Sent here from Reddit. This is my post from r/legaladvice

[designguy 1,179]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

When we had our consultation with the immigration attorney he acted like it was a non issue. Now I’m terrified about all this. 

It sounds like you were talking to a pretty incompetent lawyer  

[Fluxed88 1]

Immigration attorney in downtown Chicago with reputable reviews and has been used by family members. Not disagreeing, just stating. 

[designguy 1,179]

Also here is the I-1485

 

See your wife would be able to check the first box as she is the immediate relative of you, a USC. You will have to check a box for the boy's application. What would be their filing category? I don't see that they have a case...

[Dashinka 23,245]

6 minutes ago, designguy said:

It sounds like you were talking to a pretty incompetent lawyer  

Not really sure why that quote had my name on it as I did not state it.  That being said, doing some research, it appears that stepchildren may be able to adjust status with the mother.  It appears that they do qualify as an immediate relative of the USC after the marriage.

 

https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/does-a-stepchild-qualify-for-adjustment-of-status--1887164.html

Edited August 27, 2019 by Bill & Katya

[designguy 1,179]

3 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Not really sure why that quote had my name on it as I did not state it.  That being said, doing some research, it appears that stepchildren may be able to adjust status with the mother.  It appears that they do qualify as an immediate relative of the USC after the marriage.

 

Not sure why it did that. Thats interesting I think the OP should still retain counsel

[Fluxed88 1]

5 minutes ago, designguy said:

Not sure why it did that. Thats interesting I think the OP should still retain counsel

So you all think we should 100% not let the boys start school next week? 

[designguy 1,179]

Just now, Fluxed88 said:

So you all think we should 100% not let the boys start school next week? 

Absolutely they should NOT attend until they have legal authorization to do so. It would probably sink your case right there. 

[belinda63 2,981]

The school cannot legally refuse to admit the children. But you should be paying for them to attend school not the taxpayers. The proper way would be for them to have a student visa and pay the calculated rate for them to attend school. 

[Fluxed88 1]

11 minutes ago, designguy said:

Absolutely they should NOT attend until they have legal authorization to do so. It would probably sink your case right there. 

Thanks for the information. You have us really thinking now. 

[Zoeeeeeee 795]

Correct me if I’m wrong, but your wife visited on a tourist visa (so for a holiday) and brought her divorce papers/permission from ex to emigrate/documents to enrol her kids into school? That doesn’t sound like she came to visit and then changed her mind...that sounds like she planned to stay all along (and ergo lied at the POE).

 

I’m not saying that is the case by the way...but if I was the officer reviewing it, that’s definitely what I’d be thinking...and more experienced members please correct me if I’m wrong...have there not been cases where they are reviewing what happened at POE where they’re assessing AOS?  Ie, this could impact whether AOS is granted?

[designguy 1,179]

4 minutes ago, Zoeeeeeee said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but your wife visited on a tourist visa (so for a holiday) and brought her divorce papers/permission from ex to emigrate/documents to enrol her kids into school? That doesn’t sound like she came to visit and then changed her mind...that sounds like she planned to stay all along (and ergo lied at the POE).

 

I’m not saying that is the case by the way...but if I was the officer reviewing it, that’s definitely what I’d be thinking...and more experienced members please correct me if I’m wrong...have there not been cases where they are reviewing what happened at POE where they’re assessing AOS?  Ie, this could impact whether AOS is granted?

I would agree with you. Objectively speaking its really hard to imagine someone coming to visit with their two kids and then changing their minds to stay. You might fall in love with a place and want to move there. But most people would need to go home to take care of things. For example where were they living? Did they sell/give up the lease prior to coming to visit? Did the children bring all their belongings with them? Also would be emotionally tough for this kids that ll of a sudden we won't be going home. OP remember that the children are also going to have to be interviewed and answer truthfully. If the officers asks if their mom talked about moving to the united states what kind of an answer would they give?

 

Always think about the long term goal rather than the short term satisfaction

Edited August 27, 2019 by designguy

[Fluxed88 1]

3 minutes ago, Zoeeeeeee said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but your wife visited on a tourist visa (so for a holiday) and brought her divorce papers/permission from ex to emigrate/documents to enrol her kids into school? That doesn’t sound like she came to visit and then changed her mind...that sounds like she planned to stay all along (and ergo lied at the POE).

 

I’m not saying that is the case by the way...but if I was the officer reviewing it, that’s definitely what I’d be thinking...and more experienced members please correct me if I’m wrong...have there not been cases where they are reviewing what happened at POE where they’re assessing AOS?  Ie, this could impact whether AOS is granted?

Fair questions. She brought all travel info with her and her divorce papers, court documents , etc. we had talked about marriage. 

[Zoeeeeeee 795]

6 minutes ago, Fluxed88 said:

Fair questions. She brought all travel info with her and her divorce papers, court documents , etc. we had talked about marriage. 

Ok...so it sounds like she committed visa fraud when she entered then. Not a great start. And if a sleepy communications exec, reading whilst taking a coffee break, can figure that out (that’s me by the way), a trained officer...whose job it is to spot these things...will do too...

 

I’d definitely recommend her going home and you guys starting the CR1 application - yes, it means a year apart, but you can visit each other - and much better to have time apart initially but AOS granted overall...short term pain, long term gain.

Edited August 27, 2019 by Zoeeeeeee

[Fluxed88 1]

4 minutes ago, Zoeeeeeee said:

Ok...so it sounds like she committed visa fraud when she entered then. Not a great start. And if a sleepy communications exec, reading whilst taking a coffee break, can figure that out (that’s me by the way), a trained officer...who’s job it is to spot these things...will do too...

 

I’d definitely recommend her going home and you guys starting the CR1 application - yes, it means a year apart, but you can visit each other - and much better to have time apart initially but AOS granted overall...short term pain, long term gain.

Correction. I thought she brought them with her, but she had her other family members bring them when they came for the wedding. She only brought her passports initially. 

[USS_Voyager 1,971]

44 minutes ago, Fluxed88 said:

Immigration attorney in downtown Chicago with reputable reviews and has been used by family members. Not disagreeing, just stating. 

Oh no, not Messersmith, is it?