1
00:00:00,120 --> 00:00:03,320
Speaker 1: There's another Obama era rule that the Trump administration is

2
00:00:03,400 --> 00:00:07,560
Speaker 1: moving to delay and repeal. It's called the International Entrepreneur Rule,

3
00:00:07,600 --> 00:00:10,119
Speaker 1: and it would allow foreign born start up founders to

4
00:00:10,160 --> 00:00:12,440
Speaker 1: stay in the US for up to thirty months if

5
00:00:12,480 --> 00:00:16,119
Speaker 1: they meet certain requirements, including showing they had raised at

6
00:00:16,200 --> 00:00:20,079
Speaker 1: least two hundred fifty thousand dollars from American investors or

7
00:00:20,120 --> 00:00:23,720
Speaker 1: one hundred thousand dollars in grants from government entities. The

8
00:00:23,760 --> 00:00:26,880
Speaker 1: Trump administration's move to rescind the rule is based on

9
00:00:27,040 --> 00:00:31,360
Speaker 1: border security grounds and likely faces litigation from several fronts.

10
00:00:31,800 --> 00:00:36,400
Speaker 1: Joining me is MICHAELA Ross, a reporter for Bloomberg b NA. MICHAELA.

11
00:00:36,479 --> 00:00:40,560
Speaker 1: This rule has a lot of backing from business organizations

12
00:00:40,600 --> 00:00:45,480
Speaker 1: and particularly the tech sector. Tell me about it. Yes,

13
00:00:45,560 --> 00:00:48,080
Speaker 1: the tech sector was very excited to see this rule

14
00:00:48,080 --> 00:00:50,920
Speaker 1: when it was the drafts first announced last summer, and

15
00:00:50,960 --> 00:00:53,519
Speaker 1: it would finalized in the last minute, last days of

16
00:00:53,560 --> 00:00:56,440
Speaker 1: the Obama administration, and they were looking forward to its

17
00:00:56,440 --> 00:00:59,200
Speaker 1: effective date, which was to come next week July seventeenth.

18
00:00:59,280 --> 00:01:02,760
Speaker 1: But what the reason the tech sector is so excited

19
00:01:02,800 --> 00:01:05,160
Speaker 1: about this is they have a long history of um

20
00:01:05,319 --> 00:01:09,360
Speaker 1: foreign born founders. You look at Tesla, Google, eBay, this

21
00:01:09,440 --> 00:01:12,679
Speaker 1: is UH, this is kind of a prolific group of

22
00:01:12,760 --> 00:01:16,080
Speaker 1: foreign born founders founders here. In fact, a two thousand

23
00:01:16,120 --> 00:01:20,720
Speaker 1: twelve Hoffman Foundation study founder forty cent of startup founders

24
00:01:20,920 --> 00:01:23,920
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley were immigrants. So there was a lot

25
00:01:23,920 --> 00:01:27,399
Speaker 1: of excitements UM the tech front also UM the venture

26
00:01:27,440 --> 00:01:31,319
Speaker 1: capital front UH to welcome this new pathway since technically

27
00:01:31,480 --> 00:01:34,400
Speaker 1: right now there is not a clear way for foreign

28
00:01:34,440 --> 00:01:37,240
Speaker 1: born founders to enter the US. US is not does

29
00:01:37,240 --> 00:01:40,040
Speaker 1: not have what's called the startup visa. In fact, this

30
00:01:40,200 --> 00:01:42,160
Speaker 1: rule was not even going to create a visa. It

31
00:01:42,240 --> 00:01:46,319
Speaker 1: was simply a parole status, which is a permission status UM.

