How long can a person stay on a tourist visa?

[TennMike7 8]

My wife came on a tourist visa for the first time. It is unclear how long she can stay. I thought it was 90 days and then she could come back for another 90 days, but the officer stamped her passport with a stamp that says November. So does this mean she can stay till November? I'm confused.

 

[NikLR 13,234]

B2 visa or ESTA?

 

B2 is good for 180 days at a time.  Leave by day 178-9 for safety. 

 

ESTA is good for 90 days at a time. Leave by day 88 or 89. 

[Unlockable 7,322]

The 90 days is for ESTA/ VWP. Not a tourist visa. Which is it?

 

Also, her coming for 90 days, leaving, then quickly coming back for another 90 days is risky. that is a sure way for her to loose here visiting privileges.

[KazuriSana 324]

2 hours ago, TennMike7 said:

My wife came on a tourist visa for the first time. It is unclear how long she can stay. I thought it was 90 days and then she could come back for another 90 days, but the officer stamped her passport with a stamp that says November. So does this mean she can stay till November? I'm confused.

 

Where is the confusion, if she has a date stamped in her passport?  She can stay up to that date.

 

The officers do not stamp random dates on passports and then let you go out to do some research and guesswork based on the visa you hold.

[geowrian 22,339]

Go by the date of the I-94. This is in the passport, but also check it online:

https://i94.cbp.dhs.gov/I94/

 

As noted, ESTA is 90 days max, not extendable. A B-2 visa holder can technically be stamped with an I-94 for up to a year, although 6 months is the max.

Returning after an extended stay without being outside the US for too long will raise scrutiny by CBP and may be denied entry. The general rule is to spend more time outside the US than in it, with twice as long outside than inside being better.

[Teemo 252]

2 hours ago, geowrian said:

Returning after an extended stay without being outside the US for too long will raise scrutiny by CBP and may be denied entry. The general rule is to spend more time outside the US than in it, with twice as long outside than inside being better.

Is there any reason/circumstance you can think of where someone can repeatedly come into the US, obviously spending more time in the US than out of the country on a tourist visa, without any scrutiny/issues with CBP?

 

Edit: Back in my younger days a decade ago, before I spent any time thinking about immigration law as anything more than "waiting in line at customs," I repeatedly went to Canada for 3-7 days then came back into the US for 3-4 months or so. I wasn't even trying to circumvent anything I just had more of life in the US than Canada because I had gone to school for 4 years and worked for 4.5 years there. Not once did anyone warn me or scrutinize me. Very weird, now that I look back at it. 

Edited June 1, 2018 by Teemo

[Boiler 47,502]

3 minutes ago, Teemo said:

Is there any reason/circumstance you can think of where someone can repeatedly come into the US, obviously spending more time in the US than out of the country on a tourist visa, without any scrutiny/issues with CBP?

B2 Cohabitating

[geowrian 22,339]

7 minutes ago, Teemo said:

Is there any reason/circumstance you can think of where someone can repeatedly come into the US, obviously spending more time in the US than out of the country on a tourist visa, without any scrutiny/issues with CBP?

 

Edit: Back in my younger days a decade ago, before I spent any time thinking about immigration law as anything more than "waiting in line at customs," I repeatedly went to Canada for 3-7 days then came back into the US for 3-4 months or so. I wasn't even trying to circumvent anything I just had more of life in the US than Canada because I had gone to school for 4 years and worked for 4.5 years there. Not once did anyone warn me or scrutinize me. Very weird, now that I look back at it. 

As Boiler noted, a B-2 for cohabitating partners would generally not raise much scrutiny and can spend more time in the US than out.

 

In the past, things tended to be much more lax at the US/Canada border as well. They many times didn't even issue an I-94 for Canadians entering by land (making them D/S status) or record their passport number. As of around 2011/2012 or so, they aren't quite as lax. It's still pretty good and a number of close trips is probably fine, but eventually you'll get a CBP officer that will take issue with it...some sooner than others.

 

For non-Canadians and air travel, they tend to look at this much more closely IMO (visa holders more so than ESTA travelers).

[Teemo 252]

1 minute ago, geowrian said:

As Boiler noted, a B-2 for cohabitating partners would generally not raise much scrutiny and can spend more time in the US than out.

 

In the past, things tended to be much more lax at the US/Canada border as well. They many times didn't even issue an I-94 for Canadians entering by land (making them D/S status) or record their passport number. As of around 2011/2012 or so, they aren't quite as lax. It's still pretty good and a number of close trips is probably fine, but eventually you'll get a CBP officer that will take issue with it...some sooner than others.

 

For non-Canadians and air travel, they tend to look at this much more closely IMO (visa holders more so than ESTA travelers).

I see. Yes this was before 2011/2012. What happened then that made them less lax?

[geowrian 22,339]

Just now, Teemo said:

I see. Yes this was before 2011/2012. What happened then that made them less lax?

This tended to just be a general increase in scrutiny of land crossings...at least that's my take on it. I don't have anything specific to point at, sorry. Although I think in 2013, electronic I-94s started being issued so there was now a way to track and log people (since paper I-94s weren't that common for land crossings at least). I'm confident that kind of log/traveler history contributed to events.

[Teemo 252]

4 minutes ago, geowrian said:

This tended to just be a general increase in scrutiny of land crossings...at least that's my take on it. I don't have anything specific to point at, sorry. Although I think in 2013, electronic I-94s started being issued so there was now a way to track and log people (since paper I-94s weren't that common for land crossings at least). I'm confident that kind of log/traveler history contributed to events.

Most of my crossings were by air, but ok noted. Thanks, interesting. 

[Coco8 1,054]

If she is from Brazil then she has a visitor visa. That allows her to stay 6 months as long as the i-94 says so, like in your case. However, she won't be able to come back in a long time after that, probably 1 year. If you are doing a spousal visa, then you should be OK with that because by the time she gets back, she should be close to the interview and you could visit. 

 

Make sure to create some "evidence" while you are together during the trip to take to the consulate. 

[Daisy.Chain 317]

15 hours ago, BlessedAssurance said:

Where is the confusion, if she has a date stamped in her passport?  She can stay up to that date.

 

The officers do not stamp random dates on passports and then let you go out to do some research and guesswork based on the visa you hold.

Of course, visiting is always a privilege, not a right - no guarantees. I know someone who left long before their allotted time and still wasn:'t allowed back a few years, the officer citing that she had stayed too long.

[TennMike7 8]

She's from Brazil and her interview should be before November.

[az2014 381]

57 minutes ago, TennMike7 said:

She's from Brazil and her interview should be before November.

So she goes back before November snd attends her interview.

 

Whats the confusion? Seems pretty simple.