ras
07-05 04:09 PM
There has been parallel thread going on enquiring about the AC 21 portability for porting from Software engineer to software quality engineer. I did small bit of search and got the following info.
DOT CODE 030.062-010 Software Engineer
SOC Code
15-1011.00 Computer and Information Scientists, Research In-Demand
15-1031.00 Computer Software Engineers, Applications In-Demand
15-1099.01 Computer Software Engineers, Systems Software In-Demand
DOT CODE033.262-010 Quality Assurance Analyst
15-1099.01 Software Quality Assurance Engineers and Testers
We wanted to know from the attorney
if the above DOT codes
030.062-010 and 033.262-010 can be considered to be similar.
or
SOC codes
15-1011.00 and 15-1031.00 and 15-1032.00 or 15-1099.01 can be considered to be similar.
DOT CODE 030.062-010 Software Engineer
SOC Code
15-1011.00 Computer and Information Scientists, Research In-Demand
15-1031.00 Computer Software Engineers, Applications In-Demand
15-1099.01 Computer Software Engineers, Systems Software In-Demand
DOT CODE033.262-010 Quality Assurance Analyst
15-1099.01 Software Quality Assurance Engineers and Testers
We wanted to know from the attorney
if the above DOT codes
030.062-010 and 033.262-010 can be considered to be similar.
or
SOC codes
15-1011.00 and 15-1031.00 and 15-1032.00 or 15-1099.01 can be considered to be similar.
wallpaper Cool Blue Apple Mac wallpaper
chintu25
02-13 10:22 AM
:mad:BUMP:mad:
eb3_nepa
09-23 12:31 PM
How do you propose to actually IMPLEMENT this though? I mean how does one actually get out of the quota by "simply agreeing" to buy a house? How does the USCIS enforce that? Don't get me wrong, I would actually possibly benefit from this, but I am not sure how exactly this will go down? The anti-immigrants will see this move as a "BUY YOUR GREEN CARD" or "THE US CITIZENSHIP UP FOR SALE" move.
2011 21 Beautiful Apple (Mac)
EkAurAaya
07-17 09:58 AM
Note to Moderators: I posted the same question as a separate thread, but then I thought this would be a good place to pose the question too...
Heres the background...
Primary:
EB3 Feb 2003 PD
i140 Approved
i485 files June 2007
for both wife and me...
EAD/AP - approved Sept 2007
EAD extension received June 2008 (1 year)
AP extension pending
(we have not used EAD/AP yet - we both are on H1b)
Derivative:
EB2 April 2004 PD
i140 Approved
Pending - i824 in Sept 2007 to convert AOS to CP (hoping it will get through by Oct this year)
Question:
Assuming we will get CP interview before AOS gets adjudicated, do you forsee any potential issues in this scenario?
Thanks in advance!
Heres the background...
Primary:
EB3 Feb 2003 PD
i140 Approved
i485 files June 2007
for both wife and me...
EAD/AP - approved Sept 2007
EAD extension received June 2008 (1 year)
AP extension pending
(we have not used EAD/AP yet - we both are on H1b)
Derivative:
EB2 April 2004 PD
i140 Approved
Pending - i824 in Sept 2007 to convert AOS to CP (hoping it will get through by Oct this year)
Question:
Assuming we will get CP interview before AOS gets adjudicated, do you forsee any potential issues in this scenario?
Thanks in advance!
more...
ronhira
01-13 04:38 PM
So i was right GCPerm was kicked out of this forum for being EB3 ................
Tell me something Ron . In you opinion what would freak out all the guys more and again
- If I am GCPerm
- If I am NOT GCPerm
Let me know which so that i will agree to be the opposite and then hopefully the guys will calm down or not freak out more. A whole day with the guys here on IV and i am feeling like i took care of 20 bawling, crying children for the complete time. I am not sure i can do that for another day.
