Dashinka

In addition, the U.S. Consulate in PI will know the laws and culture there.

Yes, she will still have her GC, but the SB1 rejection would most likely be visible to the CBP officer making entry difficult which could mean your mother could be detained.

No, but any attempt to enter the US after a denial of the SB1 may be dramatic. Here are a few short opinions from attorneys. Honestly, I don't think an SB1 is worth the risk. Good Luck! https://www.avvo.com/legal-answers/sb1-eligibility-not-met-can-i-still-try-to-enter-t-6184810.html

Need a little more context as to the basis for your N600 application. Are you claiming USC status since birth, or due to naturalization of a parent when you were a minor?

Depends on the circumstances as to why she stayed outside the US for 16+ months. Proving unavoidable circumstances can be a high bar. Good Luck!

That is a good analogy. When I say I laugh a little and ask myself if a person is wearing a ma

So you assume everyone masking today is doing it for the reasons you stated, and I assume it is because they are sick themselves. Maybe we are both wrong, who knows. Regardless, I don’t judge, I suppose a little internal laughing is judgy a bit, but if they are masking for the reasons you stated, why didn’t we see that prior to Covid?

Simple answer to your thread title question, Yes. You can wait and delay the case at NVC (which I would recommend), then proceed to the consulate interview after Feb 2026. It will be the CO at the consulate that will determine any inadmissibility (not NVC) and if a waiver is possible, or no necessary, as the 10 yr bar has expired. Good Luck!

Another analysis. This will be an interesting follow, and it should be pointed out that neither of these touched anything related to Freedom of Speech. https://cis.org/Fishman/It-Constitutional-Deport-Ringleader-Columbia-Universitys-ProHamas-Demonstrations

Still speculation, but fairly comprehensive analysis of what is most likely occurring here with respect to Mr. Khalil. ICE Arrests Palestinian ‘Activist’ Confusingly, press reports indicate that Khalil has both a student visa and lawful permanent resident status (“LPR”, that is, a green card). By law, one cannot be both a nonimmigrant and an immigrant, so there’s likely a lot more to his immigration history, and my guess is that he recently adjusted his status. Section 237(a)(4)(C)(i). Even more confusing is the specific ground of removal in Khalil’s case. Generally — and somewhat elliptically — LPRs can only be taken into ICE custody, detained, prosecuted, and removed if they have done something that would render them deportable on one or more of the grounds of deportation in section 237 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The criminal grounds in section 237(a)(2) of the INA are the most common immigration charges lodged against LPRs, but nothing suggests that Khalil has a criminal record per se. It’s more likely that the government is alleging that Khalil is removable under the “security and related grounds” of removal in section 237(a)(4) of the INA. Let me explain. AP interviewed Khalil’s attorney, Amy Greer, and she claims that ICE officers told her that “they were acting on State Department orders to revoke Khalil’s student visa”. That itself is confusing, because aside from issuing visas at consulates abroad, the State Department usually doesn’t get involved in immigration issues domestically. Except when the department actively gets involved in domestic immigration issues. Which brings me to section 237(a)(4)(C)(i) of the INA. It renders deportable any alien “whose presence or activities in the United States the Secretary of State has reasonable ground to believe would have potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences for the United States”. https://cis.org/Arthur/ICE-Arrests-Palestinian-Activist

Still remember having to route my wife home as she was in Russia at this time five years ago. Normally we would fly through Beijing, or Incheon, but in this case her only option was via Moscow and Washington DC. When I went to Detroit Metro Airport to pick her up eventually, it was like a ghost town. It is not just Canada. I still see folks wearing masks at work, driving alone in cars, out hiking, etc. I always laugh a little inside when I see it. The work one to me is the most egregious, if you feel sick enough to wear a mask, do not go into the office!

That is a great point. Although not a requirement, it would be recommended to file the N565 (another $505) to update the Nat. Cert. I agree, the N400 is the cleanest and cheapest way to do a name change even if it means having to wait a few weeks for a judicial oath ceremony. Good Luck!

Who applied for the expedite? I hadn't heard of 3rd parties applying. Good Luck!

Sure

Rules for thee.... What is the total carbon footprint for these pointless COPs?

Depends. She can use the I864EZ if these apply: Who May Use Form I-864EZ? You may use Form I-864EZ if ALL the following conditions apply: 1. You are the person who filed or is filing Form I-129F, Petition for Alien Fiancé(e); Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative; Form I-600, Petition to Classify Orphan as an Immediate Relative; or Form I-800, Petition to Classify Convention Adoptee as an Immediate Relative, for the relative you are sponsoring. 2. The relative you are sponsoring is the only person listed on Form I-130; and 3. The income you are using to qualify is based entirely on your salary or pension and is shown on one or more Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Form W-2s provided by your employers or former employers. Otherwise, the I864. Also, if you file taxes jointly with your wife, I would have an I864A from you in case the consulate asks for it. Good Luck!

