Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft's H-1B Workers Cited In Motion That Successfully Blocked Trump's Travel Ban (geekwire.com)

"President Trump's travel ban is on hold," reports WGN. "A federal judge in Seattle blocked the executive order banning travelers from seven predominately Muslim countries." But Slashdot reader theodp noticed that the judge's temporary restraining order might've been responding to something specific: the motion argued Trump's executive order had been harmful because it impacted major tech companies in the state of Washington, including Microsoft. From the motion: Washington's technology industry relies heavily on the H-1B visa program. Nationwide, Washington ranks ninth in the number of applications for high-tech visas. Microsoft, which is headquartered in Washington, employs nearly 5,000 people through the program. Other Washington companies, including Amazon, Expedia, and Starbucks, employ thousands of H-1B visa holders. Loss of highly skilled workers puts Washington companies at a competitive disadvantage with global competitors.
It was in response to the motion from Washington that the judge ultimately ruled that "the States have met their burden of demonstrating that they face immediate and irreparable injury as a result of signing and implementation of the Executive Order," citing its harm on the state's public universities -- and on its tax base. And Attorney General Bob Ferguson told GeekWire that he gave some credit for the judge's ruling to the declarations of support filed by Amazon and Expedia which specifically say that "Microsoft's U.S. workforce is heavily dependent on immigrants and guest workers. At least 76 employees at Microsoft are citizens of Iran, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, or Yemen and hold U.S. temporary work visas."

10 of 476 comments (clear)

  1. Re:companies matter more then usa workers by Layzej · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hey! Corporations are people too! Anyway, the Muslim ban is just another of the burdensome regulations that are strangling small businesses. Aren't we supposed to be against regulations?

  2. Judge should learn the law by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 2, Informative

    Section 1182(f) of the US Code reads: "Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate." In other words, the president has pretty much arbitrary power to decide who is and isn't allowed into the country. This is why it was lawful when President Obama banned all Iraqi refugees for six months in 2011. Also, the judge implies that aliens in foreign countries have Constitutional rights, which is complete lunacy.

    1. Re:Judge should learn the law by guises · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is why it was lawful when President Obama banned all Iraqi refugees for six months in 2011.

      There was no refugee ban under Obama, I don't know where you all are getting this from. There was a period in 2011 when vetting was increased for refugees from Iraq, and... that's it. At no point was there a ban, at no point were Iraqi refugees prohibited from entering the country, there was never a time when Iraqi refugees were not entering the country.

    2. Re:Judge should learn the law by msauve · · Score: 3, Informative

      "the State Department stopped processing Iraq refugees for six months in 2011" - ABC News

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    3. Re:Judge should learn the law by guises · · Score: 5, Informative

      Okay, thanks for answering my question anyway. Apparently that article is indeed where that rumor started (link), though the only thing that actually happened was that they stopped taking new applications for a while while they redid the existing applications. There were no bans, and new refugees continued come in during this time.

    4. Re:Judge should learn the law by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Stopped taking new applications" is a de facto ban.

      And it was also reported in the New York Times if you care to do a cursory search.

      Also - in a related item, did you realize the DHS under Obama deported more illegal immigrants than his predecessor? Fact.

      Silence from the left while Obama did some worse shit than Bush. You should all be ashamed.

  3. Re:Expand the H-1B beyond the Tech Industry . . . by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can't comment on H1-Bs but I know that the medical industry is already highly reliant upon immigrant doctors and nurses, and yes, the EO has lead to some problems, causing doctors shortages in some areas of the US.

    Because the discussion of the EO has centered around terrorism (something it's unlikely to have any affect on, given the lack of terrorist incidents in the US committed by people from the affected countries so far), and the tech industry (because it's tech that's been most high profile in attacking the ban), the affect on other industries has been largely ignored. But yeah, doctors are being turned away and doctors living in the US are having their visas canceled, and you can draw your own conclusions as to what the effect of that will be.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. Re:Alternatives by mrclevesque · · Score: 5, Informative

    "I support the ban - our safety comes ahead of their convenience"

    But does it increase your safety. What about other countries, what about those that get through anyway, what about 9/11 terrorists, 15 where from Saudi Arabia, two where from the United Arab Emirates, and one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon.

  5. Re:Expand the H-1B beyond the Tech Industry . . . by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1, Informative

    I'd guess there's some process whereby they can practice the type of non-invasive medicine common in an urgent care clinic with a "lite" version of the medical boards and under USA doctor "supervision".

    Wife is a doctor and wants some citation to your wild speculation.

    If they were working as doctors they completed their residency in the US, full stop. My wife has some co-workers that worked for 20 years in their own country and still had to complete residency again if they wanted to work in the US.

    t might keep out a lot of talentless hacks but on the other it makes sure the MD workforce is kept small and salaries high.

    Isn't this the exact same thing IT has been complaining about wanting? Why don't you setup a trade union and do the exact same thing? It's how Electricians, Plumbers, Pipe Fitters, Steam Fitters, Riggers, and a whole host of other careers work. You get to keep out all of the 'talentless hacks' and you keep your salaries high.

  6. Re:Alternatives by ClickOnThis · · Score: 5, Informative

    "I support the ban - our safety comes ahead of their convenience"

    But does it increase your safety. What about other countries, what about those that get through anyway, what about 9/11 terrorists, 15 where from Saudi Arabia, two where from the United Arab Emirates, and one was from Egypt, and one was from Lebanon.

    Not to mention that the number of terror-related deaths on American soil since 1975 caused by people from the seven countries in Trump's travel-ban is ... exactly zero.

    People may feel safer with Trump's ban in force, but that doesn't mean they actually are. Trump played to his base with this order. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the UAE -- all countries with which Trump has business dealings -- are still off the hook.

    --
    If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.