I don't want to leave him!

[Casprd 167]

I know you don't want to be apart from your husband, but please take the CR-1 advice, file for the petition, stay as long as you can, and come back to visit during the process. This is an option that you as a Canadian have that a lot of us don't have. Yes you can AOS and stay here, but every time someone does this, it makes it that much harder for the rest of us to have our fiancee/spouse visit during the process or to have our relatives visit down the road. People complain about how difficult the process is to get a visitor or tourist visa and to be Frank, the AOS is exactly why. People taking advantage of the AOS process. It is not intended for someone to come here with the intent to get married as you did. It is no more difficult for you to be apart than it was/is for any of the rest of us so please do this the right way and be happy with the fact that you can be with your SO during much of the process where others have to spend the entire time apart.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

Because she had intent to immigrate and the DOS considers marriage that soon after entry (30/60) as material misrepresentation to the CBP officer when she applied to temporarily visit. I've worked in the past with the DOS an have seen this happen too often.

The rule will only apply if she transfers jurisdiction to DOS. If she goes through USCIS, she won't have a problem even with a marriage that short after arrival. See Matter of Cavazos. They are routinely adjudicated favorably.

The problem with your logic is that if she "transfers jurisdiction to DOS" then she has returned to her home country for consular processing thereby eliminating any intent to immigrate using a non-immigrant entry.

What you're saying is that anyone who marries a US Citizen while in the US will be considered to have misrepresented a material fact if they return to their home country for consular processing of a spousal visa.

You have your logic backwards.

[rlogan 2,036]

Did they specifically ask you whether you intend to get married? If not, you did not lie.

I agree with Anh Map.

Wow, talk about not true.

Because of it, the oath you take in court is worded this way: "Tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth..." The "whole truth" part is to emphasise lying by omission. The "nothing but the truth" is to emphasise the lie by inclusion of extraneous misleading information. This legal standard is ancient because people have been lying since they have been able to talk. They use exactly the reasoning you did here: it isn't really a lie if I tell the border officer I am visiting my cousin in Chicago, omitting this: [because my cousin is the flower girl in my wedding to my fiance].

The part about including extraneous misleading information is familiar to any parent. You ask Johnny if he brought his school books home, and his answer is "we did not have any homework today". That is not the answer to the question of course. There are only two truthful answers: yes or no.

The purpose of both these strategies is to deceive and evade consequences under the law. If you look at the case in question, she clearly lied in order to gain entry illegally: to enter for the purpose of marriage, but to deceive the government about that intention. If visajourney were to back your theory, it would be advocating illegal entry. Don't bother going through all that silly paperwork. Just lie your way in.

If you teach your kids to lie like this, wow - you'll get what you deserve.

[Mithmeoi 29]

I go with the ones recommending CR-1 to you. Even though it's a wait it's worth it in the end! I know people that are on the VWP waive their rights to a review or repeal a decision if rejected. If you AOS there might be a chance of this and you'd be separated for even longer, plus you will have to lie to the government. I'd say stay for a while longer, apply, then go home get your things in order and wait out the CR-1 process.

[Little_My 463]

I fully agree with Harpa, Kathryn and Bob 4 Anna. DOS, or USCSI for that matter, DO NOT consider marriage per say as a violation of anything. If they did, Las Vegas and other popular wedding destinations in the US would take a serious financial hit.. People come to the US on tourist visas all the time to marry, and it doesn't make any difference whether they come here to marry another foreigner or a US citizen. What matters are the actions they take AFTER the marriage has occurred. That Foreign Affairs Visa Manual that was posted by CC90 clearly states:

You should apply the 30/60-day rule if an alien states on his or her application for a B-2 visa, or informs an immigration officer at the port of entry (POE), that the purpose of his or her visit is tourism, or to visit relatives, etc., and then violates such status by:

(1) Actively seeking unauthorized employment and, subsequently, becomes engaged in such employment;

(2) Enrolling in a program of academic study without the benefit of the appropriate change of status;

(3) Marrying and taking up permanent residence; or

(4) Undertaking any other activity for which a change of status or an adjustment of status would be required, without the benefit of such a change or adjustment.

The 30/60 rule has nothing to do with people entering the US and marrying. It applies to actions taken AFTER the marriage. If the foreigner returns to his/her home country after the marriage, before his/her period of authorized stay expires, no rules or visa regulations were violated. If the OP returns to Canada and continues to file for CR-1, there's absolutely nothing wrong with that and no material misrepresentation issues to worry about. I don't really see any problems ahead for them with the CR-1 process - quite the contrary. Taking that route is by far the safest way to go.

People who take the CR-1 route come to marry in the US very often, with the ceremony taking place here while the foreigner is under a tourist status, and then completing the process abroad. It is a very common way to go about it, and the 30/60 rule has nothing to do with people coming here to marry, as long as they leave before their visa expires and finish the process abroad.