Just between you and me I am not GCPerm but shhhhhhhhh don't tell anyone anything or it might lead to another round of slugfest.
i'll not tell anyone that u'r gcperm.... ok?
btw, no one is freaked out knowing that u'r gcperm..... i guess no one cares for u....
Tell me something Ron . In you opinion what would freak out all the guys more and again
- If I am GCPerm
- If I am NOT GCPerm
Let me know which so that i will agree to be the opposite and then hopefully the guys will calm down or not freak out more. A whole day with the guys here on IV and i am feeling like i took care of 20 bawling, crying children for the complete time. I am not sure i can do that for another day.
Just between you and me I am not GCPerm but shhhhhhhhh don't tell anyone anything or it might lead to another round of slugfest.
i'll not tell anyone that u'r gcperm.... ok?
btw, no one is freaked out knowing that u'r gcperm..... i guess no one cares for u....
Eternal_Hope
02-15 11:56 AM
If you google retrogression, IV doesn't show up until page 2.
Is there anyway we can change this? So that IV is the first link that shows up? Anyway know about this.
Type "retrogression" in Google search bar - when the results page shows up, look at the right hand side, there under the Sponsored Links you will see IV advertisement and link.
Looks pretty cool. GO IV!
Is there anyway we can change this? So that IV is the first link that shows up? Anyway know about this.
Type "retrogression" in Google search bar - when the results page shows up, look at the right hand side, there under the Sponsored Links you will see IV advertisement and link.
Looks pretty cool. GO IV!
more...
soljabhai
12-13 04:15 PM
we, as non citizens, obviously do not have all the rights that the citizens possess. We don't know whether this rule is or is not constitutional (And as someone rightly pointed out that the expertise of a constitutional attorney is required).
However if it can be shown that certain citizens/corporations ( for example microsoft, google etc who also make efforts and lobby congress to change the law ) are unduly disadvantaged by this per country cap, then they can be plaintiff. So in a sense, we have allies in the corporate sector with tons of money (and who want to make more!) So they might be willing to support us,
if it is indeed found that the rule can be challenged.
However if it can be shown that certain citizens/corporations ( for example microsoft, google etc who also make efforts and lobby congress to change the law ) are unduly disadvantaged by this per country cap, then they can be plaintiff. So in a sense, we have allies in the corporate sector with tons of money (and who want to make more!) So they might be willing to support us,
if it is indeed found that the rule can be challenged.
2010 pictures Fancy Wallpapers
Googler
02-15 10:28 PM
My friend, I'm not trying to fight you. All I am saying that you cannot file a class action against USCIS because they have not done anything wrong. They are just following the law.
If you really want to have this change, it is the US congress that you can deal with.
As I've said, I work for a law firm.
Why don't ask your immigration lawyer first regarding the "class action" you are talking about.
(1) There was no shortage of laypeople and even attorneys who asserted that "USCIS isn't doing anything wrong they are just following the law" when it came to FBI name checks. Fortunately for all of us sharper legal brains and sharper judges prevailed, and brought us to this happy day.
(2) On Class Actions: Villamonte, have you read the Mocanu decision (http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08%20LEXIS.pdf)? If not I encourage you to do so -- that was just individual cases being consolidated, but the situation is not very different -- you should pay particular attention to the part where Judge Baylson recommends a multi-district class action litigation to deal with all the other name check cases (see p. 16, para numbered 6).
The parallels between the those cases and the one being proposed are very strong.
Judge Baylson is not the only judge who has recommended a class action approach to these issues. IV members should also be aware that all we need are a few named plaintiffs, it isn't as though every IV member or even everyone wanting to sue needs to be a named plaintiff. All the judge needs to recognize is that there is a large group of applicants with same or similar grounds for suing USCIS/Emilio Gonzalez. Edit to add: IV the organization doesn't even need to be the primary plaintiff, since that will necessarily cutoff any parallel discussion with the agencies. The IV forums are just a place to organize this.