32
00:01:46,480 --> 00:01:49,560
Speaker 1: And so this was one way that the US thoughts

33
00:01:49,640 --> 00:01:53,160
Speaker 1: itself touching up with countries like the UK, Canada, Ireland

34
00:01:53,360 --> 00:01:55,720
Speaker 1: that do have that startup pisa, that clear way for

35
00:01:55,720 --> 00:01:58,280
Speaker 1: foreign born founders to enter. Well, what are the Trump

36
00:01:58,280 --> 00:02:02,840
Speaker 1: administration's objections to the rule, So this really changes on

37
00:02:03,160 --> 00:02:08,200
Speaker 1: the parole status. The International Entrepreneur Rule argued that parole,

38
00:02:08,320 --> 00:02:10,600
Speaker 1: which is once again not a visa, It is a

39
00:02:10,600 --> 00:02:14,160
Speaker 1: permission toutory that is granted by the Department of Homeland Security,

40
00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:17,720
Speaker 1: and it's only granted in cases of humanitarian assistance such

41
00:02:17,760 --> 00:02:21,800
Speaker 1: as refugees, or in cases what individual could improved significant

42
00:02:22,040 --> 00:02:25,320
Speaker 1: public benefit. So the rule is saying that these entrepreneurs,

43
00:02:25,360 --> 00:02:29,119
Speaker 1: by you know, spurring investments and creating US job growth,

44
00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:31,800
Speaker 1: they would have to prove US job growth creation and

45
00:02:31,880 --> 00:02:35,600
Speaker 1: revenue creation in order to stay longer than those thirty months. Um,

46
00:02:35,600 --> 00:02:38,600
Speaker 1: they're saying that that is a benefit. However, the concern

47
00:02:38,680 --> 00:02:42,079
Speaker 1: from the Trump administration is that, Um, they had a

48
00:02:42,160 --> 00:02:45,160
Speaker 1: January executive order and in that order that was looking

49
00:02:45,240 --> 00:02:48,840
Speaker 1: to improve border security. They said there's currently a abuse

50
00:02:48,919 --> 00:02:52,079
Speaker 1: of parole in parole status in the US, and they

51
00:02:52,080 --> 00:02:54,880
Speaker 1: want to make sure that this rule is consistent with

52
00:02:55,000 --> 00:02:58,919
Speaker 1: that executive order. They're saying that their argument is that, um,

53
00:02:59,040 --> 00:03:02,760
Speaker 1: this rule opens up parole to a class of people

54
00:03:03,200 --> 00:03:06,440
Speaker 1: instead of doing it on a case by case basis. Um.

55
00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:08,440
Speaker 1: Of course, the opponents of the rule will say that

56
00:03:09,040 --> 00:03:12,920
Speaker 1: still each individual entrepreneurity needs to apply, So it is

57
00:03:13,000 --> 00:03:15,440
Speaker 1: case by case, and that's where the argument is coming

58
00:03:15,440 --> 00:03:18,280
Speaker 1: down to, and the move to rescind the rule is

59
00:03:18,320 --> 00:03:22,120
Speaker 1: being heavily criticized. Steve Case, the founder of a o L, tweeted,

60
00:03:22,240 --> 00:03:27,400
Speaker 1: big mistake. Immigrant entrepreneurs are job makers, not job takers.

61
00:03:27,440 --> 00:03:30,640
Speaker 1: So tell me about what some of the challenges to

62
00:03:30,800 --> 00:03:35,960
Speaker 1: this Trump move might be. We're looking at possible litigation

63
00:03:36,040 --> 00:03:39,480
Speaker 1: from several funds according to administrative attorneys and League An

64
00:03:39,480 --> 00:03:42,960
Speaker 1: Immigration attorneys. So first off is the delay. Now, agencies

65
00:03:43,000 --> 00:03:45,760
Speaker 1: in the past have delayed the effective date of the

66
00:03:45,840 --> 00:03:48,640
Speaker 1: rules against this agency is is saying that it's going

67
00:03:48,640 --> 00:03:51,080
Speaker 1: to the delayed the effect of dates from July seventeen

68
00:03:51,480 --> 00:03:54,720
Speaker 1: until March of two, eighteens with with the aim to

69
00:03:54,800 --> 00:03:58,480
Speaker 1: resond or repeal the rules altogether. Now the delay there

70
00:03:58,480 --> 00:04:01,160
Speaker 1: has been delayed in the past if there's a technical reason,

71
00:04:01,240 --> 00:04:04,200
Speaker 1: so for example, of the paperwork for applications wasn't done,

72
00:04:04,280 --> 00:04:06,360
Speaker 1: or there was a technology that hadn't been developed yet,

73
00:04:06,360 --> 00:04:08,760
Speaker 1: but there's still a good sased effort. What we're doing

74
00:04:08,760 --> 00:04:12,040
Speaker 1: from attourneys is that this does not fit that category.

