P6 million bond for a taste of the American dream?
Based on circulating news reports, it seems that nothing less than $100,000 is acceptable.
Text size
Daily TribuneBased on circulating news reports, it seems that nothing less than $100,000 is acceptable.
As reported in several American media outlets last week, the US Department of State, in collaboration with the US Department of Homeland Security, is considering a bond requirement of $100,000 (roughly P6 million) for certain immigrants to the US.
As shocking as the news was, it wasn’t totally unexpected. As mentioned in last week’s column, a new “public charge” rule is scheduled to take effect in September. The new rule sets aside a Biden-era policy that limited a consular or immigration officer’s discretion to determine an immigrant visa applicant’s risk of becoming a financial burden to the American taxpayers in the future.
Indeed, in a stunning policy reversal, the new rule grants immigration and consular officials extremely wide latitude in the adjudication of a visa applicant’s public charge admissibility based on a number of factors, including age, health, education, and employment status, among other things. Coverage-wise, its current iteration dwarfs the original version in effect during the first Trump administration.
Among the new rule’s most consequential features is the provision that a bond may be required if the applicant fails to satisfy the public charge criteria. Since the new rule does not specify the amount of the bond, the government is given free rein to establish the bond parameters.
Based on circulating news reports, it seems that nothing less than $100,000 is acceptable. If the bond proposal becomes operational, who are the most vulnerable?
Naturally, the most at-risk are the older people. For example, a 70-year-old woman from the Philippines is being petitioned by her US citizen daughter in America. Considering that the woman is probably retired, has no financially rewarding employment prospects in the US, may be battling a myriad of health issues, and is in the twilight years of her life, a US consular officer may find her highly likely to become a public charge in the future.
According to the new rule, the submission of an Affidavit of Support (AoS) by a financial sponsor is only one of the factors to be considered. It is not determinative. Thus, even with a valid AoS, the Filipina mother (or her daughter) may still be required to put up a bond of P6 million. To some, this is an American dream killer.
Another potential at-risk group are the beneficiaries of employment-based sponsorships migrating with a large family.
To illustrate, a Filipino woman is applying for an immigrant visa after being sponsored as a caregiver with an annual salary of $36,000. On her visa application, she includes her spouse and four minor children as derivative beneficiaries.
Under this scenario, the US consul may find her salary insufficient to support a family of six and thus require her (or a US-based relative) to put up a $100,000 bond per person. Unless she complies, she’s left with no option but to migrate solo (or only with her husband) or to abandon the immigrant sponsorship altogether.
In both the above scenarios, the bond will be returned once the immigrant becomes a US citizen or otherwise attains the required amount of employment credits sufficient to establish financial independence.
Nowadays, dreaming the American dream is like trying to reach the unreachable star (and stripes), no matter how hopeless, no matter how far — a never-ending quest for the unbearable sorrow.
