denied

[pushbrk 12,105]

May I ask who conducted the interview? Was it a blonde lady or an arabic man? The reason I am asking is because I am an older woman engaged to be married to a younger Algerian man.

Because something is terribly wrong with this procedure. It's okay for an OLDER man to marry a YOUNGER woman, but not the other way??? That is injustice.

I hope you can secure some form of consultation and bring your honey to AMERICA. I wish you the best.

Sincerely, Deafemily

Consular officers are not considering the subject in the way you describe. It's not a matter of whether it's OK with them that you marry. Their job is to determine whether the relationship is bona fide or only entered into by one or more of the parties exclusively to circumvent US immigration laws to obtain an benefit. In making their somewhat subjective judgment call, they are trained and expected to consider the totality of the circumstances, including local social and religious culture and norms.

To be blunt, they are wanting to determine whether YOU are being used and lied to or whether both of you are lying to them about the relationship. It's highly unusual for a young Muslim male to marry a woman who has been divorced and even more unusual if she's too old to have his children. People in these reverse age difference relationships are often successful and often not but ALWAYS see extra scrutiny.

[pushbrk 12,105]

Be realistic in your expectations. If you are a United States Senator and people who are unhappy with the decision of US Government employees contact you every few days and complain, do you really think you would butt in every time? Sure, if some documented abuse or scandal surfaces, perhaps, but if a woman complains that her fiance in Algeria did not pass the interview because the consular officers concluded possible abuse or fraud or call it whatever you want, I don't think that's something a US Senator would want to deal with. It's not his job.

Not only is it not his job to intercede or attempt to overcome the decision of Consular officers, unless he knows you personally and is intimately familiar with your relationship, he's simply not QUALIFIED to intercede. The Consular officers did their job as they do every day. Sometimes and maybe even often, couples disagree with those decisions. There's a process in place to deal with those disagreements but it takes time, and doesn't always work out the way we want it to.

[Gocka 17]

Not only is it not his job to intercede or attempt to overcome the decision of Consular officers, unless he knows you personally and is intimately familiar with your relationship, he's simply not QUALIFIED to intercede. The Consular officers did their job as they do every day. Sometimes and maybe even often, couples disagree with those decisions. There's a process in place to deal with those disagreements but it takes time, and doesn't always work out the way we want it to.

True very true, sadly the case looks very suspect ( i know its not) I dont think she would be on here heartbroken if it wasnt but I have to admit to the outside eye it looks suspect, I would be suspect of the situation if I was reviewing it. I still think she can get passed it though, if its genuine then where theres a will theres a way.

[pushbrk 12,105]

True very true, sadly the case looks very suspect ( i know its not) I dont think she would be on here heartbroken if it wasnt but I have to admit to the outside eye it looks suspect, I would be suspect of the situation if I was reviewing it. I still think she can get passed it though, if its genuine then where theres a will theres a way.

"It" is a relationship between two people, ONE of whom is here heartbroken. We know NOTHING about the other side of the relationship, good, bad or indifferent. In this type of case, it's far less likely the US Citizen is part of any immigration fraud than the foreigner.

[Karonya and Adel 8]

Yes, the consular officers did assume that the reason why a 25 year-old man from Algeria would want to marry a 40 (?) year-old woman from the US might be -- at least to some degree -- fueled by the desire to live in the Land of Milk and Honey.

Whether or not that's true is irrelevant, as the assessment is up to the people in charge, not the beneficiary and not the applicant.

Compare it to a job interview. If you apply for a job and are being interviewed, the person conducting the interview is deciding on whether you get the job or not. Sure, you can complain to the interviewer's boss, but I doubt that this would get you the job.

Be realistic in your expectations. If you are a United States Senator and people who are unhappy with the decision of US Government employees contact you every few days and complain, do you really think you would butt in every time? Sure, if some documented abuse or scandal surfaces, perhaps, but if a woman complains that her fiance in Algeria did not pass the interview because the consular officers concluded possible abuse or fraud or call it whatever you want, I don't think that's something a US Senator would want to deal with. It's not his job.

It is her job (talk about sexist to assume my senators are male!). it is her job to help her constituents with their concerns. it is her job not to make the outcome what I want it to be but to be sure that the laws are followed and my case is given due consideration. and, as a matter of fact, her office has already contacted me and is willing to get involved.

