Adjusting via B2 visa....should the law be changed?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

2 minutes ago, missileman said:

Are you saying Congress meant to allow people to enter the US with intent to violate US law? I think most who marry on a B2 and stay to adjust enter with intent.

 

   No, the penalties for that are outlined in law. 

 

9 minutes ago, missileman said:

Are you saying Congress meant to allow people to enter the US with intent to violate US law? I think most who marry on a B2 and stay to adjust enter with intent.

 

  Yeah, as I said you are basing a lot of this on feelings. Not good policy.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

42 minutes ago, bcking said:

If you can marry in a B2 why do we need K-1? Let's get rid of that system then.

Try to have a single female from the Philippines get a B2. There are countries where it all but impossible for the average person to get a B2. The K1 is for the specific intent to marry and immigrate.

[bcking 3,157]

38 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 Yeah, as I said you are basing a lot of this on feelings. Not good policy.

Also not great policy to base immigration decisions based on "feelings" from an immigration officer, and yet we do that all the time.

 

The issue for marriage should be simple. You should be able to do it whenever you want, on whatever visa you are on. Marriage isn't, on it's own, an immigration issue.

 

However when you get married, you should have to apply for immigration just like every other married person. The process should be the same. It shouldn't matter whether you are in the country already or not. You should have to abide by whatever visa you currently have (30 day, 90 day, whatever) and if the application process takes longer you return home and wait it out.

 

That seems like the simple, straight forward solution that covers everyone equally.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

11 minutes ago, bcking said:

Also not great policy to base immigration decisions based on "feelings" from an immigration officer, and yet we do that all the time.

 

The issue for marriage should be simple. You should be able to do it whenever you want, on whatever visa you are on. Marriage isn't, on it's own, an immigration issue.

 

However when you get married, you should have to apply for immigration just like every other married person. The process should be the same. It shouldn't matter whether you are in the country already or not. You should have to abide by whatever visa you currently have (30 day, 90 day, whatever) and if the application process takes longer you return home and wait it out.

 

That seems like the simple, straight forward solution that covers everyone equally.

 

   That is currently how it works. AOS allows you to remain in the country while your case is adjudicated. You entered with legal status, you adjust from non immigrant to immigrant status, and you remain with a new legal status.

 

    Works similarly AFAIK if you enter on a work visa or a student visa. If someone worked here legally for 10 years and got married should they go home and wait? 

 

   I get what you are saying, but it seems like an overhaul to AOS is what you would be looking at. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2018 by Steeleballz

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

I've been on VJ for 11 years now and I will repeat what MY elders and betters told me:

 

IT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE

IT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE

IT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE

IT'S A FEATURE NOT A BUG

 

If you don't like it, do what you can to convince your legislators to change the law. 

[JayJayH 546]

1 hour ago, bcking said:

You don't need a K-1 if you are a fiance.

 

Just show up on a B-2, say you don't intend to marry and neglect to mention you are engaged and then marry "spontaneously". 

 

Seems like a much quicker system.

 

1 hour ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Because a lot of the people coming on k-1s do not qualify for a b2

 

Yep^

 

There wouldn't be a need for a K-1 category if B-2s were allowed to enter with intent to stay. If you married a foreigner, but wanted to hold your wedding in your home town, that would be very difficult to do without the K-1, virtually impossible if the foreign fiance(e) is from a high-fraud country. You'd have to convince a consular officer and CBP that you intend to enter, get married, and then leave for the I-130/CR-1 route.

 

I realize everyone's situation is different, but I really cannot think of a good reason why tourists should be eligible to adjust status. If you adjust status from i.e. F-1 or H-1b, that makes complete sense, since you would have entered the country to spend a significant amount of time and even set up temporary domicile in the U.S - most of your belongings and most of your life is already here. That isn't the case if you're here to go to Disneyland or visit your aunt. Filing an I-130/CR-1 while on a B-2 isn't  even that big of a deal. You can stay legally until your 180 days are up, return for your interview and come back on a CR-1. If you overstayed, you're still eligible for an I-601 waiver. This would make it a whole lot easier for family members waiting for an I-130 to visit during that time too, because the presumption of immigrant intent would be easier to overcome.

