For an individual in an advisory position with no basis in the Constitution whatsoever, the Senate parliamentarian certainly has the Democratic majority buffaloed. I think Elizabeth McDonough, the current holder of this purely advisory position, has a lot of people hypnotized into believing she was elected Hippolyta, Queen of the Amazons.
Democrats argued this time to the parliamentarian that they include a provision to change the registry date from 1972 to 2010 for the legalization of immigrants and it could be passed using budget reconciliation. The effort to include immigration in their economic agenda bill, although it has faced long odds, has stood as one of the last clear opportunities for Democrats to pass substantial immigration reform in President Joe Biden's first year in office. Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, an official who advises the Senate on how its rules, protocols and precedents should be applied, rejected Democrats' second argument after they submitted a memo Tuesday
My reaction?

So what?

Do it anyway. Call Vice President Harris out of the bullpen and vote on the bill. If necessary, thank Ms. McDonough for the service she’s performed for her $172,000-a-year and shuffle her out the door. Stand the gaff, if necessary. (When then-Vice President Nelson Rockefeller ignored the parliamentarian’s advice back in 1975, everybody had a conniption fit. That was the last time any vice president, as presiding officer of the Senate—an office that has genuine constitutional authority—did so. It was almost 50 years ago.) Even more than the untoward reverence as regards the filibuster, the acquiescence of constitutional officers toward the illusion of the parliamentarian’s power is an inexplicable phenomenon of institutional bone-worshipping. This is the second time McDonough has ruled in this way on immigration, which is absurd, because there never should have been a first time. The Senate is clearly a place of magic spells.
Copy and pasted.

@sanaklaal, detach urself from this issue for a minute and look at it as a third party, from birds eye view. With outcomes having no consequences whatsoever on you. Like i do. You will have a much clearer view than wishful thinking.
Look from the parliamentarians and democrats point of view. Why should they destroy their careers by going above and beyond? If it passes through the regular process and channel, they will happily do it. If it wont, Will they break the rules and jeopardize their career/livelihood ? Never. One thing i learned here in US is people are heartless and have no empathy. Here Nobody will bend a rule by even an inch and put their ass on line to help others unless it directly benefits their interest. Baru Nepal ma you will see people bend rules to help people, though it could be out of ignorance or lax laws. or simply because nepalis have big heart.
So, no, parliamentarian will not allow immigration in reconciliation because she wont break the law and put her ass on the line. Democrats tried to trick her and she didnt fall for it. democrats knew the outcome all along, the just wanted to make her the sacrificial goat. Otherwise, why wont democrats over rule her or get rid of filibuster ? They wont do it because as i said, they wont put their ass in the line. Sometimes, i even doubt if bernie or aoc truly care abt immigrants. They only advocate abt the issue because it gives them platform to break out from the establishment democrats and gets them votes from young liberals like you. Thats how aoc got elected, being different, anti establishment.
So instead if wasting your time and energy, get on with ur life. U will be far better off that way.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=oPL2KVMbJY8&feature=share

Ok. Fight is not over