[pushbrk 12,105]

It is her job (talk about sexist to assume my senators are male!). it is her job to help her constituents with their concerns. it is her job not to make the outcome what I want it to be but to be sure that the laws are followed and my case is given due consideration. and, as a matter of fact, her office has already contacted me and is willing to get involved.

You might want to consider the meaning of the verb in my sentence. It was "intercede". Sorry if I neglected to use the correct pronoun but it doesn't change the message. You'll best help yourself by staying focused on what matters to the process instead of what doesn't.

[rsns 0]

Im so sorry to hear that. Dont give up! Wait for senators help or your attorney. I am 15 yrs younger than my petitioner but they never question me about it. All the best! Fight for it! You are just in a high fraud country. Show and prove your true intent.

I am curious-- which are the countries that are considered high-fraud?

[rsns 0]

our interview was yesterday and I was in attendance. we had all the standard proof of a relationship e.g. chat logs phone records text logs letters from family and friends. He was interviewed by a woman in english and then given the same questions by a man in arabic. he answered consistently and truthfully for over an hour. I was then interviewed by the same man for about an hour. We were given no specific reasons for denial just the usual "appears to be for immigration purposes" statement. i'm fairly sure that they did not like the fact that I had met him in may 2009 and went to see him in december 2009. the man said " that was quick!!" they also did no tlike our 15 year age difference. that's all i can think that it would be since we co,pared our answers to their questions afterwards and we gave the same;

so, i have tried contacting my senator, no response yet; what about getting in touch aith an attorney, and how do I find a good one?

Firstly, I am sorry to hear about this. I see that your post was a few months ago-- I hope something good has happened since then.

I was wondering, why did they interview you in the first place? I thought that the interview was just supposed to be with the beneficiary...

[C Med 14]

Still the fact remains that you have a problem to solve.

I saw an ad here on VJ about an attorney specializing in visa refusal. Have no idea how good this atty is. I just saw the ad. Here it is: http://www.visarefusal.com/

I am seeing a disturbing pattern of visa refusals, Stokes interviews, AAP and other abuses directed largely at non-white or non-European beneficiaries. Is anyone else seeing this?

Sorry, this is totally but, your signature is hilarious.

[C Med 14]

To the OP, I hope that everything was sorted out for you!

[aguilayserpiente 2]

our interview was yesterday and I was in attendance. we had all the standard proof of a relationship e.g. chat logs phone records text logs letters from family and friends. He was interviewed by a woman in english and then given the same questions by a man in arabic. he answered consistently and truthfully for over an hour. I was then interviewed by the same man for about an hour. We were given no specific reasons for denial just the usual "appears to be for immigration purposes" statement. i'm fairly sure that they did not like the fact that I had met him in may 2009 and went to see him in december 2009. the man said " that was quick!!" they also did no tlike our 15 year age difference. that's all i can think that it would be since we co,pared our answers to their questions afterwards and we gave the same

Dear KAA, I am sorry for what happened. Take a deep breath and move quickly with care. You are taking all of the right steps. In my past experience with political asylum cases, exhausting administrative remedies and contacting elected officials are sound approaches. Just Bob's comment is mistaken. The duty of elected representatives is to advocate and act on behalf of the people. They have a duty to take corrective steps. Elected officials have staff persons dedicated to immigration matters. Follow up with telephone calls or even a visit to that Senator or Congressperson's local office.

There is a lack of an express, written basis for the denial. You are right to note the biased comments of the interviewer. To a reasonable observer the 7 month period of time between becoming acquainted and meeting in person should not have negative significance. A K1 petitioner is required to meet the fiance(e) at least once in the preceding 24 month period. The "15 year age difference" comment reflects gender based bias prohibited under federal law, executive order, and the equal protection clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments of the US Constitution.

From a cursory review, it appears that Consular Review is one available administrative remedy, which should be requested immediately. I am going to consult the Kurzban practice guide at the law library. If you have a law library near you, you may want to check into an immigration practice guide to review one of the practitioner's points as to how to gain administrative review of an erroneous decision.

Another option that you may want to consider is contacting the USCIS Ombudsman, http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0497.shtm#6 . The substantive remedy would be a negotiated correction of the erroneous denial and the procedural remedy would be to have the case returned to the USCIS for review. If you are able to have the case returned to the USCIS in the US for review, you will have more administrative remedies and remedies at law available to you.

I am sympathetic to your hardship. That is why I suggest contacting your local law school's immigration clinic, where thoughtful professors and students can assist you. I hope this note reaches you in a timely way.