Really good one from the Center for Immigration Studies: https://cis.org/Report/Hello-I-Love-You-Wont-You-Tell-Me-Your-Name-Inside-Green-Card-Marriage-Phenomenon

 

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  What is your suggestion then?

 

  You can't stop people from getting married. You are not going to change adjustment of status, and contrary to the OP's suggestion, I really don't see a legal way of forcing a spouse of a USC to leave the country that would hold up in court. 

 

  

 

10 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   

 

  I think everyone who marries a foreign spouse should live in the foreign country for 2 years to prove they are not just being used for a visa. If it works out after two years, then they can come back.  Shouldn't spouses be required to get in line with everyone else? Why does it matter where you met them? Why should foreign spouses jump ahead of other immigrant categories who have been in line for years?

 

  

Everyone has to get in line. Family members generally go the I-130 route, and I-130s are the same for all family members. Once the I-130 petition is approved however, is when the difference comes in. While anyone can file a petition, there are only a certain amount of immigrant visas available to apply for each year. This supply of available visas is far lower than the demand for those visas. So you wait. There is no quota for spouses and minor children.

 

Why? Because spouses and minor children are often dependent on you and you share a household. In essence, your wife or 10 year old kid takes priority over someone else's 47 year old brother.

Imagine 100,000 visas were allocated to spouses and minor children annually. You try to bring your wife and 10 year old to the U.S., but 1,000,000 other applications were filed that same year. You'd be looking at a 10 year wait to bring your wife and child to come live with you - Time that the 10 year old could have spent with both parents, in a U.S. school, learning English fluently and creating a network of friends instead of waiting in immigration limbo.

Edited March 27, 2018 by JayJayH

[JayJayH 546]

37 minutes ago, bcking said:

Also not great policy to base immigration decisions based on "feelings" from an immigration officer, and yet we do that all the time.

 

The issue for marriage should be simple. You should be able to do it whenever you want, on whatever visa you are on. Marriage isn't, on it's own, an immigration issue.

 

However when you get married, you should have to apply for immigration just like every other married person. The process should be the same. It shouldn't matter whether you are in the country already or not. You should have to abide by whatever visa you currently have (30 day, 90 day, whatever) and if the application process takes longer you return home and wait it out.

 

That seems like the simple, straight forward solution that covers everyone equally.

I disagree slightly.

B-1/2 visas are short term visas for people intending to visit the U.S. for vacation or short business trips.

F-1 visas, H-1b visas would require the foreign spouse to quit their current job or significantly delay their college degree if they have to return. Adjustment of status should be an option, especially given that it's entirely plausible to meet, date and marry someone while you're here studying or working for half a decade.

[yuna628 9,663]

38 minutes ago, elmcitymaven said:

I've been on VJ for 11 years now and I will repeat what MY elders and betters told me:

 

IT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE

IT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE

IT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE

IT'S A FEATURE NOT A BUG

 

If you don't like it, do what you can to convince your legislators to change the law. 

But that's the problem isn't it? The majority of our population hasn't got a clue about immigration except when a bunch of talking-heads get them fired up about something they still have no clue about it. I'm not actually convinced the legislators actually know enough to change the law either. They say a lot and then do nothing, and none of the changes they have proposed ever address real issues or fix things for the better of immigration as a whole. They don't care to listen or be convinced.

[NikLR 13,227]

33 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

But that's the problem isn't it? The majority of our population hasn't got a clue about immigration except when a bunch of talking-heads get them fired up about something they still have no clue about it. I'm not actually convinced the legislators actually know enough to change the law either. They say a lot and then do nothing, and none of the changes they have proposed ever address real issues or fix things for the better of immigration as a whole. They don't care to listen or be convinced.

