K1 Visa, ICE came to my house.

[fip & jim 452]

I get pretty mad when I see these posts when the USC has failed to protect their spouse. First off, they fail to ensure that there are adequate funds to adjust status. They do not educate their spouse about how to keep safe regarding having adequate ID and proof of status should a situation arise. They do not ensure their spouse knows how to respond to ICE. I can't imagine having to deal with that on top of everything else an immigrant has to deal with. The responsibility is on the USC to ensure that their spouse is safe. It's that simple. I know I'd be doing everything I could if the tables were turned. 

[geowrian 22,335]

I understand sudden unexpected financial issues do pop up. But at the same time, there really needs to be a fund set aside and dedicated to AOS related costs before the individual even arrives in the US, and plans for an sponsor in the worst of cases. This is just looking out for your loved ones. I'm in no way suggesting somebody who doesn't do this loves their SOs any less, but it is a dangerous lack of planning.

And obviously there are exceptions (i.e. sudden medical issue negating functional income, and no friends/family members able or willing to sponsor).

It's just that far too often people fully plan for AOS only after arriving in the US. The K-1 is only step 1...you gotta plan for steps 2, 3, and 4 alongside step 1.

/rant

 

Whether the passport was truly voluntarily surrendered or if it was coerced is not really relevant now. They have it. First step is to request it back. Only if they refuse to do so does it really make sense to raise the issue to the local consulate/embassy and immigrant support groups, or trying to compel them to do so due to coercion, IMO. Getting it back is the goal...stay focused on that.

Next would be addressing the need to check in monthly. My guess is also that they are on standby in case AOS is denied. There is nothing prohibiting them from requesting somebody show up. I am not confident they have a valid reason to compel compliance with that request, though. That's where I think professional assistance or at least an immigrant rights group can really assist with sooner rather than later. If they do not provide a valid reason for requiring the check in, they aren't likely to even try to pursue it when there is some form of legal backing behind you.

Edited July 11, 2019 by geowrian

[SalishSea 16,794]

50 minutes ago, geowrian said:

I understand sudden unexpected financial issues do pop up. But at the same time, there really needs to be a fund set dedicated to AOS related costs before the individual even arrives in the US, and plans for an sponsor in the worst of cases.

Agreed.  We used some of my savings for the AOS fees.  With AOS, the wedding, our rings, fares for my husband and stepdaughter from NZ, last Fall and winter were expensive.  But it all had to be done if we were to be together.

[SalishSea 16,794]

2 hours ago, Pitaya (火龙果) said:

Time to lawyer up, I wouldn't be surprised if an organization, such as, the ACLU would like to get involved in this kettle of fish.

Yes!  Even though OP was late in filing his wife's AOS, now that they have the NOA receipt for the I-485, that shouldn't matter.  ICE can't go about making up rules.  The passport seizure and monthly check-ins certainly sound like they are beyond the scope of standard ICE protocol.  

 

And with plenty of people who actually *are* out of status and dodging them, why would ICE use resources on someone who was late but has remedied that?

 

Either there is more to this story, it is a big misunderstanding, or ICE is flexing their muscles and making an example of someone.  

 

OP, I look forward to hearing what your lawyer has to say about the situation.  

[WaterLeaf 199]

5 hours ago, fip & jim said:

I get pretty mad when I see these posts when the USC has failed to protect their spouse. First off, they fail to ensure that there are adequate funds to adjust status. They do not educate their spouse about how to keep safe regarding having adequate ID and proof of status should a situation arise. They do not ensure their spouse knows how to respond to ICE. I can't imagine having to deal with that on top of everything else an immigrant has to deal with. The responsibility is on the USC to ensure that their spouse is safe. It's that simple. I know I'd be doing everything I could if the tables were turned. 

If you don't mind telling me some of these info on a new thread or PM me either way I'd very happy to investigate to learn more in short detail, I may have some covered but may not be aware of some either.

[Dashinka 23,268]

7 hours ago, Jorgedig said:

Yes!  Even though OP was late in filing his wife's AOS, now that they have the NOA receipt for the I-485, that shouldn't matter.  ICE can't go about making up rules.  The passport seizure and monthly check-ins certainly sound like they are beyond the scope of standard ICE protocol.  

 

And with plenty of people who actually *are* out of status and dodging them, why would ICE use resources on someone who was late but has remedied that?

 

Either there is more to this story, it is a big misunderstanding, or ICE is flexing their muscles and making an example of someone.  

 

OP, I look forward to hearing what your lawyer has to say about the situation.  

I completely agree.  Considering the wife was not detained by ICE, they must know the I485 is in progress (unlike the woman out-of-status who was detained during a traffic incident due to not filing the AOS).  The entire checking in thing and asking for the passport is very interesting.

