Existing US immigration statutes, regulations, and policies do not expressly authorize the short-term admission of digital nomads: typically, college-educated professionals who use laptops, cell phones, and other digital technology to perform their occupations remotely while traveling. Nor do these rules explain how to manage the admission of noncitizens who are not digital nomads per se but who, while lawfully visiting the United States to see family or go to an industry conference, log on to their laptop or phone to review and respond to routine business matters such as replying to emails. To address the void, we propose that the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State promptly formulate and issue policy guidance that authorizes the admission of certain digital nomads for up to six months as visitors under sections 101(a)(15)(B) and 217 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Such policy guidance can help fill an emergent area of the ever-widening rift between facts of life and US immigration law in the absence of congressional reform. Carefully crafted, it can do so in a manner that conforms to existing legal requirements governing travel to the United States as a visitor and that allows the country to benefit economically from their lawful visits.
Authors
Angelo A. Paparelli, David J. Bier, Peter Choi, Stephen Yale-Loehr
Related Organizations
- Pages
- 12
- Published in
- United States of America
Table of Contents
- E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y 1
- I N T R O D U C T I O N 2
- A M O D E R N P H E N O M E N O N N OT 2
- E N V I S I O N E D B Y O U T DAT E D L AW S 2
- Unlike in many other countries current US immigration laws and policies do not expressly authorize the short-term admission of digital nomads. 2
- A S O L U T I O N I N T H E A B S E N C E 2
- O F L E G I S L AT I V E R E F O R M 2
- P R I M A R Y I N T E N T V E R S U S 3
- I N C I D E N TA L I N T E N T 3
- The absence of public policies on digital nomad admissions engenders disrespect for laws that are oblivious to the real world. 3
- Incidental use of digital technology remotely in connection with foreign employment need not disqualify anyone from admission. 4
- C O N F O R M I N G TO E X I S T I N G 4
- R E Q U I R E M E N T S 4
- D E F I N I N G E M P LOY M E N T A B R OA D 5
- The proposed policy guidance would benefit US workers by increasing demand for goods and services in the United States. 5
- The need to resort to agency action to fix such a commonplace practice reflects the truism that our nations immigration system needs to be updated. 6
- O F F I C E R D I S C R E T I O N 6
- C O N C L U S I O N 6
- A P P E N D I X 7
- In facilitating and 7
- B-2 visitor for pleasure under INA 101a15B as long as 7
- Permanent Program where such incidental use of remote 7
- N OT E S 8
- Information Technology and Tourism Washington Post Merriam-Webster Dictionary Embracing Digital Technology A New Strategic Imperative MIT Sloan Management Review 8
- Financial Times Investopedia Investopedia 8
- Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 9
- Matter of Z-A- Inc. 9
- Matter of Z-A- Inc. 9
- Business Immigration Law and Practice Nonimmigrant Concepts 9
- Karnuth v. United States 9
- Georgetown Immigration Law Journal 9
- Matter of Hira Karnuth v. United States 9
- Forbes 10
- Matter of GP Matter of G---- Matter of Hira Matter of Hall 10
- Lardy et al. v. United Airlines Inc. Lardy 10
- Matter of Hira 11
- C I TAT I O N 12