Edited August 31, 2011 by Little_My

[fordchev 1]

Here is what I did..Flew from Canada to Denver Colorado got married and went back to Canada in September..In November I loaded up my car and drove to Colorado...they only asked me at the border where I was going and I told them Denver Colorado..I filed all my paperwork at INS office in Denver (2003) and got my EAD right there on the spot..My interview was in Denver..nobody every questioned anything..it was almost too easy

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

Here is what I did..Flew from Canada to Denver Colorado got married and went back to Canada in September..In November I loaded up my car and drove to Colorado...they only asked me at the border where I was going and I told them Denver Colorado..I filed all my paperwork at INS office in Denver (2003) and got my EAD right there on the spot..My interview was in Denver..nobody every questioned anything..it was almost too easy

That is textbook immigration fraud. Just because you got away with it doesn't make it right.

Entering the US with the intent to immigrate without first securing the proper Visa is Fraud. Had they asked your intent and you answered to immigrate and live with my USC Spouse they would have refused you entry.

[Penguin_ie 5,986]

The part about including extraneous misleading information is familiar to any parent. You ask Johnny if he brought his school books home, and his answer is "we did not have any homework today". That is not the answer to the question of course. There are only two truthful answers: yes or no.

If you teach your kids to lie like this, wow - you'll get what you deserve.

But she did not get asked "are you going to get married?" and then say "I am going to visit my boyfriend". She was asked what the purpose of her visit was, and answered truthfully - in your example, she didn't get asked the homework question at all, she was asked how her day at school was. If I answered truthfully without any omission everytime I used the VWP to visit the USA before I became a greencard holder I'd be standing at passport control for half an hour as I listed the friends I wanted to see, places to visit, restaurants to go to etc.

Also, please do not bring my kids into this. That is a personal attack and uncalled for.

[Purple_Lilac 1]

Thanks everyone! After doing a lot of research, reading all of your comments, and speaking with my husband, I know what we must do. I don't want to break any law and I definitely don't want to risk being separated from my husband for a long, long time. CR-1 seems like a good route to take, and I'm glad I'll still be able to see my husband throughout the process. When I first posted I thought I wouldn't be able to see him for 6+ months which scared me and upset me. I feel better about our situation now and I have a good feeling that everything will work out in the end. Good luck to everyone trying to get their Green Card.

[Penguin_ie 5,986]

That is your best choice to be safe.

Between you staying here for a bit, and then him coming to visit you, and maybe a second visit by you, you'll hardly need to be apart.

[Deputy Purple 1,294]

Thanks everyone! After doing a lot of research, reading all of your comments, and speaking with my husband, I know what we must do. I don't want to break any law and I definitely don't want to risk being separated from my husband for a long, long time. CR-1 seems like a good route to take, and I'm glad I'll still be able to see my husband throughout the process. When I first posted I thought I wouldn't be able to see him for 6+ months which scared me and upset me. I feel better about our situation now and I have a good feeling that everything will work out in the end. Good luck to everyone trying to get their Green Card.

File the I-130 ASAP, you can remain in the US for the length of your authorized stay.

FWIW, entering with the intent to marry isn't a violation of anything. If you intended to immigrate then technically you had immigrant intent and were violating immigration law. The problem is that USCIS needs something more than perceived immigrant intent to deny your AOS, that's why when they suspect immigrant intent they will often times pull you into secondary and ask leading questions in an attempt to get you to misrepresent a material fact which can later be used to deny AOS if you file.

[Udella&Wiz 325]

Thanks everyone! After doing a lot of research, reading all of your comments, and speaking with my husband, I know what we must do. I don't want to break any law and I definitely don't want to risk being separated from my husband for a long, long time. CR-1 seems like a good route to take, and I'm glad I'll still be able to see my husband throughout the process. When I first posted I thought I wouldn't be able to see him for 6+ months which scared me and upset me. I feel better about our situation now and I have a good feeling that everything will work out in the end. Good luck to everyone trying to get their Green Card.

Hope everything works out quickly for you - good luck. Come join us in the Canadian Forum - we have plenty of down home info!

[nane1104 146]

Here is what I did..Flew from Canada to Denver Colorado got married and went back to Canada in September..In November I loaded up my car and drove to Colorado...they only asked me at the border where I was going and I told them Denver Colorado..I filed all my paperwork at INS office in Denver (2003) and got my EAD right there on the spot..My interview was in Denver..nobody every questioned anything..it was almost too easy

You should not suggest to someone to commit immigration fraud just because you got away with it! And if it was easy in 2003 doesn't mean it would happen like this in 2011.

Think before you give such bad advice!

[fordchev 1]

That is textbook immigration fraud. Just because you got away with it doesn't make it right.

Entering the US with the intent to immigrate without first securing the proper Visa is Fraud. Had they asked your intent and you answered to immigrate and live with my USC Spouse they would have refused you entry.

First off BOB I didn't commit intentional fraud...I was unaware that entering the US with the intent to immigrate was fraud...and you are right had I been asked at the border I wouldn't have lied..I would have told the truth

Geesh you make it sound like I did what I did on purpose with the intent to defraud...you need not to judge people so harshly it might make you a little less uptight

[fordchev 1]

You should not suggest to someone to commit immigration fraud just because you got away with it! And if it was easy in 2003 doesn't mean it would happen like this in 2011.

Think before you give such bad advice!

Did I say to the OP "here is what I suggest"?? Nope I merely told the facts of what I did unaware at the time it was going to be a problem...

Geesh why is everyone on here so uptight acting like they are immigration attorneys giving out wrong information on most of what i have read