Tourist Visa Denial Stories

[Boiler 43,438]

VISA is a credit card btw

 

I was refused a B2 many years ago. Not sure what you want to know, I applied, went for the interview, asked a couple of questions and was refused.

[usmsbow 795]

2 hours ago, Ahegao said:

 

I should've included that, but glad you ask. I am proposing a change in how the United States allows only a select few countries to be able to travel to the US w/o requiring a Visa through its VISA Waiver Program. This means including more countries into the list or revising the program so that it is not so biased towards first world political allies of the US.

 

Are there any first world countries that aren't a part of the VWP? I can think of two*: Qatar and the UAE. Qatar has a huge US base, so I am pretty sure it is considered a US ally. The UAE is pretty friendly with the US as well. They're closer "allies" to the US than some countries that are in the VWP such as Chile and Brunei. 

 

*Saudi Arabia and Bahrain (home of the US 5th fleet) perhaps are two others, no sure if they could be considered developed/first world. 

 

Point being I think it's pretty hard to argue that the program is biased towards 1st world political allies of the US. 

[Boiler 43,438]

Isn't Poland an ally?

[usmsbow 795]

Ah yes, good example. It is part of NATO. 

[Ahegao 3]

6 minutes ago, usmsbow said:

Ah yes, good example. It is part of NATO. 

but is it rich though? I know Poland has been trying to get into the list for some time now and checks out on most of the boxes besides having a strong economy.

[TM92 527]

Just now, usmsbow said:

Ah yes, good example. It is part of NATO. 

Quite a few NATO allies that are not VWP*: Albania, Bulgaria, Croatia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania, Turkey

*I didn't include Canada because the US-Canada longstanding friendship predates VWP

[usmsbow 795]

6 minutes ago, Ahegao said:

but is it rich though? I know Poland has been trying to get into the list for some time now and checks out on most of the boxes besides having a strong economy.

 

It has a higher per capita income than Hungary (which is in the VWP), and based on purchasing power, higher than Portugal, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_average_wage

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

1 hour ago, gsdc23 said:

I’m no expert on immigration reform but I will say that Tourist visas in Haiti are rarely approved no matter how many ties you show. I’ve had family members/friends who just want to visit to shop/explore the US that have families, houses that they’ve built from the ground up on land they’ve purchased and even businesses up and running that proves, IMO, major ties to their country and they still get denied. Doesn’t matter how much proof they bring to the interview. I think the only visas they actually take time to make decisions on are K1’s/CR1’s and other sponsorship visa’s and such. I wouldn’t consider Haiti a High fraud country, but I’m going to go ahead and guess we don’t have the best percentages when it comes to tourist visa use in the past. Which is why they probably just deny, deny, deny now. That’s just my little 2 cents. 🤷🏾‍♀️

Normally we find people exaggerate wildly about “everyone is refused” but in Haiti’s case that is not so far from the truth, with a 71% refusal rate.  I’m assuming the issue is more overstays than fraud per se for Haiti.

 

OP, the link above in geowrian’s post will be useful to you  to help you evaluate others who we sometimes see claim “everyone” is refused yet in reality there may be a 15-20% refusal rate. 

 

 

[TM92 527]

3 hours ago, Ahegao said:

Yes, I am aware, but there are individuals that still get denied entry for whatever arbitrary reason despite showing no intent to immigrate to the US. Those are the ones I would like to hear from.

Intent to immigrate is just one factor COs look for. Should they go back to being more lenient on different factors? https://www.ilw.com/articles/2004,0429-ellis.shtm:

Quote

It is hard to imagine a bigger bureaucratic blunder than granting fifteen Saudi hijackers tourist and student visas to enter the United States. But that is exactly what happened in Saudi Arabia in 2000 and 2001.

