They turned her back at the POE

[John & Nan 0]

this is so sad to read, but so true. Even when see got a visa to come to the US. They turned her back at the POE.

Story

[rebeccajo 14]

It was a visitors visa.

Happens.

[John & Nan 0]

It was a visitors visa.

Happens.

Yeap I know, but still suck that she was given one and the turned away at the POE. So close and yet so far. I was hoping to get my wife a visitors visa but then decide it was to worth the risk of this happening even if she got one.

[Minya's wife 24]

The intention of the couple in the story was for the wife to come for a short visit, because,

"... green card holders cannot spend long periods outside the US to be with family, since the naturalization process has requirements for them to be physically present and in continuous residence in the U.S." This implies that the husband, because he's waiting to be able to apply for US citizenship couldn't go visit her. I thought PR's were allowed a max of 6 months outside the country without breaking the continuity of the physical presence rule?

[John & Nan 0]

The intention of the couple in the story was for the wife to come for a short visit, because,

"... green card holders cannot spend long periods outside the US to be with family, since the naturalization process has requirements for them to be physically present and in continuous residence in the U.S." This implies that the husband, because he's waiting to be able to apply for US citizenship couldn't go visit her. I thought PR's were allowed a max of 6 months outside the country without breaking the continuity of the physical presence rule?

Oh now I understand it! Visa time frames are different if the spouse is a green card holder compared to US citizenship. Wow I though the time frame for US citizenship suck. mmm so the Reuniting Families Act is to speeds up the time frame for green card holders not US citizenship.

[daboyz 36]

This seems to happen alot. I'm sure she told CBP she was married to an American and they haven't filed anything yet. There's 100s of stories on VJ like this. It is, what it is. I'm sure she'll be fine getting CR-1/IR-1. I've seen this happen with countries that are the VWP. Not really a shocker.

The intention of the couple in the story was for the wife to come for a short visit, because,

"... green card holders cannot spend long periods outside the US to be with family, since the naturalization process has requirements for them to be physically present and in continuous residence in the U.S." This implies that the husband, because he's waiting to be able to apply for US citizenship couldn't go visit her. I thought PR's were allowed a max of 6 months outside the country without breaking the continuity of the physical presence rule?

Maybe I'm confused. Sounds like she had a visitors visa, not PR.

[AaronLV 12]

They are allowed to be out of the country for 6 months and not break the continuity rule.

The fact of the matter is there are thousands of people that try to circumvent the immigration laws, and reading the story, I would not be surprised if the couple was let into the US she might do the same thing, she got caught and sent back. We have no way of knowing what she said to CBP and we have no idea what her true intention was, but I highly doubt the CBP just decided hey your going back, without some sort of suspicion that she was going to stay. There are plenty of stories both ways on VJ, and I am sure there will be plenty more.

While on the subject I think the immigration process for US Citizens bringing over fiances, spouses, children, etc should be overhauled before they extend immigration rights to PR's. Fix the current problems for USC's and then work on the other stuff. Just my opinion.

[SuperDuper! 230]

It was a visitors visa.

Happens.

Plus, the woman was from Argentina. Recently, our governor got caught running away to Argentina to meet his lover there. Coincidence?

[Bobby+Umit 161]

Husband was LPR who is in the process of becoming an USC.

They were waiting for that so he can petition his wife to become an LPR.

She had a visitors visa. She was denied entry.

He is complaining about it.

Ironically, if she came in seperately with the visitors visa, she probably would not be in this situation.

But since she came in with her LPR husband (in the process of becoming an USC) - this probably flagged it and was sent back.

Sucks, but it clearly states that having a visa does not guarantee admittance into the US.

[Krikit 1,163]

Moving from K-3 to General Immigration Related Discussion.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

"There was plenty of evidence to the contrary: no previous overstays; a signed affidavit stating she would abide by the time limit; and phone calls from an immigration law firm and the Argentine Consulate begging for clemency."

He thinks that's "plenty of evidence"? A statement from the visa holder, and statements from people who have no specific knowledge or interest in her return to Argentina. Where is the evidence that she had a job, owned a home, had bank accounts, or other semblance of an actual life in Argentina to return to???

