|WikiProject Law||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Politics||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
The article right now is pretty stubby, and I think would be better done as a disambiguation page with forks to Immigration to the United States, Immigration to the United Kingdom (1922-present day), etc. Wl219 09:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- I would disagree, as I see this article as growing and focusing on the legal aspects, with links to such other articles. Bearian 16:45, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
What's with the big section in the middle written in the first person? Is this an advertisement for CLESPA, or an article about immigration law in the United States? -220.127.116.11 (talk) 22:49, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Quite right. Thanks for pointing that out. I've remvoed it now. Will Beback talk 23:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
I think I found a second piece of advertising in this page. Under the External links, it seems like there's a group of links that simply link to a private immigration firm. I don't understand why those would be provided under the external links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 14:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
A big comparison
I have created a table comparing migration categories in different countres. There are many blank places there, unfrtunately I cannot fill them all. Please update the table if you know something on specific legislation. This table us going to be an important fource of initial information of those who is thinking about changing country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Curious735 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Progress - POV
Progress seems like a POV word to me. A better wording could be: There have been various additions and changes to the immigration laws in the United States.
Chinese Exclusion Act - Date
There seems to lack a date on the Chinese Exclusion Act. "Many years later" is not very helpful. May 6, 1882 is the correct date, right? I am not an experienced Wikipedian and therefore I have not made the correction myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonwaever (talk • contribs) 16:12, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Sentence that does not make sense
The sentence "Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Customs and Border Protection." must lack something as it makes no sense. Does anyone know what is meant to be said by this sentence? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simonwaever (talk • contribs) 16:14, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Confusing various legal issues
This Article may need some major rework from a legal standpoint. I'll list some points where this Article could be improved upon (mostly as a reminder for myself, but comments are always welcome):
- I would not discuss the issue of "European Union migration law". For one, from what I know, the EU does not decide on individual migrant applications themselves, and any Regulations/Directives passed by the EU legislature merely introduce categories of visa's/permits which the individuals Member States have to implement. Further, in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (Part I, Title V of the TFEU), there are various opt-outs (e.g. UK/Ireland and Denmark have opted-out of the Blue Card regime). Certain aspects, such as the (short-term) Schengen Visa, is subject to an entirely separate regime, to which some non-EU States are Party.
- I would either expand on the content of other countries' immigration laws (which would be a huge effort), or remove the mention of the US immigration law (perhaps relegating it to the 'See also' section. Otherwise, it might give the impression of the US immigration regime being representative of the world's immigration laws. A suggestion for the former is perhaps to group them by regions. For Europe, the general description could then include the issues of EU migration 'laws', Schengen, and the opt-outs, with wikilinks to the more specific articles.
- I would remove the issues of citizenship from the immigration laws (table) entirely, perhaps moving them to a separate section on Access to Citizenship instead. This is due to the fact thatnot all countries consider citizenship/nationality and migration together. Many of the issues are considered as separate laws (e.g. separate Citizenship Laws, Immigration Laws, Visa Laws/policies (sometimes in Passport legislation)).
- For the same reasons, I would separate (or at least clearly denote the differences between) short-term immigration (i.e. visas) and 'longer-term' immigration (e.g. residence permits). Often (from what I know of various EU immigration laws), there are separate categories for short-term and long-term visas/permits, and these categories do not always overlap or equate. Especially in the EU, countries that are part of Schengen generally have one uniform visa law (i.e. Schengen Visa Code), but they retain their individual residence-migration laws and policies.