Exactly.  I don't have enough fingers to count how many times people thought I was automatically a USC because I'm married to one.  That I could just move down here.  Heck even my husband's best friend was trying to figure out a way for me to AOS "legally" when my husband's grandmother died.  But the inability to travel just made it not worth it for me, nor the fact that I felt like I'd be lying, and leaving far too abruptly.   For a lot of people that's not a big deal?  I don't get it but apparently it's not a big deal to them to leave their things they've worked hard for, family who loves them, jobs without notice, even their pets, etc behind on a "whim."  I call cowpoo on that!!  It's a huge deal to move to a new country and if it's taken lightly, the relationship won't last.  These people have said their good byes, packed their things, left their jobs....  I'm sure there are some who really don't actually care about that stuff, or don't have family etc... but I don't think that's a majority.  I truly believe MOST AOS from B2 or VWP is on purpose with intent. 

 

But again, the cash cow isn't leaving the stable any time soon. 

Edited March 27, 2018 by NikLR

[TBoneTX 45,001]

9 hours ago, elmcitymaven said:

At risk of hopelessly violating the TOS for non-English outside the regionals, ex post facto mens rea

Tantumodo in regionalibus colloquiis aliter atque Anglice loquimini!

[RLA 323]

7 hours ago, bcking said:

However when you get married, you should have to apply for immigration just like every other married person. The process should be the same. It shouldn't matter whether you are in the country already or not. You should have to abide by whatever visa you currently have (30 day, 90 day, whatever) and if the application process takes longer you return home and wait it out.

 

That seems like the simple, straight forward solution that covers everyone equally.

Doesn't make sense to me.  Nobody would benefit from that solution.  It's not like AoSlers are jumping the line and thus making the process slower for all the other people.  AoSlers are waiting in line like everybody else.  The only difference is that they are allowed to stay in the US while waiting.  

 

AoS is an instance of bureaucratic common sense.  If somebody is currently in the US legally and will likely gain LPR in the near future it would be a bit pointless to make them leave in between.  It would just cause extra costs and delay the future LPR's integration into the American society. 

[Nemeseax 36]

18 hours ago, missileman said:

I think that anyone who comes to the US via B2 and marries  should have to return to their country to wait out the CR-1process.  First, I think the majority of those who adjust from a B2 really enter with intent.  Secondly, why should it matter where or when the decision was made to marry.  Shouldn't those people be required to get in line with everyone else who has waited months and years to live with their spouses?

I don't want to sound rude or disrespectful but I think really every case is different. 

As far as I know AOS from any visa takes time and really a lot of documentation , interview(s) and money as well.There is line to get in just in any case ( no one is " jumping over " )Also USCIS has right to deny an applicant  from any visa.And I guess sometimes there are  possible fradulent intentions eben from CR-1 cases.Everyone takes their own path and each applicant has to proove that his/ her marriage is real. 

I don't really understand why so much  speculating about this subject - especially not from people who has already sucesully finished their immigrant journey  ( my congratulations to them).

Again, I'm sorry if I have offended some of you .

[Nemeseax 36]

I would like to add one more thing  ( if speculating)  - what with AOS people on B2 overstayed for years doing who knows what here while undocumented? Do you think it is " fair " that they just meet USC and finally realize their status? Or you can put just all of us in the same gruop?

Do you think that AOS from B2 is simply " I will put my documents and wedding dress/ suit in my suitcase and pray that IO at POE wouldn't pull me at secondary "? Far from that , dear people.

I really appreciate all great advices from you which  has given been given to  me/ us  to make this complex journey easier- BUT  I think we have to leave changing the laws to the people who are responsible to do  that. 

[Dashinka 24,353]

10 hours ago, Il Mango Dulce said:

"more a redundancy issue and unequal treatment issue"  So like 80% of what the government does:Redundant, unequal or inefficient.  The poster boy of the level of overlap that government aspires to is the immigration system that touches these Agencies :

 

 

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

• The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is the agency that determines immigration benefits. 
• The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) deals with immigration enforcement issues within the United States.
• The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) handles immigration screening at the U.S. Border.

Department of State (DOS)
Department of Labor (DOL)
Selective Service
Social Security Administration
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

 

Did I miss any?  

I am sure you did, however, it is a great example of our bloated federal government.  Thanks.

[Dashinka 24,353]

9 hours ago, spookyturtle said:

Try to have a single female from the Philippines get a B2. There are countries where it all but impossible for the average person to get a B2. The K1 is for the specific intent to marry and immigrate.

Seems that the federal government is practicing a bit of profiling when it comes to issuing B2s.