Going to post this here as well, but the Simian and Charles can move this to the Master Environmental thread if so desired. The trial finally commenced in January 2024, and in the following month, the jury unanimously found Simberg and Steyn guilty of defamation. Mann was awarded nominal damages of $1 from each of the defendants but was also awarded $1,000 in punitive damages from Simberg and an astonishing $1 million from Steyn. It would seem that the massively higher punitive punishment the jury meted out to Mark Steyn can only be explained by the latter’s high profile as a conservative commentator. He has appeared in national media networks such as Fox News and as a guest host for Rush Limbaugh on contentious topics including the culture wars and Covid. In a laudatory article published in the Wall Street Journal in the flush of his court victory, Mann said that he felt “vindicated by his court victory and hopes it will embolden other climate researchers to defend their work as vigorously as he has defended his own.” He is lionized in the Journal article as follows: Super-star, planet-saving Mann, has however received some adverse – some would say well-deserved -- news this year. On January 10th, in an article entitled “Pay Up, Mr. Mann”, the editors of the National Review reported that “a court in our nation’s capital ordered Mann to pay us $530,820.21 worth of attorney’s fees and costs, and to do so within 30 days.” As was made clear during the discovery process in the long legal battle, Mann’s explicitly stated intention was to use a “major lawsuit” as a vehicle with which to “ruin National Review.” The court order will go some way in restituting the news magazine for legal fees spent in the long litigation. In even better news, it was reported earlier this week that Judge Alfred S. Irving, Jr. of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia issued a Final Judgment Order, reducing the punitive damages charged against Mr. Steyn from the astronomical $1 million to a modest $5,000. The order underscored the judiciary's role in preventing the legal system from being used as a tool to intimidate and silence critics of the prevailing climate narrative. https://tilakdoshi.substack.com/p/hockey-stick-shenanigans-and-fraudulent

Michael Mann is truly a disgusting grifter. Hockey Stick Shenanigans and Fraudulent Climate Science: Mark Steyn Has The Last Laugh If the blade of Mann’s hockey stick showed an unprecedented rise in global temperature coinciding neatly with the onset of the Industrial Revolution, its millennia-long relatively straight shaft also performed a critical function. The hockey stick in effect abolished the Medieval Warming Period (800 – 1300 AD) which was part of the previously accepted climatological record. By deleting reference to the MWP, the hockey stick persuaded people and politicians into thinking that modern global warming was unprecedented and hence entirely man-made. Commentator Rupert Darwall points out that “the Medieval Warm Period presented a twofold problem to the new climate change orthodoxy. It implied a much greater amplitude of natural variability beyond the bounds posited by the new scientific consensus of human-driven climate change, and it challenged the catastrophist narrative of global warming. If the prosperity of the Middle Ages and Viking settlement of Greenland occurred during an extended period of unusual warmth, then modern societies, too, could survive and prosper in a period of rising temperature.” Since the publication of Mann’s hockey stick paper, there have been many peer-reviewed temperature reconstruction studies using similar proxies (such as tree ring data) and statistical methods that have given results that diverge from Mann’s. Since 2019, there have been over 350 peer-reviewed scientific papers published showing no warming in the modern era and/or much warmer temperatures than today when CO2 levels ranged from 180 to 280 ppm. Well known climate scientist Dr. Judith Curry, writing in her capacity as an expert witness to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, gave her opinion that it is “reasonable” to have referred to the hockey stick in 2012 as “fraudulent” in the sense that “aspects of it are deceptive and misleading.” https://tilakdoshi.substack.com/p/hockey-stick-shenanigans-and-fraudulent

Was it a Walmart?

If it has a stamped seal you are fine. Typically funeral homes provide certified copies of the DCs to the family after the funeral. I think this is more like what @Edward and Jaycel suggested, just send another certified copy in response to the somewhat pointless RFE to get the case back on track. Good Luck!

I thought the same thing back when I was single, and even after getting married, but I found otherwise. Not everything there is sold in massive bulk, and those that are and are also perishable, we avoid (think salad kits). Beyond that, there are a lot of decent deals there on household goods like bath towels, bed sheets, appliances (bought a fridge and dishwasher recently) etc. We also like their deli dishes you can take home an cook/bake which last a few days for our family of two. Recently they offered a mushroom ravioli dish that was amazing. We often get those and put them in the freezer for later consumption. Yes, Costco is not a regular for weekly groceries, but it has been worth it even for our family of 2. it has been worth it even for our family of 2.

Not really a big hot dog fan. Sure, I will eat them occasionally, but I do not go out of my way for them. As to the samples at Costco, those are not for me, so much processed foods there.

Of course this is a BB article, but it does beg the question as to what does Trump regret from his past? We see a similar issue with his tariffs on Canada and Mexico. Didn't Trump negotiate USMCA (NAFTA II) with Mexico and Canada? Sure there were restrictions there that probably should have been negotiated out, but why is Trump now hammering tariffs on Canada and Mexico (non-retaliatory tariffs)? Trump needs to ditch Navarro as an advisor, there is no way tariffs are going to replace the current tax system, and no way consumers are going to continue their purchasing practices in response to higher prices.

Here is what I find troubling with the media reporting on Mr. Khalil, the synchronized MSM is of course painting him out to be some sort of victim even though there is credible evidence online of his support of pro-Hamas activities, and the rest of the media has no clue as to immigration. The simple fact is this person is an LPR, so there is no student visa to cancel SO STOP SAYING HIS STUDENT VISA IS BEING REVOKED (sorry for the shouting)! If the government has evidence he lied on an I485, or has since provided support for a terrorist organization like Hamas, then this needs to go in front of an immigration judge. We always say only an IJ can take away someone's LPR status (not Trump, not Rubio, not Noem...), so take the evidence there, even get an expedited hearing (I understand high ranking government officials can get those), and get this over with.

No, as @pushbrk stated, each parent requires their own I130 (no derivatives for immediate relatives). As to notifying USCIS of the change in your spouse’s application (from F2A to IR1), that should happen automatically, but most people contact USCIS with proof of their naturalization along with the case number of the spouse’s I130. Good Luck!