Dashinka

Probably cannot AOS. There is a risk of crossing the border illegally, and then trying to hide under the radar. Does this guy have an actual and valid SSN? Why didn't they pursue a spousal visa via consulate processing when they married? These are some of the questions I wish these 'journalists' from the synchronized media would ask.

Still trying to find out more about this guy. According to some, there was an order of removal attached to him from 2019 with the only caveat being he could not be removed to El Salvador, so sort of in a stasis. So was he in fact legal here, or just sort of safe at least from removal to El Salvador. I understand his asylum claims were rejected which I understand he filed after the 2019 removal order. Then he got married to a USC (being married to a USC does not confer legal status). So why are all the MSM types saying he was here in the country legally? He apparently has no pathway to LPR while inside the US having entered without inspection. Maybe his wife should start the I130 process now that he is outside the US.

Absolutely, no one actually has the original, only certified copies, or if they do, the clerk messed up.

Yes, you definitely need one from each of you. The one and only RFE my now wife and I received was for a missing intent to marry letter from her. She sent me a scanned copy so I could respond to the RFE, and we were all good. I agree with @MalloryCat, no need for detailed plans of the future wedding, just the desire of each of you to marry. Good Luck!

You will be just fine with the certified copies provided by your local clerk. Actually, any one of those provides evidence of a valid marriage properly documented by your local clerk. Even if you rushed back to your local clerk, they will only provide another certified copy like the one’s you have. Good Luck with your interview.

You may try DM’ing this poster who recently also went through the SB1 process. It was a different consulate, so the timing may be different, but they may have some knowledge of what step 2 is. Good Luck!

It was actually a fortuitous post as it was the very next new posting after your post, and the poster was successful. Good Luck!

An I290B seems to be appropriate here as the assets were presented. You may considering organizing your asset information in a similar way as to the linked thread as even though this was done for the consulate, the situation is similar. Good Luck!

I agree, land borders can lead to delays, hence longer detention.

Definitely. What is also interesting was she only made a passing reference to Canada Border Services turning her around due to an improper visa. This is fairly common, especially at land crossings where people are turned around for suspecting to work on a visitor visa (visa free for USCs). This happened once to my nephew, a technician of assembly equipment. Of course US and Canadian border officers talk to each other, and now the jig was up as CBP was now informed that she had entered the U.S. using the wrong visa, and now had to leave. The jist of the piece though seemed to be all about her not being treated like a queen, so she ends it with a warning not to travel to the U.S. The warning should have been do not travel to another country with the improper visa.

I completely agree. In this case we actually had a test case as my boss who was on the same trip returned via O’Hare. Myself and my other colleagues including one on an H1B came through DTW, and were through with our checked bags in about 15-20 minutes, where it took my boss over an hour to clear Immigration and Customs. For reference DTW had four international flights arriving around the same time.

She answered “no” to the question ‘would she lose her accommodation if she failed to provide the service?’. Is that how Workaway works?

Completely anecdotal, but recently went through immigration at Detroit Metro airport, and did not witness much in the way of delays in either the visitor line or the citizen/resident line, and no instances of LPRs of visa holders being sent to secondary.

I always love it when food/meals are labeled generically as Chinese, Mexican, Brazilian, etc. The food in those countries are immensely diverse from region to region. Food in the Shanghai area is different from Beijing which is different from Sichuan, etc. I suppose people sample some fares, and then label it generically. Another great example is Thai, as compared to Vietnamese, as compared to Cambodian, as compared to Hmong. There is a lot of differences in those cuisines.

Jan. 18. A two week vacation generally does not result in an official residential address change. Good Luck!

To add to this, even with a lawyer or visa service, the petitioner and beneficiary still need to do all the legwork, and check all the forms. To the OP, if there is no criminal history, or immigration related issues, a lawyer is most likely not needed. When I started the journey with my now wife, I had a consult with a lawyer (friend of a family member) regarding my I129F, and was prepared to go that route, but he reviewed the case and suggested I handle it. This was the best advice I ever received from a lawyer.

Yes, he needs to file an I130 and I485 for the son along with the evidence required for those petitions. I agree with @Boiler, a lawyer should probably be consulted. Good Luck!

Make sure you have the watermarked original with you to present to CBP, and take a few copies in case an airline asks to keep a copy. Beyond that, you should be fine.

Completely agree, and it seems we see that even with what is described today as a decidedly conservative court. All rulings from SCOTUS are not 6-3, so they are not simply rubber stamping a conservative idealism. I also agree, court packing is not a good move by any stretch. I could agree with some term limits, but if Congress wants to do that, they need to look at their own branch of the government as well. I am old enough to remember voters in some states attempting to put term limits on their House and Senate members, and that was fairly rapidly and rightly struck down by SCOTUS at that time as unconstitutional. What SCOTUS does need to do though with its own branch is bring back jurisdictional control at the District and Appellate levels.

In this I completely agree. It is the people that need to decide what is disinformation and what is not. The issue I see, at least when the Democrats are in charge, is movement toward the government doing this either through a “Disinformation Tsar” as suggested under the previous administration, or by some faceless unelected bureaucrats. This smacks of the regimes ruled by the likes of Putin, KJU, Maduro, etc.

I wasn’t really referencing the bias or perceived bias of the BBC, I was more commenting on why any government is funding a news organization. We talk about state sponsored media with respect to totalitarian regimes, and it is true, so why do we allow governments to fund any media? Now in the U.S. it may be different as we are supposed to have a separation of the government with the media which I deem a good thing. What we saw though in 2020 was the government actively suppressing stories via media and social media. Is that a good thing? Elon Musk, love him or hate him, actually bought X to stop that practice of the U.S. federal bureaucracy controlling the speech on that platform, and it has worked so far, much to the chagrin of those government agencies. I know, it is all about disinformation, but who decides what is disinformation? I actually like the BBC, and I agree, they tend to be fairly centrist in their reporting, but the U.S. government has no business sending US taxpayer money to them. Would you agree with the UK government sending UK taxpayer money to say Fox News, or ABC, etc.? I am not familiar with reporters without borders, but like many NGOs or as I like to call them GFOs (government funded organizations), they also have an inherent bias of keeping their funding streams alive.

It would take a Constitutional amendment to change how federal judges are appointed which is why as partisan politics became the norm (no, this did not start with Trump), the suggestion is always to add more judges. Yes, there are countries with more, but is more better? If Congress wants to actually do something to provide more representation to the people they supposedly represent, they need to change their rule that limits the number of House members to 435. The House members are supposed to be the direct representatives of the people, and the apportionment of the U.S. House is second only to India as to the average amount of people each Representative is representing (~750k people per House member).

Yep, it is always a great idea to be flippant with the person deciding on your visa, or deciding if you can enter on said visa. I remember a story of an Australian attempting to enter on a K1 that was flippant with the CBP officer. They were not allowed to enter and their visa was canceled.

No a media organization. Of course the question is can a media organization be impartial when their funding is coming from a government? Isn’t that the very definition of state sponsored media?

There may be some scrutiny, and maybe you have pictures to share with the IO at your N400 interview to help tell your story as you told us in your first post. Filing under the 5yr rule should bring less scrutiny than filing under the 3 yr rule, but it also allows USCIS to review your complete file. Since you and your former spouse submitted a lot of evidence to get your IR1 visa, and USCiS and the DoS already decided you deserved one, you should be fine. The main thing @OldUser is suggesting is to just prepare yourself. Good Luck!