Trouble Ahead???

[Tracy 0]

We were told the same thing from an attorney....to just "visit" the US and "decide" we just couldn't leave once we got here. However we too just sold our house and thought there is no way that is going to fly and didn't want to take the chance of things not working out. We DCF and it took around 9 months even with the Adam Walsh Act which stopped everything for a few weeks. Personally I couldn't take the chance of USCIS believing my intent.

[trailmix 77]

Yes, I asked vic which visa he chose, knowing full well he decided to enter the U.S. to visit and lie at the border and adjust status.

Many many people get away with this and I have been pondering it - thinking well, if they are so willing to overlook people coming to the U.S. and adjusting status when in fact many of them had full intent to live here when they crossed the border and yet lied - is it really so wrong.

The fact is there is a HUGE loophole in the U.S. immigration system. Basically the visas work on an honesty system - particularily for Canadians who have wide open access (in general for visiting) to the U.S.

So in pondering this I have come to the conclusion that yes, it truly is the wrong thing to do. Just like any system that works through honesty - if you are dishonest and buck the system - well that says a lot about you and your integrity.

I think from now on when someone comes in here suggesting different ways they can circumvent the system, I will wish them good luck - i'm tired of advising people to do what they already know is the right thing to do.

[rexalite 0]

Yes, I asked vic which visa he chose, knowing full well he decided to enter the U.S. to visit and lie at the border and adjust status.

Many many people get away with this and I have been pondering it - thinking well, if they are so willing to overlook people coming to the U.S. and adjusting status when in fact many of them had full intent to live here when they crossed the border and yet lied - is it really so wrong.

The fact is there is a HUGE loophole in the U.S. immigration system. Basically the visas work on an honesty system - particularily for Canadians who have wide open access (in general for visiting) to the U.S.

So in pondering this I have come to the conclusion that yes, it truly is the wrong thing to do. Just like any system that works through honesty - if you are dishonest and buck the system - well that says a lot about you and your integrity.

I think from now on when someone comes in here suggesting different ways they can circumvent the system, I will wish them good luck - i'm tired of advising people to do what they already know is the right thing to do.

Yes, I asked vic which visa he chose, knowing full well he decided to enter the U.S. to visit and lie at the border and adjust status.

Many many people get away with this and I have been pondering it - thinking well, if they are so willing to overlook people coming to the U.S. and adjusting status when in fact many of them had full intent to live here when they crossed the border and yet lied - is it really so wrong.

The fact is there is a HUGE loophole in the U.S. immigration system. Basically the visas work on an honesty system - particularily for Canadians who have wide open access (in general for visiting) to the U.S.

So in pondering this I have come to the conclusion that yes, it truly is the wrong thing to do. Just like any system that works through honesty - if you are dishonest and buck the system - well that says a lot about you and your integrity.

I think from now on when someone comes in here suggesting different ways they can circumvent the system, I will wish them good luck - i'm tired of advising people to do what they already know is the right thing to do.

I feel you on this, trailmix. I totally can understand your frustration. But I think it can be helpful to look at the system as a whole and what public policy objective it is aiming to achieve. With the family based visas, it's clearly in the public interest to keep families together, and not force a seperation for a long time. So what is the immigration process designed at doing? It is aimed at keeping terrorists and criminals out of the country, people who can't afford to support themselves and might become a public charge, and people who have some infectious disease, and might infect Americans. It is aimed at weeding out people who are faking relationships in order to move to America. So in light of the public policy objectives the rules are trying to serve, there actually isn't anything served by preventing people from entering the US with immigrant intent because they want to live with their families. They are doing it because they have a bona fide relationship. And the rules reflect that. The law recognizes that there is no purpose in refusing to allow people to adjust status if there is no other reason to keep them out. I don't think it's actually a loophole, because it doesn't allow people to circumvent the public interest or the policies behind the rules.

[Reba 2]

And yet people who have entered the US with intent to immigrate, have been denied AOS and sent packing. Even if they had a bonafide relationship, and even though their lawyer told them it was ok to do so. What the lawyer failed to mention (and I've yet to hear of even a single lawyer say this to a prospective client) is that if they enter the US on a visitor status, and their AOS is denied, they have NO avenue of appeal. None. They are immediately under deportation proceedings, and they have to leave the country. And in quite a lot of cases, their "bonafide" marriage ends in divorce, because the USC spouse can't/doesn't want to move to their spouse's home country.

THAT's why we tell people here who ask why they should do it the long legal way. It's up to them to choose which way they'll end up going of course, but they really need to know what the consequences are of trying to circumvent the laws. It's not the "thought police". It's ICE.

[SapphireDreams 71]

And yet people who have entered the US with intent to immigrate, have been denied AOS and sent packing. Even if they had a bonafide relationship, and even though their lawyer told them it was ok to do so. What the lawyer failed to mention (and I've yet to hear of even a single lawyer say this to a prospective client) is that if they enter the US on a visitor status, and their AOS is denied, they have NO avenue of appeal. None. They are immediately under deportation proceedings, and they have to leave the country. And in quite a lot of cases, their "bonafide" marriage ends in divorce, because the USC spouse can't/doesn't want to move to their spouse's home country.

THAT's why we tell people here who ask why they should do it the long legal way. It's up to them to choose which way they'll end up going of course, but they really need to know what the consequences are of trying to circumvent the laws. It's not the "thought police". It's ICE.

Amen to that.

