unless they can show, on a case-by-case basis, that their resettlement would be in the national interest, among other criteria. The targeted countries are understood to be Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mali, North Korea, Somalia, South Sudan, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. As a practical matter, virtually no one will meet the “national interest” test.

Admission of immediate family members of refugees indefinitely suspended:  Processing of refugee applications to reunify spouses and children of refugees already resettled in the U.S. (“principal refugees”) is suspended indefinitely, causing significant uncertainty and delays, while the government undertakes a review of  its procedures.

Heightened scrutiny:  Finally, applicants for refugee resettlement will face heightened scrutiny, despite historically having been the most thoroughly vetted category of noncitizens coming to the U.S.   New requirements include providing addresses going back 10 years, rather than the usual five, and providing email addresses and phone numbers of all members of their family tree, no matter where in the world these relatives are.   People forced to flee wars or persecution often move frequently and live informally (without a fixed address) and in many cases may lose contact with members of their family. These new requirements, as a practical matter, may result in refugees who need and deserve resettlement being denied.

• How will this affect Maine’s businesses?
  

Maine is home to many immigrants from Iran, Iraq, Somali, South Sudan, Sudan and Syria.   The FY2018 restrictions on refugee admissions will mean that Maine residents from these countries who were anticipating reuniting imminently with their  family members still abroad, including their spouses and children, now face further separations and uncertainty about whether this will be the last delay. The other changes will prolong the family reunifications of refugees coming from other countries not on the list of eleven, as well.

Affected immigrants working in Maine will face great emotional and financial strain due to the postponed reunification with their loved ones. In addition, due to all of these changes, Maine will resettle hundreds fewer refugees than it has in recent years, at a time when we need to grow our population for the health of our communities and our labor supply.