(3) Preliminary Ideas on the Grounds for Suing (courtesy lazycis):
The grounds for suing USCIS is the same as in Gonzalez v Howerton -- (a) interpreting the law incorrectly (b) not following the statutory requirement that they use up all the greencards available in a given year and therefore being guilty of affirmative misconduct. At the very least, a judge is within his rights to make them make amends -- by recapturing 2003-2004 EB greencards, since they wasted them as a result of their affirmative misconduct -- they waited for name checks or simply not processing applications - no one can say there wasn't an application backlog in 2003-2004.
(4) First Steps
What we need here is to get this matter before a good legal strategist who is familiar with (a) the two sources of affirmative misconduct (FBI name checks and cessation of processing in 2003-2004) (b) precedents and caselaw (note that most immigration law firms are good with filing paperwork, but not necessarily complex litigation, so forget about the usual suspects.) The perfect legal argument will not sprout up immediately. In the same way that the legal arguments in the name check cases were honed over time (lazycis can confirm this), this too will need some serious research and thinking.
Those of you who want everything about this case sorted out, signed, sealed, guaranteed and delivered this week will need a reality check. :)
As will those of you who think that the way to approach this is to discuss these issues without familiarizing yourself with facts and legal precedents in some detail (so arguments about slavery etc are not the ones that will win the day in court, it is arguments that can show that USCIS was not interpreting the law correctly and in doing so caused harm and that the harm can be remedied through recapture.) -- if you want to see how a case like this will work read Mocanu and Galvez. This case will not be a dramatic movie-style civil rights case about slavery, it will involve the most tedious sort of nitty gritty discussion of admin misconduct.
OTOH, for most of us, all we've got is time -- I do not foresee my Jan 2003 EB-2 India PD becoming current any time soon. I'm prepared for a long legal battle. I'd rather do something constructive** that will likely change the process than sit and wait and mope.
**: Yes, I've sent off my letters too. I think of these two things as complementary projects.
If you really want to have this change, it is the US congress that you can deal with.
As I've said, I work for a law firm.
Why don't ask your immigration lawyer first regarding the "class action" you are talking about.
(1) There was no shortage of laypeople and even attorneys who asserted that "USCIS isn't doing anything wrong they are just following the law" when it came to FBI name checks. Fortunately for all of us sharper legal brains and sharper judges prevailed, and brought us to this happy day.
(2) On Class Actions: Villamonte, have you read the Mocanu decision (http://www.bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%202-8-08%20LEXIS.pdf)? If not I encourage you to do so -- that was just individual cases being consolidated, but the situation is not very different -- you should pay particular attention to the part where Judge Baylson recommends a multi-district class action litigation to deal with all the other name check cases (see p. 16, para numbered 6).
The parallels between the those cases and the one being proposed are very strong.
Judge Baylson is not the only judge who has recommended a class action approach to these issues. IV members should also be aware that all we need are a few named plaintiffs, it isn't as though every IV member or even everyone wanting to sue needs to be a named plaintiff. All the judge needs to recognize is that there is a large group of applicants with same or similar grounds for suing USCIS/Emilio Gonzalez. Edit to add: IV the organization doesn't even need to be the primary plaintiff, since that will necessarily cutoff any parallel discussion with the agencies. The IV forums are just a place to organize this.
(3) Preliminary Ideas on the Grounds for Suing (courtesy lazycis):
The grounds for suing USCIS is the same as in Gonzalez v Howerton -- (a) interpreting the law incorrectly (b) not following the statutory requirement that they use up all the greencards available in a given year and therefore being guilty of affirmative misconduct. At the very least, a judge is within his rights to make them make amends -- by recapturing 2003-2004 EB greencards, since they wasted them as a result of their affirmative misconduct -- they waited for name checks or simply not processing applications - no one can say there wasn't an application backlog in 2003-2004.
(4) First Steps
What we need here is to get this matter before a good legal strategist who is familiar with (a) the two sources of affirmative misconduct (FBI name checks and cessation of processing in 2003-2004) (b) precedents and caselaw (note that most immigration law firms are good with filing paperwork, but not necessarily complex litigation, so forget about the usual suspects.) The perfect legal argument will not sprout up immediately. In the same way that the legal arguments in the name check cases were honed over time (lazycis can confirm this), this too will need some serious research and thinking.