[thetreble 19]

I feel you on this, trailmix. I totally can understand your frustration. But I think it can be helpful to look at the system as a whole and what public policy objective it is aiming to achieve. With the family based visas, it's clearly in the public interest to keep families together, and not force a seperation for a long time. So what is the immigration process designed at doing? It is aimed at keeping terrorists and criminals out of the country, people who can't afford to support themselves and might become a public charge, and people who have some infectious disease, and might infect Americans. It is aimed at weeding out people who are faking relationships in order to move to America. So in light of the public policy objectives the rules are trying to serve, there actually isn't anything served by preventing people from entering the US with immigrant intent because they want to live with their families. They are doing it because they have a bona fide relationship. And the rules reflect that. The law recognizes that there is no purpose in refusing to allow people to adjust status if there is no other reason to keep them out. I don't think it's actually a loophole, because it doesn't allow people to circumvent the public interest or the policies behind the rules.

I concur. And the person that decides to adjust status from visitor's status, regardless of how wrong you feel it is personally, goes through a process as well. In the end, they still have to be scrutinized and and if they are found to be wrong-doers, they will hopefully be sent packing or denied.

[trailmix 77]

I feel you on this, trailmix. I totally can understand your frustration. But I think it can be helpful to look at the system as a whole and what public policy objective it is aiming to achieve. With the family based visas, it's clearly in the public interest to keep families together, and not force a seperation for a long time. So what is the immigration process designed at doing? It is aimed at keeping terrorists and criminals out of the country, people who can't afford to support themselves and might become a public charge, and people who have some infectious disease, and might infect Americans. It is aimed at weeding out people who are faking relationships in order to move to America. So in light of the public policy objectives the rules are trying to serve, there actually isn't anything served by preventing people from entering the US with immigrant intent because they want to live with their families. They are doing it because they have a bona fide relationship. And the rules reflect that. The law recognizes that there is no purpose in refusing to allow people to adjust status if there is no other reason to keep them out. I don't think it's actually a loophole, because it doesn't allow people to circumvent the public interest or the policies behind the rules.

I concur. And the person that decides to adjust status from visitor's status, regardless of how wrong you feel it is personally, goes through a process as well. In the end, they still have to be scrutinized and and if they are found to be wrong-doers, they will hopefully be sent packing or denied.

I personally have no problem with someone adjusting from visitor status - it's allowed and is no problem (i'm not talking about people with intent to stay).

I also think that the system is odd and that AOS should be wide open for everyone.

[vicmark 0]

We ultimately went to the US with the intention of returning to Canada. Our family had a 2 month lease on an apartment and return airline tickets. We were presented with an opportunity while here and decided to stay. It is not illegal, immoral or deceptive in any way. We had no idea what we would find once we got here. I was concerned about the perception our unique situation would present if an opportunity came up that sufficiently enticed us to stay. There wasn't a word asked about any of that, which confirmed our advice that the issue becomes moot after a certain period of time. In any event, we were prepared to answer those questions truthfully and back up our answers with evidence of our intent.

I would heed the advice of this board and not travel to the US with the intention of staying. I would add however, that should your situation change while there, don't be scared into thinking you're somehow susceptible to immediate deportation and a lifetime ban. Get a grip, its perfectly legal.

[Flames9_RN 358]

Probably in reality, Most canucks could just come to the USA with INTENT and just say! But of course one just isn't going to tell the POE dude or at the AOS interview that you had the intent of staying all along. As long as you stick to your story, your probably good to go. Personally I care more about how the Capitals are going to fair against the penguins than other people life,lol When my life is perfect and boring, I wil worry about others,lol that aint going to happen. Go caps go

[bowflex 0]

We ultimately went to the US with the intention of returning to Canada. Our family had a 2 month lease on an apartment and return airline tickets. We were presented with an opportunity while here and decided to stay. It is not illegal, immoral or deceptive in any way. We had no idea what we would find once we got here. I was concerned about the perception our unique situation would present if an opportunity came up that sufficiently enticed us to stay. There wasn't a word asked about any of that, which confirmed our advice that the issue becomes moot after a certain period of time. In any event, we were prepared to answer those questions truthfully and back up our answers with evidence of our intent.

I would heed the advice of this board and not travel to the US with the intention of staying. I would add however, that should your situation change while there, don't be scared into thinking you're somehow susceptible to immediate deportation and a lifetime ban. Get a grip, its perfectly legal.

You can state your opinion on this but it's never going to be 100% fact either way, either agreeing or disagreeing with you. I honestly feel that you had in the back of your mind that you could stay and if that's true you were completely wrong in what you did. I went through a year and a half going the completely legal way and when folks cheat the system and file for AOS knowing that they planned to stay in the first place it feels like a slap in the face. I'm completely happy that you and your family can stay together in the States and that everything went well for you but it was wrong in my opinion.

There are people from third world countries waiting years to get into the States for a better life or opportunity while your family already had a very good life in Canada and had no worries about deportation or horrible conditions. They get scrutinized beyond all belief in their attempts to immigrate and you completely cut in line and I will never agree with that.

[vicmark 0]

I'm about to sign off from this forum for good, but before I do...

Bowflex - You clearly don't understand how the system works for Canadians with American spousal sponsorship, relative to other poorer unfortunates. Your argument that because I had a good life in Canada I should be happy and stay put, is nonsensical and blatantly hypocritical.

[bowflex 0]

I'm about to sign off from this forum for good, but before I do...

Bowflex - You clearly don't understand how the system works for Canadians with American spousal sponsorship, relative to other poorer unfortunates. Your argument that because I had a good life in Canada I should be happy and stay put, is nonsensical and blatantly hypocritical.

Lol If you say so I'm very glad that your family is together, I just disagree with how you went about it. Good luck!