Petition to include K1 filers as exemption from travel bans

[JBF 116]

7 minutes ago, SteveInBostonI130 said:

DS-160 is simply used in case of non-immigrant visas.  DS-160 cannot be used for Spouse, Child or Sibling, so already that screenshot is wrong for DS-160.

Have you ever filled up the DS-160? If yes, you would know that the screenshot is correct and from the official form. Please, inform yourself before talking and spreading confusion. And yes, the DS-160 is used for nonimmigrant visas, but it does list fiancés as immediate relatives. But anyway, this thread hasn’t been created to ask opinions about the legal status of fiancés, simply to give the opportunity to sign the petition for those who want to. 

[SteveInBostonI130 3,319]

Just now, JBF said:

Have you ever filled up the DS-160? If yes, you would know that the screenshot is correct and from the official form. Please, inform yourself before talking and spreading confusion. And yes, the DS-160 is used for nonimmigrant visas, but it does list fiancés as immediate relatives. But anyway, this thread hasn’t been created to ask opinions about the legal status of fiancés, simply to give the opportunity to sign the petition for those who want to. 

Yes I have filled out a DS-160. 

 

And I have also filled out a DS-260.  

 

You pointed out that DS-260 is for immigration only and has no bearing on immediate family status.  I pointed out that DS-160, in correlation, is for non-immigration and has no bearing on immediate family status.

 

The response has been pointed out that the petition states K1 as immediate family.  But fiances are not immediate family.  It is as confusing as the EO, because it lumps fiances into the wrong category (whereas the EO did not address fiances specifically)

 

[Crazy Cat 39,257]

10 minutes ago, JBF said:

Please, inform yourself before talking and spreading confusion

It is against the terms of service here to tell others not to post.  Everyone is free to post within the terms of service as everyone is free to ignore said posts....good luck on your journey...😀

Edited June 20, 2020 by Lucky Cat

[JBF 116]

2 minutes ago, Lucky Cat said:

It is against the terms of service here to tell others not to post.  Everyone is free to post within the terms of service as everyone is free to ignore said posts....good luck on your journey...😀

I didn’t say not to post, I said not to spread confusion with an information that is not true, as he told me the screenshot was not correct. I’ve never said not to post, as you can see. 

Edited June 20, 2020 by JBF

[geowrian 22,335]

There are a few issues with the petition...

 

Quote

Consulates in the EU and other countries are advising K1 Visa applicants that they can not process pending visas because they are subject to Proclamation 9984.

To me this is a mistake. Some consulates have said they can and will process cases. Some have said otherwise. This lack of clarity is something that they will need to resolve once they do actually resume normal visa processing. Until then, it's just some low level staff running around like chickens with their head cut off.

 

From a legal standpoint, nobody has been actually harmed by this yet. I've listened to legal arguments before a judge about the EOs and the fact that nobody has been harmed to date meant the entire case was thrown out due to lack of standing.

 

Petitions that address immigration issues that are not actually issues yet have not fared well. It's jumping the gun.

 

Quote

This proclamation lists immediate family members of US Citizens and LPR's as exempt from this travel ban, but does not address K1 visas.

Incorrect. It lists certain relatives of a USC or LPR as exempt.

Notably, parents of a USC are not exempt (unless they have an <21yo unmarried child USC/LPR relative).

 

Legally - and in the INA specifically - there is heavy weight put on the relationship with a parent and child (regardless of age), but very very little even mentioning a fiance/fiancee (pretty much entirely in conjunction with a K visa application).

 

Quote

This petition advocates that Fiances ARE IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS

I don't think you realize the consequences of what you are advocating for.

First, this would require an amendment to the INA...so Congress + the POTUS would need to support it.

Second, there are all kinds of benefits that IRs qualify for that I'm not sure you intended that a fiance/fiancee should also qualify for. This is a huge can of worms as worded.

 

I think you mean to include fiance/fiancees as being exempt from this proclamation. That could easily be done by the POTUS (if he desired) via an amendment to the EO, and does not come with any of the other side effects of listing a fiance/fiancee as an IR.

 

Quote

When completing the DS160 immigration form, K1 applicants are directed to list the American Fiance in response to the question "Do you have any immediate relatives, not including parents in the U.S.?"

This question is just for information so that the CO can determine one's ties to return to the US or not. It is not a legal definition. It does not confer any benefits.

This is not a basis for anything.

Quote

This demonstrates that the US government recognizes fiances with an approved petition as an IMMEDIATE FAMILY member.

Where does it say anything about an approved petition in that question? This is not a requirement.

 

Quote

Amend Proclamation 9984 to include K1 Fiances in exclusions.

That part I'm fine with...that's what the petition is really about. But that clashes with prior parts of the petition, and the basis for having it.

