Interesting News on I601

[Sergi9 110]

Boiler says "I guess you could say the same about any decision made by any Consular official."

Consular Officers do not adjudicate I601 applications.

"Using the same logic I could sue if I for example failed my driving test."

And let me know if when you fail your driver test they force your wife to leave the country for 10 years and we can have a RATIONAL discussion about this issue and how my saying the 3/10 year bars are draconian. Please give me one example of an Administrative infraction of any other Federal Law or local traffic law that requires the US Citizen to live out the next ten years or forever in a foreign country if they want family unity.

An I601 has to do with the harship to a US Citizen not the alien and given the gravity of the consequences to those citizens of the outcome of the cases and the obvious complexity of the INA and confusion in the hardship standard itself as stated in the case law on it, the adjudicator should be accountable for legal error. If he/she is not a member of the bar... why is he or she practicing law and able to avoid accountability? In fact the USCIS is "going after" notarios who practice law without a license, why should adjudicators be exempt from prosecution if they are practicing law without a license?

[Boiler 43,423]

So what percentage of those incur a ban did so unknowingly?

The first comment surely is if you do not want to do the time, do not do the crime.

Marriages involving nationals of 2 countries are usually going to require one to move, it comes with the territory.

There are all sort of factors that come into play. The lack of affordable medical cover has I have seen been a factor, a class action suite? There are people with all sorts of problems, criminal past, drug issues, spouses in jail with life sentences etc etc.

The inability to get a US DL could be a killer if your job and financial prospects require one.

So you have a ban, at least you have a chance to to jump through a few hoops, if you want to.

PS You did not answer any of my questions.

[TBoneTX 43,040]

Agree with Boiler above. And, in regard to this:

An I601 has to do with the harship to a US Citizen [...] and given the gravity of the consequences to those citizens [...]

The obvious answer is: Be careful whom you marry before marrying.

[momof1 205]

Why does this only apply for those who entered after 2001?

According to the IIRIRA of 1996, those who had applications filed for them before April 2001 could obtain permanant residence without leaving the United States. They simple paid a $1000 fine and their green card was issued. Even today, those who are unlawfully presenct who had a petition filed for them before April 2001 could still adjust under 245i of said act. This holds true even if the person was at the time a child and the petition was filed by some relative and their visa still isn't current. If they marry a USC, they can use the previous file date and adjust in country. Anyone who entered without inspection, both before 2001 without any petitions previously filed for them and those who entered after 2001, have to leave the United States to file a waiver of inadmissibility to return. It's also good to note that those who entered lawfully on a K1 visa and subsequently did not marry that petitioner would also have to leave the US to file waivers. Another little known fact is that false claims of US Citizenship pre-1997 are waiveable whereas those after that date are not.

It should also be noted that those who entered the country fraudulently can file in country waivers but the ban is not limited to three or ten years.

[momof1 205]

I also wanted to add that judicial review of cases is just not feasible. Immigration Judges, who generally have law degrees, are already bogged down with hundreds of thousands of cases. It is simply not realistic to expect that they would adjudicate these waivers also.

From personal experience, I can say that the waiver process is not ideal. Heck, it is barely tolerable. However, looking back now 2 years post waiver approval I can say that I am truly thankful for the opportunity my family was given. I prefer a system full of flaws to no system at all. I am reminded how lucky I am every single day I get to wake up next to my husband again. Our case was long and extremely difficult. His first immigration related petition was filed in 2000 and he will finally be eligible for citizenship in 2012. He worked for 8 years with authorization, paid taxes, and never got into a bit of trouble. His asylum was denied after 8 years and he was deported with a lifetime ban. It took 27 months to get him back home. It was the most difficult thing I've ever experienced.

Edited April 28, 2011 by momof1

[Boiler 43,423]

I am sort of familiar with 245i, but this action excludes all those who entered before 2001, not just the handful that might have a 245i application running.

[Sergi9 110]

Time towards bans do not accrue until 18

I have seen a few cases where an accusation has been made where no overstay was involved, they were all sorted out. There must be at least one I guess where this did not happen, but yet to see it. Any links complaining about false accusations of overstaying? ..

Also not relevant to post, but in most cases I know about the child brought here when a baby is hit with the bombshell of not being a citizen at or around 15-21 years old. Launching someone who is the spouse of a US Citizen into a foriegn country where there is no established mechanism for support is simply ludicrous on the face of it, but again not sure what your point is by asking this question in the context of the original post.

Marriages involving nationals of 2 countries are usually going to require one to move, it comes with the territory.

Again, brilliant insight, not relevant. US Citizen meets someone here, marries and then gets hit in the head with a brick called INA section blah blah blah and must leave thier country to have family unity. This is a forum dedicated to bringing people here, not sending them somewhere else.

There are all sort of factors that come into play. The lack of affordable medical cover has I have seen been a factor, a class action suite? There are people with all sorts of problems, criminal past, drug issues, spouses in jail with life sentences etc etc.