Those of you who want everything about this case sorted out, signed, sealed, guaranteed and delivered this week will need a reality check. :)
As will those of you who think that the way to approach this is to discuss these issues without familiarizing yourself with facts and legal precedents in some detail (so arguments about slavery etc are not the ones that will win the day in court, it is arguments that can show that USCIS was not interpreting the law correctly and in doing so caused harm and that the harm can be remedied through recapture.) -- if you want to see how a case like this will work read Mocanu and Galvez. This case will not be a dramatic movie-style civil rights case about slavery, it will involve the most tedious sort of nitty gritty discussion of admin misconduct.
OTOH, for most of us, all we've got is time -- I do not foresee my Jan 2003 EB-2 India PD becoming current any time soon. I'm prepared for a long legal battle. I'd rather do something constructive** that will likely change the process than sit and wait and mope.
**: Yes, I've sent off my letters too. I think of these two things as complementary projects.
more...
cableman
05-10 06:27 PM
Does anyone have a comment on this ?
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
hair For Apple Mac#39;s fans or those
rajesh_kamisetty
07-11 11:54 AM
Agree.
Very well written...
Very well written...
more...
dpuranik
01-26 02:11 PM
You can not apply I-140 Premium Processing if you are doing Labor substitution.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_eb3140.html
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_eb3140.html
hot 60 Most Beautiful Apple (Mac
PlainSpeak
01-13 12:57 PM
why doesn't anyone in iv core get it dammit..... this is crystal clear..... what more do u want...... now get mov'in & get green cards for all of us by next week..... :rolleyes:
why doesn't anyone in iv core get it dammit..... this is crystal clear..... what more do u want...... now get mov'in & get green cards for all of us by next week.....
For a second after seeing your statement i thought some is getting what i am saying but the smile at the very end destroyed that illusion
But in any case whether you agree with me or not (or whether as some say i am in cloud cooko land- to which all i can say is i woke up when will you) i appreciate a reply to the post
why doesn't anyone in iv core get it dammit..... this is crystal clear..... what more do u want...... now get mov'in & get green cards for all of us by next week.....
For a second after seeing your statement i thought some is getting what i am saying but the smile at the very end destroyed that illusion
But in any case whether you agree with me or not (or whether as some say i am in cloud cooko land- to which all i can say is i woke up when will you) i appreciate a reply to the post
more...
house Apple, MAC, OS x, Wallpapers
vadicherla
09-04 01:31 PM
Go to your postings in this thread and read what you wrote in "Brain Damage". You wanted to distribute sweets??? How do you feel when YS Jagan grabs what you have in your village? You were supporting them so much, why not advice them to return 10,000 acres of land that he grabbed for Brahmani Steels? Jesus Christ killed YSR, otherwise, they would have grabbed all your village. Be happy, Jesus took him away.
You dont even talk about my village even in your dreams.. Our village is much happier than before 5 years.. Its all becuase of YSR did for our village.
You dont even talk about my village even in your dreams.. Our village is much happier than before 5 years.. Its all becuase of YSR did for our village.
tattoo Made cool Leopard Wallpaper
Rb_newsletter
01-15 04:08 PM
I agree Teddykoochu.
Think what will happen if they woke up one fine morning and start another new interpretation of an existing law and then later they start doing it retroactively; just imagine the cascading effect.
It does not matter which side of the ship is taking fire. It seems to me that people on the left side of the boat are happy that the firing is only on the right side, forgetting it is the ship as a whole which is taking fire.
This only reminds me of the famous poem by Martin Niem�ller which goes like this.
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out�because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out�because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out�because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me�and there was no one left to speak out."
To get the gravity of the situation, substitute it with which ever suits you ! EAD/consulting H1/direct H1/AOS pending/485 not filed/EB3/2/1....etc etc.. Behind all these fancy terms, numbers and notations there are people, children and families who are going thru difficult situations.
