Green Card Lottery
July 16, 2011 by USA Post
Green Card Lottery, The 22,316 people who thought they had won the green card lottery U.S. State Department – the global lottery which attracted 19 million applicants the right to immigrate to the U.S. permanently – on Thursday lost an appeal to the results that stand out from the lottery.
On 19 May, the Department of State announced that a computer error had been made by lottery results invalid, and the second should be celebrated. The results of the second lottery, the State Department says were posted on the website on Friday.
For those who won the lottery invalid, the news was devastating. Nearly 2 million applicants had already visited the website of results by the time the error was discovered and the website to take the May 5, and about a quarter of those selected had learned of his selection.
Thirty-six people representing the “22 thousand applicants” had filed a federal lawsuit urging the State Department not to overturn the results of the draw. The plaintiffs in the trial talked about sharing the news with their children, leave their jobs, land sales money to emigrate and marry a loved one so that he or she is eligible for immigration.
However, a federal judge dismissed the case on Thursday, supporting the State Department claims that the lottery results are not truly random, as the mandates of the process.
“The Court can not order the State Department in honor of a flawed process that did not meet legal and regulatory requirements” of randomization, wrote U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson on a 35-page ruling.
The department found that 98 percent of those selected had submitted more than 22,000 tickets in the first two days of the application period in October 2010. The department said this was the result of a computer glitch in a new randomness program, which selected the winners in the order they submitted their entries.
“There are 19 million stories of lottery participants, many of which may be equally or even more convincing, and that is why Congress determined that all applicants have equal chances of winning the right to request the visa, “wrote Justice Jackson.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs, Blanco and Associates based in Los Angeles, California, released a statement Friday criticizing the decision:
“The end result is that the U.S. government has lost credibility – promising 22,000 people the right to continue the immigration process and taking away the hope and promise. The State Department could have won in court, but has lost the hearts and the minds of 22,000 people around the world. ”
In his ruling, Jackson offers sympathy for the “emotional impact” and “painful and real” experiences caused by the reversal of the results of the lottery.
“This is a highly coveted prize, and winners may ultimately qualify for U.S. citizenship, and provides a means to apply for a visa that does not rely on sponsorship from an employer or a relative,” Jackson writes.
To qualify for a visa through the Diversity Lottery Program Visa, a person must have a high school diploma or its equivalent, or two years recent work experience requiring two years training or experience. The diversity visa is available to natives of countries with low and the U.S. the number of immigrants, such as Algeria, Lebanon, Thailand, Ukraine and New Zealand. If more than 50,000 people emigrated from one country in the last five years, people in these countries are not eligible for a diversity visa.
The State Department 100.000 select lottery winner’s diversity visas from 50,000 slots for 2012 fiscal. The reason the selected number is much greater than the number of visas available is that many applications are considered invalid closer inspection, and some winners did not choose to continue the application process. Some qualified applicants can be lost, however, if their requests are not processed before the close of fiscal year, or before all 50,000 visas are issued.
Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.