Sounds to me like another whiner who didn't adequately prepare for dealing with the branches of the US government that deal with more fraud on a daily basis than all other government agencies combined. He's also whining because LPR's don't have the same rights as US citizens, and he's outright lying to make his point:

"Because immigration law does not classify them as "immediate family members," an estimated 322,000 spouses and minor children of green card holders wait years -- and sometimes decades -- for their visa applications to be processed."

This is not true. "Immediate Relative", or "IR" is a category for the visa - not for the person getting the visa. By not including spouses of LPR's in this category, the immigration law is NOT saying that the spouse of an LPR is not an "immediate relative" - they're saying that the spouse doesn't qualify for the IR category visa, which is more properly called "Immediate Relative of a US Citizen". The category of the visa is not a definition for the person who qualifies for the visa. Most spouses of US citizens who apply for a visa don't qualify for the IR visa either because they've been married less than two years - they get the "Conditional Resident", or CR visa instead. Do US citizens whose spouses get a CR visa accuse the government of not considering their spouse to be an immediate relative?

If Conor Fortune had spent a few hours on VJ then he wouldn't have botched this so badly. He'd have known the chances of getting his newlywed bride into the US on a visitors visa were tenuous at best, he would have brought overwhelming evidence to counter the presumption that she was intending to immigrate, and he would have been prepared for the event that she would be turned back at the POE. His lack of knowledge and basic research does not constitute a failure on the part of the US government.

[ghosttridder 0]

"There was plenty of evidence to the contrary: no previous overstays; a signed affidavit stating she would abide by the time limit; and phone calls from an immigration law firm and the Argentine Consulate begging for clemency."

He thinks that's "plenty of evidence"? A statement from the visa holder, and statements from people who have no specific knowledge or interest in her return to Argentina. Where is the evidence that she had a job, owned a home, had bank accounts, or other semblance of an actual life in Argentina to return to???

Sounds to me like another whiner who didn't adequately prepare for dealing with the branches of the US government that deal with more fraud on a daily basis than all other government agencies combined. He's also whining because LPR's don't have the same rights as US citizens, and he's outright lying to make his point:

"Because immigration law does not classify them as "immediate family members," an estimated 322,000 spouses and minor children of green card holders wait years -- and sometimes decades -- for their visa applications to be processed."

This is not true. "Immediate Relative", or "IR" is a category for the visa - not for the person getting the visa. By not including spouses of LPR's in this category, the immigration law is NOT saying that the spouse of an LPR is not an "immediate relative" - they're saying that the spouse doesn't qualify for the IR category visa, which is more properly called "Immediate Relative of a US Citizen". The category of the visa is not a definition for the person who qualifies for the visa. Most spouses of US citizens who apply for a visa don't qualify for the IR visa either because they've been married less than two years - they get the "Conditional Resident", or CR visa instead. Do US citizens whose spouses get a CR visa accuse the government of not considering their spouse to be an immediate relative?

If Conor Fortune had spent a few hours on VJ then he wouldn't have botched this so badly. He'd have known the chances of getting his newlywed bride into the US on a visitors visa were tenuous at best, he would have brought overwhelming evidence to counter the presumption that she was intending to immigrate, and he would have been prepared for the event that she would be turned back at the POE. His lack of knowledge and basic research does not constitute a failure on the part of the US government.

I have to disagree with you about basic research. The process of applying for visa for the us does NOT require basic research. This process is unique, has various terminologies, lengthy papers, circumstatial qualification rules, systematic applications, and requires much much more than a "basic" research. this is why there are many cases on here people post up, (as stated earlier in this thread) about getting turned away at the POE, they have not done their in depth research. Lawyers are making a fortune off of immigration these days by people hiring them to do their immigrant paperwork. I've seen the paperwork, and it's not just one or two, it's more than a couple of stacks. If I had to guess.. if 6 out of every 10 people who apply for a visa will get it wrong the first time around.

[Bobby+Umit 161]

I have to disagree with you about basic research. The process of applying for visa for the us does NOT require basic research. This process is unique, has various terminologies, lengthy papers, circumstatial qualification rules, systematic applications, and requires much much more than a "basic" research. this is why there are many cases on here people post up, (as stated earlier in this thread) about getting turned away at the POE, they have not done their in depth research. Lawyers are making a fortune off of immigration these days by people hiring them to do their immigrant paperwork. I've seen the paperwork, and it's not just one or two, it's more than a couple of stacks. If I had to guess.. if 6 out of every 10 people who apply for a visa will get it wrong the first time around.

