is marriage on courtly.com same as a utah online wedding

[Mike E 11,727]

That’s an awful experience. Given CBP disagrees with the the law, USCIS policy manual, and State FAM, I wonder how you will be able to use your IR-1 visa now that CBP has you flagged. But once you find a way in, CBP won’t be able to legally prevent you from entering the U.S., though it can issue an NTA. And you will win in court. The decision from the judge will be your security blanket on subsequent returns to the U.S. 

 

Get global entry after you become an LPR.  

[JustJimothy 2]

3 hours ago, Mike E said:

That’s an awful experience. Given CBP disagrees with the the law, USCIS policy manual, and State FAM, I wonder how you will be able to use your IR-1 visa now that CBP has you flagged. But once you find a way in, CBP won’t be able to legally prevent you from entering the U.S., though it can issue an NTA. And you will win in court. The decision from the judge will be your security blanket on subsequent returns to the U.S. 

 

Get global entry after you become an LPR.  

We have travelled there a few times since under the B1/B2 after I got it and had no issues. The embassy were as perplexed as we were and the lady interviewing just said wrong guy on the wrong day! Perfect time to exercise self control and not unload about it 😂

 

 

[Mike E 11,727]

4 hours ago, JustJimothy said:

We have travelled there a few times since under the B1/B2 after I got it and had no issues

Before Covid ban or after?

[JustJimothy 2]

9 hours ago, Mike E said:

Before Covid ban or after?

It was after, my visa was approved in time for Thanksgiving! 

[bck86 19]

22 hours ago, JustJimothy said:

Sure, I can elaborate.

 

We used Webwed to officiate, a zoom wedding basically. My wife and I were in the same physical location in Ireland with our folks on the call with the officiant in Utah.

Everything went great! We got our marriage certificate, with the seal and stuff.

 

At the time the proclamation to travel to the US was in place because of the pandemic meaning only citizens and/or their spouse could enter.

I was entering using my ESTA/VWP with no intent to immigrate just to visit family.

 

When going through pre-clearance in Dublin I was called into the back room to wait while they scrutinized us.

After a while he called me to the counter to ask about the wedding.

 

He said something along the lines of not everyone was physically present at the wedding and we proclaimed that we were.

He retorted by saying the officiant wasn't so not everyone.

 

He denied me entry saying I'm legally married in Utah but it doesn't work for immigration/CBP and quoted an immigration act partially:

 

(35) The term "spouse", "wife", or "husband" do not include a spouse, wife, or husband by reason of any marriage ceremony where the contracting parties thereto are not physically present in the presence of each other

 

Anyone familiar with it might notice the bit that's missing from that. Here it is in full:

 

(35) The term "spouse", "wife", or "husband" do not include a spouse, wife, or husband by reason of any marriage ceremony where the contracting parties thereto are not physically present in the presence of each other, unless the marriage shall have been consummated.

 

He never mentioned it nor asked about consummation, how we'd prove it would be another story but he picked and chose what parts to use.

 

CBP are human and make mistakes like the rest of us, that day we got a dude who made a mistake and revoked my ESTA and my ability to use the VWP. 

To fix it we had to make an appointment to apply for a B1/B2 visa to even visit family. It took us 2 years to iron out.

 

 

Thank you for the details! I asked because I recently got married in Utah via remote appearance, my husband and I were physically together during the ceremony. I'm glad you got it ironed it, though it sounds like an awful experience. I hope CBP has seen enough of these now that they better understand the rules!

[Mike E 11,727]

4 hours ago, JustJimothy said:

It was after, my visa was approved in time for Thanksgiving! 

And I don’t see why there should be issues since B visa holders can come to USA without being married to U.S. citizens.  It’s after you get your IR-1 that I see the possibility for an issue from CBP.  
 

 CBP has previously made an (erroneous) ruling that your marriage isn’t valid and therefore the basis for your IR-1 is not valid (to CBP). 

[Chancy 6,233]

2 minutes ago, bck86 said:

I hope CBP has seen enough of these now that they better understand the rules!

 

That poster was denied entry in the middle of the pandemic, when there was a rule in place prohibiting entry of tourists who are not immediate relatives of USC/LPR.  There are no such restrictions for tourists anymore.  It is not standard procedure anymore for CBP to ask to see a traveler's marriage certificate to check that they are related to a USC/LPR.

 

[JustJimothy 2]

12 minutes ago, Mike E said:

And I don’t see why there should be issues since B visa holders can come to USA without being married to U.S. citizens.  It’s after you get your IR-1 that I see the possibility for an issue from CBP.  
 

 CBP has previously made an (erroneous) ruling that your marriage isn’t valid and therefore the basis for your IR-1 is not valid (to CBP). 

We filed it this morning so we're going to find out! I'd like to think there were some conversations had after our event. We kicked up quite a fuss and hopefully it was a chance for them to educate themselves a bit more on zoom weddings and it's legality for immigration. 

 

If not, it's lawyer up time but I don't even want to think about it 🤮

[JustJimothy 2]

6 minutes ago, Chancy said:

 

That poster was denied entry in the middle of the pandemic, when there was a rule in place prohibiting entry of tourists who are not immediate relatives of USC/LPR.  There are no such restrictions for tourists anymore.  It is not standard procedure anymore for CBP to ask to see a traveler's marriage certificate to check that they are related to a USC/LPR.

 

In fairness yes, the pandemic was the reason to check it but as Mike said, entering with an intent to immigrate I'd imagine theyre gonna have the same question this time.

[Mike E 11,727]

1 minute ago, JustJimothy said:

If not, it's lawyer up time but I don't even want to think about it

Thus is one case ever I would advise port shopping. I would not go  through Dublin or any preclearance airport. I’d fly to the USA with my U.S. citizen spouse  for a morning arrival and have a lawyer at the ready for your spouse to call. 

[JustJimothy 2]

1 hour ago, Mike E said:

Thus is one case ever I would advise port shopping. I would not go  through Dublin or any preclearance airport. I’d fly to the USA with my U.S. citizen spouse  for a morning arrival and have a lawyer at the ready for your spouse to call. 

Great points Mike, that's exactly what we'll do.

[bck86 19]

19 hours ago, Chancy said:

 

That poster was denied entry in the middle of the pandemic, when there was a rule in place prohibiting entry of tourists who are not immediate relatives of USC/LPR.  There are no such restrictions for tourists anymore.  It is not standard procedure anymore for CBP to ask to see a traveler's marriage certificate to check that they are related to a USC/LPR.

 

Thanks for the clarification!