I don't have words to appreciate you. You explained it in one poem very very very well.
Earlier they asked for ridiculous documents like photos with American colleagues, etc.
Then they asked for client contract for 3 years, where no client sign a contract for more than 6 months in this uncertain world.
Then they asked for work place fire safety approval docs.
Then they sent contractors for work site visit.
then 221g slips, PIMS delay, admin processing, technology alert, rfe for no reasons, H1-b extension for 3 months, back dated denial of H1,........
Now they want to define the way of business practice.
Later...only they know what they are going to do.
Think what will happen if they woke up one fine morning and start another new interpretation of an existing law and then later they start doing it retroactively; just imagine the cascading effect.
It does not matter which side of the ship is taking fire. It seems to me that people on the left side of the boat are happy that the firing is only on the right side, forgetting it is the ship as a whole which is taking fire.
This only reminds me of the famous poem by Martin Niem�ller which goes like this.
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out�because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out�because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out�because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me�and there was no one left to speak out."
To get the gravity of the situation, substitute it with which ever suits you ! EAD/consulting H1/direct H1/AOS pending/485 not filed/EB3/2/1....etc etc.. Behind all these fancy terms, numbers and notations there are people, children and families who are going thru difficult situations.
I don't have words to appreciate you. You explained it in one poem very very very well.
Earlier they asked for ridiculous documents like photos with American colleagues, etc.
Then they asked for client contract for 3 years, where no client sign a contract for more than 6 months in this uncertain world.
Then they asked for work place fire safety approval docs.
Then they sent contractors for work site visit.
then 221g slips, PIMS delay, admin processing, technology alert, rfe for no reasons, H1-b extension for 3 months, back dated denial of H1,........
Now they want to define the way of business practice.
Later...only they know what they are going to do.
more...
pictures Apple MAC
cinqsit
01-15 02:37 PM
I am surprised why H1bs are angry ? This memo will impact the body shop only . Why shed tears for these desis dallas ? There is no bottom-line for these Indian Dallas. Now USCIS has just said we will follow the rules and people are worried ? Why the desi IT companies have/will not follow the rules.Work directly for client or good consulting companies. I see this end of Body shopping model of business.
I thought the same way as you did too. I am no fan of these job shop companies but remember some one will pay the price and face hardships I hope its just those companies not the employees. But the way things are if this gets effective employees can also get into a limbo - which I dont like - like say someone has gone for visa stamping and that gets denied or worst his/her family is still in the US - or something like that. Its true that the employee should try and look for a new job opportunity meeting new regulations but its not easy as it sounds.
More important point to consider is that new rules/regulations the way I understand it were suddenly implemented mid-stream - you cant do that. What if in after some time they apply same regulations to say people on EAD and using AC21 (i am still not clear whether it already applies to EAD we will have to wait for legal experts to comment) ? Or worse yet they come up with new regulations for people who already have their GC's approved ?
cinqsit
I thought the same way as you did too. I am no fan of these job shop companies but remember some one will pay the price and face hardships I hope its just those companies not the employees. But the way things are if this gets effective employees can also get into a limbo - which I dont like - like say someone has gone for visa stamping and that gets denied or worst his/her family is still in the US - or something like that. Its true that the employee should try and look for a new job opportunity meeting new regulations but its not easy as it sounds.
More important point to consider is that new rules/regulations the way I understand it were suddenly implemented mid-stream - you cant do that. What if in after some time they apply same regulations to say people on EAD and using AC21 (i am still not clear whether it already applies to EAD we will have to wait for legal experts to comment) ? Or worse yet they come up with new regulations for people who already have their GC's approved ?
cinqsit
dresses High Quality Apple and Mac
unitednations
02-14 08:46 PM
I'm sorry, I haven't monitored the web-site since my last posting.
Today reality hit me very hard. I am in my late thirties and I haven't had much adversity in my life regarding financial, career, family, etc.