 

More than any other Federal agency, the US Consular Corps is responsible for allowing the 9-11 hijackers into the United States. In the months following September 11th, periodicals like the National Review posted photos of the DS-156 forms submitted by the hijackers. They were so scribbled and incomplete, as to be facially unapprovable. Yet, Consular Officers in Saudi Arabia approved them without even scheduling interviews!

Edited November 28, 2018 by TM92

[Ahegao 3]

1 minute ago, TM92 said:

Intent to immigrate is just one factor COs look for. Should they go back to being more lenient on different factors? https://www.ilw.com/articles/2004,0429-ellis.shtm:

9/11 was a tragedy and the lax regulations were part of the cause of it, but it doesn't mean blanket Travel Bans are the solution. Besides government surveillance and watchdog groups have more capabilities and tools now more than ever before. I do believe we can find a fair middle ground here. It just takes time and work: things the US government isn't willing to put much effort to.

[TM92 527]

4 minutes ago, Ahegao said:

9/11 was a tragedy and the lax regulations were part of the cause of it, but it doesn't mean blanket Travel Bans are the solution.

Proclamation No. 9645? SCOTUS upheld it in the 5-4 Trump v. Hawaii decision: https://www.oyez.org/cases/2017/17-965 Thus, legal.

[SusieQQQ 11,584]

22 minutes ago, Ahegao said:

9/11 was a tragedy and the lax regulations were part of the cause of it, but it doesn't mean blanket Travel Bans are the solution. Besides government surveillance and watchdog groups have more capabilities and tools now more than ever before. I do believe we can find a fair middle ground here. It just takes time and work: things the US government isn't willing to put much effort to.

Your last sentence is debatable to say the least. Do you actually know what time and work they put in? Do you know about how background checks are conducted for visas? Do you know about administrative processing? If you don’t actually know how much time and what work is being done in the process, you have no grounds to make a sweeping statement that there’s not enough effort there. By all means make that statements if you think it’s justfied - once you actually understand what you’re saying.

[Ahegao 3]

18 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

Your last sentence is debatable to say the least. Do you actually know what time and work they put in? Do you know about how background checks are conducted for visas? Do you know about administrative processing? If you don’t actually know how much time and what work is being done in the process, you have no grounds to make a sweeping statement that there’s not enough effort there. By all means make that statements if you think it’s justfied - once you actually understand what you’re saying.

Perhaps I sounded a bit too naive with that. I personally have had experienced with being denied entry in the US before so feelings of frustration got the better of me. Still, I do think the system still leaves much more room for improvement, especially in regards to the way they screen and monitor applicants during processing.

[JE57 239]

If you really want to talk about how to potentially reform the tourist visa process I think you need to consider a policy beyond the current requirement to prove that there is no immigrant intent.  There are many relatives of US citizens that would love to visit the USA that have no demonstrable compelling reason to leave the USA.  If Trump gets his way and ends so called Chain migration than many of these individuals will have no way to ever visit so Grandparents won't have the opportunity to visit new born babies sisters, brothers, parents, adult children of US legal immigrants may never have the chance to visit their relatives in the USA and get a view of where they live.  This is justified under the current system as they are,, depending on country of citizenship, deemed to be likely to overstay or immigrate illegally.  The solution of making it less stringent would presumably only result in more illegal immigrants.  So if you want reforms you need to propose a way that the potential visitor can overcome the stay illegally presumption.   My suggestion,  set up a sponsored single entry tourist visa such that the visitor would be sponsored such that a bond is posted such that if they don't leave when they are supposed to that the sponsor has to pay extreme amounts of money and that the visitor remains deport able and the expenses of doing so are also covered by the Bond.   More people get to visit,  the costs of deportation are covered and there is less incentive to come illegally if you know you can visit legally.   When I think of REFORM this is what comes to mind not revisiting who is accepted or denied.    Also, it makes little sense to me that in the vast majority of the times a tourist visa is granted for unlimited entries for a period of 10 years.   A lot of circumstances can change in 10 years so this places the onus on CBP to do a second 'screening' of the person presenting at the boarder and makes entry less certain that it needs to be.  While the only guarantee of admissibility would be a US Citizenship a more limited visa would be more currently evaluated by the Embassy and could be less likely to being turned away at the border..  