75
00:04:12,160 --> 00:04:14,520
Speaker 1: This is more of a policy ship. The administration is

76
00:04:14,600 --> 00:04:16,960
Speaker 1: thing that we don't like this rule for X, y

77
00:04:17,040 --> 00:04:20,320
Speaker 1: Z reason and so um we are moving to rescind it,

78
00:04:20,400 --> 00:04:22,839
Speaker 1: and that is very difficult to do once a rule

79
00:04:22,880 --> 00:04:25,719
Speaker 1: has been finalized, which this rule has them and altneys

80
00:04:25,760 --> 00:04:28,239
Speaker 1: are pointing to a recent case that it's very similar.

81
00:04:28,480 --> 00:04:31,279
Speaker 1: Still unduly. Third, UH, you have sort of appealed for

82
00:04:31,480 --> 00:04:35,400
Speaker 1: DC UM had said that the Environmental Protection Agency, the

83
00:04:35,400 --> 00:04:38,560
Speaker 1: e p A, did not have the authority to delay

84
00:04:38,640 --> 00:04:40,560
Speaker 1: the effective date of another rule that had to do

85
00:04:40,600 --> 00:04:42,960
Speaker 1: with methane emissions. So they're saying this is a very

86
00:04:42,960 --> 00:04:45,919
Speaker 1: similar case that this agency, in the case that the

87
00:04:45,920 --> 00:04:48,479
Speaker 1: from the Pomsecurity does not have the authority to delay

88
00:04:48,520 --> 00:04:51,160
Speaker 1: this rule and that it must. It's a weak argument,

89
00:04:51,480 --> 00:04:55,000
Speaker 1: um that that it's making. So but the Trump administration

90
00:04:55,360 --> 00:04:59,360
Speaker 1: perhaps some that a case UH learned from UH learn

91
00:04:59,440 --> 00:05:01,320
Speaker 1: from this, and it's saying that while we're going to

92
00:05:01,480 --> 00:05:03,760
Speaker 1: be making a whole new rule making process, and not

93
00:05:03,800 --> 00:05:06,240
Speaker 1: only are we dealing it, we're going to open up

94
00:05:06,240 --> 00:05:08,640
Speaker 1: a whole new rule making process in order to rescind

95
00:05:08,760 --> 00:05:11,920
Speaker 1: this rule and UM. But in order to do that

96
00:05:11,920 --> 00:05:14,800
Speaker 1: that also might place for litigation. So what I mean

97
00:05:14,839 --> 00:05:17,840
Speaker 1: by that is that this rulemaking process is going to

98
00:05:18,360 --> 00:05:20,159
Speaker 1: their want to examine all the facts. They're going to

99
00:05:20,200 --> 00:05:22,040
Speaker 1: open it up to public comments, They're going to look

100
00:05:22,080 --> 00:05:23,840
Speaker 1: at the law, and they're going to come up with

101
00:05:23,880 --> 00:05:26,000
Speaker 1: a record that says this rule is either an accurate,

102
00:05:26,000 --> 00:05:29,560
Speaker 1: in correct, or outdated, and where litigation to come in

103
00:05:29,760 --> 00:05:31,800
Speaker 1: is of opponent to the rule. Thing. You know what,

104
00:05:32,520 --> 00:05:36,040
Speaker 1: that new records and the comp administration is not facturate

105
00:05:36,080 --> 00:05:38,400
Speaker 1: because look at the AGM administration just fit it several

106
00:05:38,400 --> 00:05:41,599
Speaker 1: months before or they initially crafted this rule. What could

107
00:05:41,640 --> 00:05:44,480
Speaker 1: have changed so drastically. So we're seeing the potential for

108
00:05:44,520 --> 00:05:47,400
Speaker 1: litigation at several points and the delay and regal of

109
00:05:47,440 --> 00:05:50,120
Speaker 1: this rule. Well, thank you for that report. We'll be

110
00:05:50,120 --> 00:05:52,360
Speaker 1: looking forward to seeing what happens with this rule. That's

111
00:05:52,400 --> 00:05:54,960
Speaker 1: Mikhaela Ross. She is a reporter for Bloomberg. Bayanna