[joshAg]

There is already law for this.

There's already a visa for victims. It's temporary, but it's called a U Visa.

There's already a visa for skilled workers like her. It's called an H1b Visa.

If her husband had an h1b visa that allowed both him and her to work in the US, which seems to be the case since the story indicates that she was employed as a software engineer too, why shouldn't she be able to assume that visa if her husband dies or chooses to leave the US, assuming she qualifies on her own for the same visa. Really, what about this case is extreme wrt to immigration? If you consider this an extreme case that pattern matches /hard cases make bad law/, then what would average circumstances look like and how would they differ from this?

[anigbrowl]

You ask some good questions, but the basic problem is that you're thinking of a visa as being similar to a transferable property interest. It isn't, and the administrative, temporal, and fiscal costs of adjusting immigration status are pretty high for an individual.

[joshAg]

Oh I know that's not the case today, but I'm asking OP to justify why law shouldn't be created/modified to handle this sort of situation.

[anigbrowl]

Oh I see - sorry about the misunderstanding.