More irrelavant jibber jabber, trying to justify a bad law on the books. People in jail for life violated a CRIMINAL STATUTE, not an adminstrative one. We don't give people life sentences or even 10 year sentences for traffic tickets, although in reading your post you seem to think if they did change the law and make that kind of bad law it would be ok???

The inability to get a US DL could be a killer if your job and financial prospects require one.

Again, veering off the issue in that converstation.. If you have a DL examiner who is in a cranky mood that day.. hey you just go tommorow and get the DL. And even if the DMV really takes a disliking to you, guess what your wife and kids are still living in your country and are accessible to you. Worst case scenario you take the bus to work.. ?? This is truly a bizarre comparision trouble with the DMV vs having to leave behind family, job and culture because some j-####### in Congress came up with a draconian scheme.

So you have a ban, at least you have a chance to to jump through a few hoops, if you want to.

I am sure like Momof1 said most I601 applicants probably do appreciate the opportunity to have the waiver channel.

Does that make it not a bad law? Not so much

PS You did not answer any of my questions.

Mostly because they don't make sense

Why does this only apply for those who entered after 2001?

245i see momof1 answer

So what percentage of those incur a ban did so unknowingly?

I have no friggen idea, but you have been on the board long enough to see how many people are suprised by finding out they are dealing with a 10 year bar..since it applies to only a small category of US Citizen spouses that cannot AOS its not suprising many are shocked by this or didn't know about it. Regardless its not relevant to the informational post on a class action.. what is your point? You are morally superior ? Congrats

The first comment surely is if you do not want to do the time, do not do the crime.

What crime is the US Citizen committing here?

[Sergi9 110]

Agree with Boiler above. And, in regard to this:The obvious answer is: Be careful whom you marry before marrying.

Great wisdom... I601 folks should be more "practical" like K VISA folks... just pick them out of a catalog. Thanks for sharing.

[Used to be broken 143]

The first comment surely is if you do not want to do the time, do not do the crime.

(a) In Martinez-Medina v. Holder (9th Cir. March 11, 2011), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held as follows:

“An alien’s unauthorized presence in the United States is not a crime.”

According to the court, while there are some Supreme Court dicta to the contrary, there is no federal criminal statute making unlawful presence in the U.S. a federal crime. A foreign national who is illegally present in the U.S. commits only a civil violation.

[Boiler 43,423]

So Parent lies to Child, OK misleads...guess that happens all the time, so we should pick up the consequences? An interesting concept.

How can you get to 21 and not know your status?

Spouse lies to spouse, I guess much more common. So yet again we should pick up the consequences. Or only when the US Spouse can show that they entered into the marriage not knowing the SO's status?

Comparable to jail time, hardly. I think there are 195 countries in the world, may be one or two off, all that this does is not allow you into one of them for a limited time. Leaves quite a few options including your own country.

Re entry following deportation is a criminal offense, so it does depend. Not that it seems that there is much of a penalty attached to it.

When it comes down to it the ban is a civil response to a civil infraction, if you do not like it you have a choice not to incur it.

The lack of knowledge about 245i makes me think this site is a scam. And who are the couple with the baby, could not find their story.

[TBoneTX 43,040]

Great wisdom... I601 folks should be more "practical" like K VISA folks... just pick them out of a catalog. Thanks for sharing.

I wrote nothing of the sort. Your response sounds like a craven insult to an entire segment of the VJ membership. Yes, the issue is emotional for you, but you've crossed the line. Reported.

My previous answer stands: Be careful whom you marry before marrying.

[TBoneTX 43,040]

When it comes down to it the ban is a civil response to a civil infraction, if you do not like it you have a choice not to incur it.

This nails it, si man.

[Sergi9 110]

I wrote nothing of the sort. Your response sounds like a craven insult to an entire segment of the VJ membership. Yes, the issue is emotional for you, but you've crossed the line. Reported.

My previous answer stands: Be careful whom you marry before marrying.

Check your motives. TBone

Obviously if someone is looking for I601 information its a bit late to "be careful whom you marry before marrying."

Unlike you I didn't troll VJ looking for a place to dump on another application type.

[Boiler 43,423]

Check your motives. TBone

Obviously if someone is looking for I601 information its a bit late to "be careful whom you marry before marrying."

Unlike you I didn't troll VJ looking for a place to dump on another application type.

I 601 is not an application type.

Why is it too late? A qualifying relative does not have to be a spouse.

[TBoneTX 43,040]

Obviously if someone is looking for I601 information its a bit late to "be careful whom you marry before marrying."

Which proves the point yet again: Be careful whom you marry BEFORE marrying.

Unlike you I didn't troll VJ looking for a place to dump on another application type.

Oh, so you're a mind-reader? If you're that good or accurate, start your own television show, like The Amazing Kreskin. Until then, quit attributing unprovable motives to others. And you still haven't justified (or apologized for) your having dumped on the entire K-1 population of VJ just because someone who's incidentally in that category happens to disagree with your reasoning. We're waiting, please.