[MelissaHussain 52]

25 minutes ago, SteveInBostonI130 said:

DS-160 is simply used in case of non-immigrant visas.  DS-160 cannot be used for Spouse, Child or Sibling, so already that screenshot is wrong for DS-160.

Wrong. Until recently it was also used for k2 which is spouse. Why are you so against us trying to get our k1s? I thought this site was to support each other through a very difficult process. 

[Crazy Cat 39,257]

1 minute ago, MelissaHussain said:

Until recently it was also used for k2 which is spouse.

Do you mean K3?  

Edited June 20, 2020 by Lucky Cat

[SteveInBostonI130 3,319]

4 minutes ago, MelissaHussain said:

Wrong. Until recently it was also used for k2 which is spouse. Why are you so against us trying to get our k1s? I thought this site was to support each other through a very difficult process. 

I am not against K1.  I am very much for it.

 

But the petition, as it is worded, is asking the US government to re-categorize fiances as immediate family, which I am against.  Therefore, I cannot support the petition.  I would have supported it if it just requested the Fiances (K1) to ALSO be exempt from the travel ban.

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by SteveInBostonI130

[Just Paul 4,591]

2 hours ago, MelissaHussain said:

Fiances ARE LEGALLY RECOGNIZED

Fiances are not recognized in US Federal Law  . . . only statuses are Single, Married, Divorced and Window. No benefit is conveyed as a Fiance.  Unfortunately a poorly constructed webpage does not change federal law. 

[JBF 116]

2 minutes ago, SteveInBostonI130 said:

I am not against K1.  I am very much for it.

 

But the petition, as it is worded, is asking the US government to re-categorize fiances as immediate family, which I am against.  Therefore, I cannot support the petition.  I would have supported it if it just requested the Fiances (K1) to ALSO be exempt from the travel ban.

 

No one is asking to categorize fiancés as immediate family from my point of view, we’re simply trying, in a way or another, to point out the fact that in certain circumstances they are considered that way (such as in the DS-160) and could be included in the exemptions, exactly as certain family members are. We may not be married yet, but we’re simply waiting to be reunited with our loved one as married couples are. 

[MelissaHussain 52]

Where does it ask to change federal law about marital status? People are blowing this way out of proportion. The petition argues that k1s have not been properly addressed by the travel bans and should be exempt. The ds160 identifies fiances as immediate family in the same tell as siblings and spouses and that is a fact.

[Crazy Cat 39,257]

The petition directly states "This demonstrates that the US government recognizes fiances with an approved petition as an IMMEDIATE FAMILY member. "............Simply put, that is just not true.

Edited June 20, 2020 by Lucky Cat

[SteveInBostonI130 3,319]

1 minute ago, JBF said:

No one is asking to categorize fiancés as immediate family from my point of view, we’re simply trying, in a way or another, to point out the fact that in certain circumstances they are considered that way (such as in the DS-160) and could be included in the exemptions, exactly as certain family members are. We may not be married yet, but we’re simply waiting to be reunited with our loved one as married couples are. 

Unfortunately, that is not what the petition states:

 

Consulates in the EU and other countries are advising K1 Visa applicants that they can not process pending visas because they are subject to Proclamation 9984. This proclamation lists immediate family members of US Citizens and LPR's as exempt from this travel ban, but does not address K1 visas. This petition advocates that Fiances ARE IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBERS and therefore should be added to the list of exemptions. When completing the DS160 immigration form, K1 applicants are directed to list the American Fiance in response to the question "Do you have any immediate relatives, not including parents in the U.S.?" This demonstrates that the US government recognizes fiances with an approved petition as an IMMEDIATE FAMILY member. Amend Proclamation 9984 to include K1 Fiances in exclusions.

 

The petition would have had my support, and probably support from many others, if all references to categorize fiances as immediate family are not there.  Just simply request that K1 visa holders to also be exempt from the travel ban. 

 

[MelissaHussain 52]

18 minutes ago, MelissaHussain said:

Wrong. Until recently it was also used for k2 which is spouse. Why are you so against us trying to get our k1s? I thought this site was to support each other through a very difficult process. 

I'm mean k3 is spouse.

 

[JBF 116]

6 minutes ago, SteveInBostonI130 said:

Unfortunately, that is not what the petition states:

 

 

 

 

The petition would have had my support, and probably support from many others, if all references to categorize fiances as immediate family are not there.  Just simply request that K1 visa holders to also be exempt from the travel ban. 

 

That’s exactly what the petition that they have created is asking for. And it is advocating that they should be considered as immediate family members, as that’s what some official forms state, and the DS-160 is a clear example. No one is saying that they have to be categorized that way, but that they could be considered that way, and be exempt as well.

Edited June 20, 2020 by JBF