Do you go to jail if you can't afford I-864 support payments?

[Villanelle 4,121]

They don't care if you have the money or not.

 

Blood from a stone? Eh, its more like when a well runs dry. The faucet will remain open and any little drop that manages to accumulate they will get. They don't care if you are thirsty as well. Your obligation is to provide x amount as support, it comes first and if that means none left for you oh well. 

[Mike E 11,725]

Any skeptics should read https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201914668.pdf

 

The beneficiary abused  the petitioner’s child and possessed child pornography.  The joint sponsors terminated financial support. The beneficiary sued the joint sponsors. District court sided with the beneficiary. On appeal the district court was upheld.  

Edited August 1, 2022 by Mike E

[JeanneAdil 6,234]

US federal law abolished debtor prison in 1883

 

however your wages can be garnished for non payment of court ordered support or alimony 

in most states if ordered and not paid ,  this is handled by family court 

 

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/30-cppa

[Mike E 11,725]

4 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

US federal law abolished debtor prison in 1883

 

however your wages can be garnished for non payment of court ordered support or alimony 

in most states if ordered and not paid ,  this is handled by family court 

 

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/fact-sheets/30-cppa

It is not handled by family court. Family court and family has nothing to do with this. It’s a federal statute for people who sign I-864: a contract between a sponsor and the federal government that Congress allows beneficiaries to enforce.  

[JeanneAdil 6,234]

26 minutes ago, Mike E said:

It is not handled by family court. Family court and family has nothing to do with this. It’s a federal statute for people who sign I-864: a contract between a sponsor and the federal government that Congress allows beneficiaries to enforce.  

saying if a us court doing divorce awards alimony and /or child support and the husband doesn't pay,  the person has to go to family court to be awarded a garnishment

seen it done this way too many times 

[Mike E 11,725]

6 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

saying if a us court doing divorce awards alimony and /or child support and the husband doesn't pay,  the person has to go to family court to be awarded a garnishment

seen it done this way too many times 

For an I-864 case?

 

VALENTIN BELEVICH,
versus
KLAVDIA THOMAS & TATIANA KUZNITSNYNA was litigated in federal court. 

[ConcernedMoose 0]

8 hours ago, Villanelle said:

They don't care if you have the money or not.

 

Blood from a stone? Eh, its more like when a well runs dry. The faucet will remain open and any little drop that manages to accumulate they will get. They don't care if you are thirsty as well. Your obligation is to provide x amount as support, it comes first and if that means none left for you oh well. 

Isn't there a legal limit to garnishment though? I thought it was like 60% or something like that, or does it not apply to this?

[Villanelle 4,121]

9 hours ago, ConcernedMoose said:

Isn't there a legal limit to garnishment though? I thought it was like 60% or something like that, or does it not apply to this?

Doesn't apply. The FDCA fair debt collection act says no more than 25% aggregate disposable earnings.  Alimony-child support is 50 - 60 %. The 864 is technically neither. So its in a grey area, the wild west of no rules technically apply.  Most of the guidance for it is based on the precedents set as cases are ruled upon. And if that's not bad enough , the district courts that handle these cases at the federal level don't always agree. So where its filed can matter.  

 

One can find additional info online at 864.net or sound immigration has a few articles summarizing highlights. Its a rabbit hole you may regret going down. 

 

The 864 can be handled by the family court during divorce proceedings or if not handled by the federal court. Some family courts will not get involved with it as they don't really understand it. Which is why it's recommended to try to slip it into the divorce at family court. Theoretically will prevent the federal court from taking the case as it was ruled on already. 

 

Is that a sneaky underhanded way of dealing with it? Eh, IDK. I believe its best to have a fair divorce in which each side is left with enough footing to be able to move forward alone. If this means the primary earner has a few years of things being tight then so be it. Its only temporary. The 864 can be permanent. 

 

And man some of the court cases at the federal level are outrageous. Some districts don't require the immigrant to even seek work or make an attempt to get themselves above guidelines. Lots of people attempting to hide assets in order to keep collecting. Having a friend or family member provide support in a roundabout way so they can still collect from the sponsor.  Is that fair? Greed is a powerful emotion.  

 

[Family 3,542]

18 hours ago, Mike E said:

Any skeptics should read https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/201914668.pdf

 

The beneficiary abused  the petitioner’s child and possessed child pornography.  The joint sponsors terminated financial support. The beneficiary sued the joint sponsors. District court sided with the beneficiary. On appeal the district court was upheld.  

Yet another “ stunningly wrong” moment where “I am stunned”. Just read this 2021 case and wonder HOW/. WHY  were  legal fees funded for that scumbag pedophile to litigate this ! 
 

The court itself apologized to the Sponsor and Joint Sponsor ( whose child was molested) and pointed only Deportation will terminate I-864 obligation in their circumstances.

 

I was a skeptic, am now a believer. Thanks @Mike E

 

 

 

 

[Villanelle 4,121]

7 hours ago, Family said:

 Just read this 2021 case and wonder HOW/. WHY  were  legal fees funded for that scumbag pedophile to litigate this ! 
 

US code 8 12 1183a

States legal fees for enforcement are sponsors responsibility. So the court has no choice. 

 

Any outrage about the above case (and there should be plenty!) should be directed at Congress. The court can only rule according to the laws and policy Congress dictates. Its not the courts fault Congress has allowed the policies to remain as written where a convicted pedophile can use the courts to cause more harm to the victim and their family.

 

WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN. DEMAND CHANGE. 

[Family 3,542]

16 minutes ago, Villanelle said:

US code 8 12 1183a

States legal fees for enforcement are sponsors responsibility. So the court has no choice. 

 

Any outrage about the above case (and there should be plenty!) should be directed at Congress. The court can only rule according to the laws and policy Congress dictates. Its not the courts fault Congress has allowed the policies to remain as written where a convicted pedophile can use the courts to cause more harm to the victim and their family.

 

WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN. DEMAND CHANGE

You @Villanelle PLEASE be my voice ! I will sign on and strong arm at least a few more with me. 
 

[Ontarkie 13,941]

On 8/1/2022 at 3:39 PM, Villanelle said:

They don't care if you have the money or not.

 

Blood from a stone? Eh, its more like when a well runs dry. The faucet will remain open and any little drop that manages to accumulate they will get. They don't care if you are thirsty as well. Your obligation is to provide x amount as support, it comes first and if that means none left for you oh well. 

I was talking more of Family courts. But agree Federal is totally different.