However; today reality really hit me hard.
One gentlemen, his name was Raja Pitchai. He had asked me to help him file his I-140 and ask for cross chargeability to his wife's place of birth (singapore). USCIS accepted his package and his 140 got approved in a couple of months. (his priority date; india became available one month later anyways (he was from india eb2).
He was the one of the nicest guys I have talked to. Very courteous fellow.
They couldn't approve his case because he was stuck in name check. Well, his wife called me today and told me that he passed away last week (brain tumor). He had two U.S. citizen children but him and his wife have no relatives here.
She doesn't seem to be interested to stay here (she wouldn't be able to keep the greencard process going anyways because the death of the petitioner is automatic denial). She is leaving USA and was going through all the things she needs to wind up. I don't know if she would have stayed here if she got the greencard and I didn't want to task. Reality really him home today.
I need a couple of days to get over this.
Today reality hit me very hard. I am in my late thirties and I haven't had much adversity in my life regarding financial, career, family, etc.
However; today reality really hit me hard.
One gentlemen, his name was Raja Pitchai. He had asked me to help him file his I-140 and ask for cross chargeability to his wife's place of birth (singapore). USCIS accepted his package and his 140 got approved in a couple of months. (his priority date; india became available one month later anyways (he was from india eb2).
He was the one of the nicest guys I have talked to. Very courteous fellow.
They couldn't approve his case because he was stuck in name check. Well, his wife called me today and told me that he passed away last week (brain tumor). He had two U.S. citizen children but him and his wife have no relatives here.
She doesn't seem to be interested to stay here (she wouldn't be able to keep the greencard process going anyways because the death of the petitioner is automatic denial). She is leaving USA and was going through all the things she needs to wind up. I don't know if she would have stayed here if she got the greencard and I didn't want to task. Reality really him home today.
I need a couple of days to get over this.
more...
makeup 100+ Cool amp; Elegant Apple, Mac
boston_gc
06-27 09:44 AM
I also checked with my lawyer and made fool out of myself. Please, please please stop discussing this and concetrate on the real stuff.....
Better than this discussion, we should put our energies on the new CIR bill and see if and how can we benefit from that.
Better than this discussion, we should put our energies on the new CIR bill and see if and how can we benefit from that.
girlfriend cool mac backgrounds.
roseball
07-10 11:48 AM
how long did it take you get your canadian PR adn when did u apply? please share
I replied to your pm....
I replied to your pm....
hairstyles Apple Mac Wallpaper 7.
raydon
08-16 09:36 PM
How is debating about this detention going to do anything for immigration? And things could get worse for immigrants on the health care front if they lose their jobs, if this article is to be believed (the venom against immigrants in the comments section is just too much)
30,000 immigrants to soon lose state health insurance - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/08/15/30000_immigrants_to_soon_lose_state_health_insuran ce/)
30,000 immigrants to soon lose state health insurance - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/08/15/30000_immigrants_to_soon_lose_state_health_insuran ce/)
indio0617
09-29 10:47 AM
I think TN visa is only for Canadian and Mexican citizens and not for Canadian Permanent Residents .....
Can someone confirm that.... ?
Yes, TN is only for canadian citizens.
Can someone confirm that.... ?
Yes, TN is only for canadian citizens.
BharatPremi
12-13 05:52 PM
Note that it would certainly not benefit the other 60%+ from countries other than India that are also stuck in various steps (EB3, name check). So, unless you want IV to stand for IndiaVoice, you should concentrate your admirable effort on increasing the overall quota (with increased per-country quota), excluding dependents, etc.
Do not worry about that. IV has everything in the agenda what you mentioned.This thread is about 'Constitutionality argument against per-country ceilings'.Nobody here is saying to promote the fight against "Per country ceiling" ONLY.
Do not worry about that. IV has everything in the agenda what you mentioned.This thread is about 'Constitutionality argument against per-country ceilings'.Nobody here is saying to promote the fight against "Per country ceiling" ONLY.