I would have to disagree with you on this.

The process of applying for a visa is pretty basic, there are USCIS FAQ's, sites like this, even the instructions for the forms themselves are pretty straight forward. The information is out on the internet, if your willing to put in some time to search for the information.

If you case is not to complicated, this visa process is simple.

My own visa paperwork consisted of 7 forms or so. I would be hard pressed to call that a "stack of paperwork", let alone a "couple of stacks".

As long as you don't try to second "guess" the questions, you should just be fine.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

"There was plenty of evidence to the contrary: no previous overstays; a signed affidavit stating she would abide by the time limit; and phone calls from an immigration law firm and the Argentine Consulate begging for clemency."

He thinks that's "plenty of evidence"? A statement from the visa holder, and statements from people who have no specific knowledge or interest in her return to Argentina. Where is the evidence that she had a job, owned a home, had bank accounts, or other semblance of an actual life in Argentina to return to???

Sounds to me like another whiner who didn't adequately prepare for dealing with the branches of the US government that deal with more fraud on a daily basis than all other government agencies combined. He's also whining because LPR's don't have the same rights as US citizens, and he's outright lying to make his point:

"Because immigration law does not classify them as "immediate family members," an estimated 322,000 spouses and minor children of green card holders wait years -- and sometimes decades -- for their visa applications to be processed."

This is not true. "Immediate Relative", or "IR" is a category for the visa - not for the person getting the visa. By not including spouses of LPR's in this category, the immigration law is NOT saying that the spouse of an LPR is not an "immediate relative" - they're saying that the spouse doesn't qualify for the IR category visa, which is more properly called "Immediate Relative of a US Citizen". The category of the visa is not a definition for the person who qualifies for the visa. Most spouses of US citizens who apply for a visa don't qualify for the IR visa either because they've been married less than two years - they get the "Conditional Resident", or CR visa instead. Do US citizens whose spouses get a CR visa accuse the government of not considering their spouse to be an immediate relative?

If Conor Fortune had spent a few hours on VJ then he wouldn't have botched this so badly. He'd have known the chances of getting his newlywed bride into the US on a visitors visa were tenuous at best, he would have brought overwhelming evidence to counter the presumption that she was intending to immigrate, and he would have been prepared for the event that she would be turned back at the POE. His lack of knowledge and basic research does not constitute a failure on the part of the US government.

I have to disagree with you about basic research. The process of applying for visa for the us does NOT require basic research. This process is unique, has various terminologies, lengthy papers, circumstatial qualification rules, systematic applications, and requires much much more than a "basic" research. this is why there are many cases on here people post up, (as stated earlier in this thread) about getting turned away at the POE, they have not done their in depth research. Lawyers are making a fortune off of immigration these days by people hiring them to do their immigrant paperwork. I've seen the paperwork, and it's not just one or two, it's more than a couple of stacks. If I had to guess.. if 6 out of every 10 people who apply for a visa will get it wrong the first time around.

What you say is essentially true of spousal visas (including the K1), but less so of tourist visas. I suppose it's a case of semantics - what differentiates "basic" from "in-depth" research. As I alluded to, I think it would have taken no more than a couple of hours of research for Mr. Fortune to become well acquainted with the potential pitfalls his new wife faced in trying to enter the US on a tourist visa.

Unless there was evidence presented that he did not describe in his article, it sounds as if she showed up at the POE bearing nothing more than an affidavit she had signed herself. I'm presuming the phone calls from the immigration attorney and Argentine Consulate happened during the secondary interview. The fact that this would be woefully inadequate would probably have been clear after only 10 or 15 minutes of research. In fact, I'll go so far as to suggest that Mr. Fortune probably spent more time writing his article than he did researching the process for successfully obtaining and entering on a tourist visa after marrying a US citizen abroad. Also, if this experience has taught him nothing, and he puts the same effort into researching the CR1 process, then we can probably expect his wife's visa to be denied, and another diatribe about how he is being mistreated by the US government.

I suppose what really irks me about this is the fact that he's given a podium from which to complain about a problem which I believe he could have easily avoided if he'd spent some time learning what to do.

[Old Dominion 26]

Journalists like Conor Fortune often believe they don't need to cross their T's and dot their I's like the rest of the folk.