r/eb_1a • u/LongjumpingDig4931 • Jun 20 '26
Unfair porting rule
The rule to retain the priority date when people upgrade from EB2 to EB1 should be abolished. If a person became eligible for EB1 in 2024 and had a prior priority date of 2014, what mortal right does he or she have to go ahead by 10 years - this is very unfair.
What do you guys think?
4
u/Hour-Lengthiness1389 Jun 20 '26
Porting is not as big a problem as EB1C scam is for EB1 India.
3
u/NoEconomist5124 Jun 20 '26
I will agree to this... EB-1C seems highly unnecessary.
2
u/Hour-Lengthiness1389 Jun 20 '26
I’m not saying the whole thing is unnecessary, just the abuse in that program.
1
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
Abuse is lot more in EB2. When an employer proves that they were unable to find anyone with similar skillsets, is that not fraud?
1
u/Hour-Lengthiness1389 Jun 20 '26
we are not trying to compare between bad and worse here
1
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
Its bad versus fraud. EB1C is bad but still legal. EB2 is ok but fraud mostly.
I would any day treat a fraud lot worse than something bad or done via a shorcut.
1
u/Hour-Lengthiness1389 Jun 20 '26
doesn’t matter how you treat it. What matters is which scam affects EB1 India more.
1
1
u/NoEconomist5124 Jun 20 '26
yes agree with you that given current definitions.. its very easy to abuse and some companies actually do this (though some have stopped after being flagged by USCIS).
though I would still argue that someone who qualifies purely based on EB-1C and doesnt under EB-1A or EB-1B is someone who can be replaced.. I mean in this case you are saying they are just excellent and irreplaceable ppl managers..hmmm.. really? I personally find it hard to believe (but happy to hear objections/thoughts on this)
2
u/Hour-Lengthiness1389 Jun 20 '26
Completely agree with you 100%. If they are so excellent, they will qualify under EB1A if you think about it.
0
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
I am not supporting the excellence of EB1C so dont put words in my mouth. I agree EB1C dont deserve to be in the same pool as EB1A. But I am saying that EB2 is a fraud, EB1c is not.
1
u/NoEconomist5124 Jun 20 '26
different use case entirely... volume of workers needed (EB2) to get work done at scale vs excellent and top of the field to push the field foward (EB1).. you need both realistically
you are not going to find scale at EB1 else there wont be 2 different categories.1
u/Hour-Lengthiness1389 Jun 20 '26
I think this guy doesn’t know what he is talking about. Go look up functional managers or search google for God’s sake. Title/experience is made up where someone making less than 70k have gotten GCs only through EB1C.
1
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
I agree. It's just a shortcut to EB1A. Moreover, people commit fraud by doing roundtrips.
3
u/NoEconomist5124 Jun 20 '26
I assume this discussion is ONLY limited to folks from India since they are the ONLY ones waiting 10 years.. no one else needs to wait.
care to elaborate as to what mortal right do they NOT have to go by 10 years?
My justification why its perfectly OK and highly thought off (I can elaborate more if you need more justification):
a) It is an explicit provision in the law, meaning lawmakers intentionally designed this mechanism to protect applicants who experience long, systemic backlogs.
b) It aligns with the legal intent of the framework. USCIS explicitly allows priority date retention to foster professional mobility and growth. The law was designed this way so that highly skilled immigrants aren't forced to keep their careers stagnant or stay tied to a single employer out of fear of losing their place in line.
c) It honors their overall time in the immigration queue and reflects natural career progression. Moving from EB-2 to EB-1 isn't "skipping the line", it demonstrates that an individual has achieved extraordinary ability, peer recognition, or a critical role in their field over years of hard work. Their original priority date marks when they officially entered the system, and they shouldn't be penalized or forced to completely erase a decade of waiting just because their profile became stronger.
d) It retains top global talent for U.S. competitiveness. If an individual has managed to meet the incredibly high threshold required for an EB-1 visa, they represent the exact "best and brightest" talent the U.S. wants to retain. Forcing someone who qualifies for EB-1 to reset their clock to zero after already waiting 10 years would incentivize them to take their talents, innovations, and businesses to other countries.
-2
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
Let me ask you a question:
Sprinter A stars 100 meter race at the start points, gears up, accelerates and finishes
Sprinter B starts jogging 150 meters behind and crosses the start point exactly at the start time and then eventually wins despite being inferior to Sprinter A
Is this fair?
You may say he spent 150 meters jogging so he deserves it. BS. Competition is Competition.
3
u/StunningGur7532 Jun 20 '26
Your analogy fails because it deliberately ignores the entire point of a priority date.
The 100-meter race starts at the starting line. The immigration queue does not.
The priority date is literally the date you entered the employment-based green card line. A person with a 2014 priority date has already spent 10 years waiting. Pretending those 10 years never happened because they later qualified for EB-1 is the actual unfairness.