In short my point is that changing which countries can and can not get VWP availability is not REFORM it's just tweaking a policy that could be made more usable for the participants if serious thought was given to how we could increase access to the USA for otherwise less qualified applicants.

Most other countries that you apply for a tourist visa from have some hard requirements which if you meet them you are reasonable certain of getting the Visa not so with the USA most interviews are not based on any documents.

[Unlockable 7,306]

7 hours ago, Ahegao said:

Hello. For my Leadership Class Final Project, I am conducting research on United States Visa policy reform and I will need as many case studies as possible. Personal anecdotes or hearsays from friends or family are fine. Being detailed with your accounts will be very much appreciated. Thanks!

 

7 hours ago, Ahegao said:

 

I should've included that, but glad you ask. I am proposing a change in how the United States allows only a select few countries to be able to travel to the US w/o requiring a Visa through its VISA Waiver Program. This means including more countries into the list or revising the program so that it is not so biased towards first world political allies of the US.

 

7 hours ago, Ahegao said:

Yes, I am aware, but there are individuals that still get denied entry for whatever arbitrary reason despite showing no intent to immigrate to the US. Those are the ones I would like to hear from.

Hi @Ahegao,

 

I am interested in your research results as it may help us and others have a better understanding of the processes and policies set in place for non-immigrant visas to the US. However, may I offer some academic advice? Based on the above in bold it seems you have already entered this project with a biased mindset. I was taught that when approaching a project, one must have an open mind. You mind should be like a blank sheet of paper. By you making statements like, "biased" and "whatever arbitrary" reasons", you have sort of set the tone of your project. As many of the experienced members that have posted in this thread have already informed you, that may be legitimate reasons for restrictions on visas.

 

There are two extreme views on how immigration should be; 1) heavily restrictions and limitations on immigrants and 2) 100% open borders with no vetting process in place. To be honest, neither one of those views are a viable solution. So countries try to find a middle ground. Of course there are certain countries that have better options to enter the US than others. In your second posting you stated that the program should be revisited to so that there is not so much bias towards allies. How else would a country determine who is a risk or not? A simple analogy is that you may invite your closest friends over to your home for dinner often. You may not do the same for people you don't have a common connection with like a stranger at a bus stop. But if you want to extend the invitation to that stranger at the bus stop, you certain would (or should) get to know them a little better first. (I like to use home or house analogies 😋)

 

The best source for your report is immigration itself. Have you tried reaching out to immigration personnel to share their experiences of dealing with certain policies? It may be a correspondence over email but at least you would get another perspective of things. I don't know how long you have been on VJ but I can tell you, that I have been on here for about 4-5 years and I have seen my share of people trying to scam the US immigration system. I have a better understanding of the vetting processes that occur. 'Tis true that there are countries that are plagued with fraud. Like @gsdc23 stated, Haiti has a high refusal rate. But Haiti is drastically suffering economically. The risk of a person using a visitor visa to come and stay/live in the US is higher a person from Finland which has one of the best economies in the world. My wife is from the Dominican Republic and I have visited there many times. The DR has an immigration situation with Haitian immigrants.They share the same island and is only separated by a mountain. But the DR's handling of Haitian immigrants is bad...

https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/trend-lines/24431/how-a-broken-migration-policy-has-divided-haiti-and-the-dominican-republic

So yes, US immigration policies are not perfect but they can be a heck of a lot worse.

 

Lastly, I want to say that visiting the US is a privilege, not a right. This goes for just about every country of the world. There are countries US citizens can't roam freely. Many people who have had a loved on denied a visitor visa often say, "not everyone wants to come and live in America". This is true, but the many suffer because of a few. To use another house analogy, you don't lock your doors because of the many people who don't want to break in your house, you lock them for the small few who do.