JohnR!

It is not. Her path is hers and as yours is yours; one not affecting the other. I fail to see how one can derive solace in the setback of others, but it has been a while since I have been out of elementary school.

Because it is a privilege. I find it interesting that in a forum like this there are so much animosity towards other immigrants, whereas one might be forgiven for thinking this would be a place where people would support others going through the same process.
I believe the British call it 'pull up the ladder Jack'.

Oy vey....
You can assume a lot when you don't know the full story. Speculation can be so titillating...

There is no quarantine in the continental US, except for pets arriving in Hawaii.

You can work from home here provided your continue to work under your Dutch contract and being paid in the Netherlands as you are today, because for all purposes and intent you are not employed in the US. What you can't do without the EAD is accept employment in the US, with a contract in the US. In fact, even once your get your greencard you can continue with the same arrangement, if it suits you. Just make sure to include your foreign earnings in your tax return next year.
Good luck!

USCIS has a database of tattoos that are associated with gangs from all over the world. If his tattoo falls into some of these categories he may need to remove it. The USCIS has discretion over the matter, and you can fight it if you want, but I think the lawyer is taking your money, and filing appeals that won't help much.

Hansen, in the eyes of the USCIS it may seem that you entered the US with the intention of staying and adjusting your status here, which is considered immigration fraud.

This is a very delicate and personal situation, so please forgive me for intruding, but I wanted to interject the male point of view in the mix....
If you are planning on having a family it would do you a lot of good letting him know in advance. In the event you get pregnant again you may - or not - need special care or even undergo treatment before getting pregnant. If will be hard on you to do it alone, and may end up putting a strain on your relationship. It will be much easier to do it with the help and support of your husband.
From a man's perspective, he will most likely want to take care of you and protect you and most of all, participate in your life, so consider not shutting him off from this very important step. Let him be a part of your life and share all the pleasant and unpleasant stuff as well.
If this piece of information is something that might make him change his mind, you are better off not marrying him, for he is not ready to make a commitment as serious as the one marriage requires.
Good luck!!

The story, as reported by the DM, not surprisingly, doesn't hold much water. The marriage would not have rendered her visa invalid. Her visa was in the name of the bearer of the passport, which is her maiden name. No CBP officer would deny entry based on that alone. They had been married for 3 days only and it would be unrealistic to expect she could have changed her name, obtained a new passport and a new visa in such short notice. There is also the case of many who get married in Mexico and have no trouble entering the US so long as the visa and the passport match.
In all likelihood they told the CBP officer they were married and that she was entering the US to stay. As it should have been, the CBP denied entry. It is not much of a story, which is probably why the DM decided to take some literary license with reality and concoct something more tragic, yellow and therefore appealing to its readership.
What really sucks is that they didn't have to leave the US in order to get married. It sucks, but in this case, there isn't much recourse other than the sympathy of many of us.

However hard it may sound, let go and move on with your life. It seems you've wasted 14 years with this person and there is always the possibility he has been less than honest with you during this time. Take charge of your life, sever communications and be happy with someone who will love you unconditionally.

We waited the best part of a year for her process to be completed. As much as we wanted to be together we both agreed that if we could not survive this part of our journey, then we had no business being together in the first place.

Not only I do not agree with you on this one, as I believe the K-1 process should be longer, more demanding and require far more scrutiny. You need not look much farther than this forum to find out countless reports of those who were scammed by foreign fiances/fiancees.
The question I ask you in return is, how can you not envisage spending a few months away from the very person with whom you will swear to spend the rest of your life?

Dana, besides the 1-year ban the consulate will require that she be tested every three months to confirm she is not using, still. She must have been given the details so make sure you go over them with her. There is more to it than just waiting a year and reapplying. She will need to prove she remains clean for a year, as well.
A lawyer will not help because her case is textbook and there are no appeals against a positive drug test, even for marijuana.

The story, as reported by the DM, not surprisingly, doesn't hold much water. The marriage would not have rendered her visa invalid. Her visa was in the name of the bearer of the passport, which is her maiden name. No CBP officer would deny entry based on that alone. They had been married for 3 days only and it would be unrealistic to expect she could have changed her name, obtained a new passport and a new visa in such short notice. There is also the case of many who get married in Mexico and have no trouble entering the US so long as the visa and the passport match.
In all likelihood they told the CBP officer they were married and that she was entering the US to stay. As it should have been, the CBP denied entry. It is not much of a story, which is probably why the DM decided to take some literary license with reality and concoct something more tragic, yellow and therefore appealing to its readership.
What really sucks is that they didn't have to leave the US in order to get married. It sucks, but in this case, there isn't much recourse other than the sympathy of many of us.

The story, as reported by the DM, not surprisingly, doesn't hold much water. The marriage would not have rendered her visa invalid. Her visa was in the name of the bearer of the passport, which is her maiden name. No CBP officer would deny entry based on that alone. They had been married for 3 days only and it would be unrealistic to expect she could have changed her name, obtained a new passport and a new visa in such short notice. There is also the case of many who get married in Mexico and have no trouble entering the US so long as the visa and the passport match.
In all likelihood they told the CBP officer they were married and that she was entering the US to stay. As it should have been, the CBP denied entry. It is not much of a story, which is probably why the DM decided to take some literary license with reality and concoct something more tragic, yellow and therefore appealing to its readership.
What really sucks is that they didn't have to leave the US in order to get married. It sucks, but in this case, there isn't much recourse other than the sympathy of many of us.

hubba hubba

maybe you have trump confused with joe the plumber. trump is a caviar and pinky-up champagne darling.

well to be fair, most liberals live and breathe satire.

huge eye roll.
although i know conservatives have real difficulty with satire, light or dark. there, there.

We are talking about people killing people in the name of Jesus, or in the name of religion. History disagrees with, and disproves your previous statement.

That is the concept of empathy, which is lost on those with social apathy tendencies...

Not really. This thread is about American Muslims raising money for the families of the victims in San Bernardino.
When it comes to killing in the name of god, Christians have done it for centuries, in the name of Jesus - it really isn't that surprising becuase Christians and Muslims worship the one and same god. Sister religions. Same god. Same theology.

We are talking about people killing people in the name of Jesus, or in the name of religion. History disagrees with, and disproves your previous statement.

No they are not. History disagrees with you.

Not really. This thread is about American Muslims raising money for the families of the victims in San Bernardino.
When it comes to killing in the name of god, Christians have done it for centuries, in the name of Jesus - it really isn't that surprising becuase Christians and Muslims worship the one and same god. Sister religions. Same god. Same theology.