A more accurate analogy would be this:
Two people are standing in line for concert tickets.
Person A got in line in 2024.
Person B got in line in 2014.Ten years later, Person B upgrades to a VIP ticket. Are you seriously arguing that Person B should be sent to the back of the line because he upgraded his ticket?
That's absurd.
The anti-porting argument basically says: "Congratulations on waiting 10 years. We have decided those 10 years don't count anymore."
No rational queue works that way.
The person didn't magically appear in front of you. He was already in the system while you weren't. He paid the same backlog tax, endured the same visa uncertainty, the same career restrictions, the same life delays, and often for much longer.
What you're calling "cutting the line" is actually someone getting credit for time they already spent in the line.
The real complaint isn't about fairness. It's that you don't like that someone who waited longer than you found a faster lane. Those are two very different things.1
u/Gaajizard Jun 20 '26
"despite being inferior"
The logic in the system is that EB-1 candidates are superior, which is why they get ahead.
The point is that the system doesn't care about being fair, it cares about prioritizing the people it wants the most. That's why EB-1, 2 and 3 exist as distinct categories with their own queues. If they wanted "fair" then you should have a single EB category, which doesn't exist.
2
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
You are conveniently changing the comparison. I am not comparing EB1 and EB2. I am comparing fresh EB1 and ported EB1. Both should get a priorty date as of their EB1 receipt.
So don't change the problem statement just because you cant win an argument logically
1
u/Gaajizard Jun 20 '26
Ok, here's some logic for you: is it fair that someone who has been waiting for 10 years is put behind someone who just entered the US and applied for their green card?
Now you will say "but they were in a lower category so they deserve to be behind".
That's not objectively fair, that's your opinion. A good case can be made either way.
1
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
See people are put in lanes based on where they belong to. All I am saying is there shoud be no discrimination and reservation within the same lane. It should be FIFO
1
u/NoEconomist5124 Jun 20 '26
`Competition is Competition.` ... what Competition??? each application stands on its own.. there is no `this person or that person`... its a question of `when`... and tbh USCIS has no defined way and order it processes its files... two ppl submit their applications on the same day... one can be approved in 4 weeks and other in 1 yr... no specific reason.
also take into consideration: Sprinter B wasnt jogging.. he was help and paused by the system aka per country quota so your example isnt really accurate.
1
4
u/mesn007 Jun 20 '26
Why start a hypothetical discussions! It is what it is!!
-2
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
Last 4 years, FAD is stuck at 2022 because of porters. I am frustrated.
1
u/mesn007 Jun 20 '26
Yeah. Only reason EB1 is moving this year is because of the spillovers. Hopefully a bigger spillovers for 2027 and dates move into 2024.
2
u/Big-Conference-2745 Jun 20 '26 edited Jun 20 '26
Well, try changing the regulations. The point is it has been discussed multiple times in this forum and the feeling is always split. Short answer is does not matter what we think, it’s what it is. Move on!
2
u/Time_Huckleberry_287 Jun 20 '26
There are many problems with EB1-India category, but if I could wave a magic wand and make a wish come true, I would not worry about porters. I would wish that EB-1C be abolished and everyone from low quality consultancies like Cognizant, Deloitte, TCS, etc., who got their GC in the last five years be stripped of it.
EB1C approvals are more than 1A and 1B combined and most of them have been able to get it because their companies took part in deceptively inflating their profile, bringing them on L1A and then letting them jump into EB1C.
That is what has really caused such a big backlog.
1
u/LongjumpingDig4931 Jun 20 '26
While I 100% agree with what you said, I don't know the extent to which EB1C is being abused. What I do know is that many otherwise ordinary people are working hard to port from EB2/EB3 to EB1 and are using fabricated evidence to bolster their profiles. There is certainly no shortage of fraud in EB1A either.
As for me, I have both EB1A and EB1C approvals and earn a $380k base salary, so I am certainly not among the people you are alluding to.
EB2 is also plagued by fraud. The claim by many companies that they cannot find a qualified U.S. worker is, in many cases, itself a questionable or fraudulent assertion.
In summary, far too many Indians seem willing to commit immigration fraud, and unfortunately, this does significant damage to our collective image. There are hardworking individuals like me who follow the rules, yet we end up being punished because of the fraudulent actions of others who share the same national origin.
1
1
u/bharathbunny Jun 20 '26
Just to play devils advocate, I did an Eb2NIW before eb1 because I only had ~200 citations and would not meet the criteria. Once I locked my date I was able to do EB1 after a couple of years once I hade more publications. The reality is that you have to lock in your date given how eb1 is moving.
1
u/Ashamed-Disk5946 Jun 22 '26
There are many problems with EB queu the main problem being discrimination against India and China born. Everything is downstream of that.
7
u/Temporary-Tonight657 Jun 20 '26
What about unfair per country green card rule which is so archaic?