 

[Crazy Cat 39,317]

7 hours ago, Jorgedig said:

Either there is more to this story, it is a big misunderstanding.........

Agree.  There are too many people with existing removal orders who are higher on their priority list, imo.  This case just doesn't make complete sense to me.

[Cheschirecat 176]

20 hours ago, Alhaji said:

@missileman def keep you guys updated, thanks for the advice

My thinking is someone reported her. People can be so terrible 

[junkmart 320]

On 7/10/2019 at 7:32 AM, Bill & Katya said:

This is similar to LPRs that are requested to surrender their GCs at a POE.

This piqued my interests. I'd love to read more about this so as to be prepared if that happens to my husband. Any additional information about when and under what circumstances this can happen would be much appreciated.

[Going through 5,668]

1 hour ago, junkmart said:

This piqued my interests. I'd love to read more about this so as to be prepared if that happens to my husband. Any additional information about when and under what circumstances this can happen would be much appreciated.

The instances I've heard/read about were when an LPR is returning to the US and has had frequent stays abroad (and doing only "touchdown visits" to the US) and the CBP officer determines that the LPR is misusing their greencard, and requests the person turn their GC over to them right then and there.  Only an immigration judge can determine whether LPR status should be revoked (after due process, and a hearing in court with you present to plead your case).  The CBP officer can refer to the proper department that you appear in immigration court, resulting in the person getting a Notice To Appear in immigration court, but they are not the deciding person about whether your status is revoked or not.

 

 

[junkmart 320]

2 minutes ago, Going through said:

The instances I've heard/read about were when an LPR is returning to the US and has had frequent stays abroad (and doing only "touchdown visits" to the US) and the CBP officer determines that the LPR is misusing their greencard, and requests the person turn their GC over to them right then and there.  Only an immigration judge can determine whether LPR status should be revoked (after due process, and a hearing in court with you present to plead your case).  The CBP officer can refer to the proper department that you appear in immigration court, resulting in the person getting a Notice To Appear in immigration court, but they are not the deciding person about whether your status is revoked or not.

 

 

Thank you. So in the scenario above, does CBP at POE have the authority to demand one hand over their GC, or should one refuse until told to do so my an immigration judge?

[Going through 5,668]

8 minutes ago, junkmart said:

Thank you. So in the scenario above, does CBP at POE have the authority to demand one hand over their GC, or should one refuse until told to do so my an immigration judge?

Do they have the authority to confiscate the green card?  Yes. 

Do they have the authority to take away your status?  No.

 

The LPR would either leave voluntarily, be paroled into the US pending a hearing with an immigration judge for a hearing, or detained until a hearing in front of an immigration judge.

 

If CBP demands that you sign the i-407 form at port of entry, you should refuse to and request differed inspection or a hearing instead.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Going through

[Dashinka 23,268]

1 hour ago, junkmart said:

This piqued my interests. I'd love to read more about this so as to be prepared if that happens to my husband. Any additional information about when and under what circumstances this can happen would be much appreciated.

The point is this should not happen, or better yet, it only happens to those that do not know their rights.  CBP can certainly ask an LPR to give them the GC, and I suppose many folks may be intimidated enough to give it up, but only an Immigration Judge (IJ) can actually take away LPR status after a proper hearing.  So if your husband is stopped by CBP at a POE or some other checkpoint and asked to give up his GC or sign a form giving up his LPR status, tell him to not give it up or do it and demand an IJ hearing.  It is not exactly the same thing as the OP's wife giving ICE her passport, but it is similar as ICE does not have to the power to confiscate a foreign passport, they can ask for it and possibly coerce someone into giving it to them voluntarily though. 

Edited July 11, 2019 by Bill & Katya

[Going through 5,668]

That's exactly it...too many LPRs do not understand their full rights in a situation like that.

 

A "request" by CBP or ICE can be deemed as an "order" followed under duress by someone who feels intimidated, or when the "request" is worded in such a manner/tone that the person believes they have no choice but to comply.

[junkmart 320]

8 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

The point is this should not happen, or better yet, it only happens to those that do not know their rights.  CBP can certainly ask an LPR to give them the GC, and I suppose many folks may be intimidated enough to give it up, but only an Immigration Judge (IJ) can actually take away LPR status after a proper hearing.  So if your husband is stopped by CBP at a POE or some other checkpoint and asked to give up his GC or sign a form giving up his LPR status, tell him to not give it up or do it and demand an IJ hearing.  It is not exactly the same thing as the OP's wife giving ICE her passport, but it is similar as ICE does not have to the power to confiscate a foreign passport, they can ask for it and possibly coerce someone into giving it to them voluntarily though. 

Thank you. I realize I sort of hijacked OPs thread, but greatly appreciate the information.