lucyrich

A minor clarification. If you're a US Citizen parent who has lived in the US for the required time (I think it's five years, at least two of which were after the age of 14), then your child IS a citizen automatically at the time of birth by the action of the law, and there's nothing you can do or fail to do which will change that. It's as though he was born inside the USA. See INA 301(g).

What your child lacks isn't US citizenship, it's documentation of his US citizenship. For that, file a CRBA, and/or apply for a passport.

Your US citizen child technically violated the law when he traveled to the US without a US passport. Don't worry, though, there's no punishment prescribed in the law, and I've never heard of it being an issue. Just get him a passport before his next trip.

No violation of law at all. The child is NOT yet a US Citizen and need not ever be. He just potentially is entitled to US Citizenship. Either way, with the current intention, file the CRBA.

No, that's not right. A child born in the circumstances described IS a US citizen. No application is necessary. He is entitled to proof that he is a citizen.

Correct. INA 301 says the child born under those circumstances IS a US citizen, not that he's potentially entitled to become one. According to INA 301, a child born abroad under INA 301(g) circumstances is treated the same as one born under INA 301(a) circumstances (that is, born inside the United States). In either case, the child doesn't become a citizen when he gets a passport, certified copy of birth certificate, CRBA, certificate of citizenship, or other document. The child becomes a citizen at the moment of birth. The document happens later, and helps to demonstrate the citizenship that existed since birth.

A few specific answers follow:

1. When by next yr can I apply for my citizenship?

The earliest date you can send the application is 90 days before you've accumulated five years with your green card. See the "resident since" date printed on your green card, add five years, and subtract 90 days. There is no deadline, so you may apply at any time after that, even decades later.

4. I have a 13 yo son, does he need to have his own application too and separate payment?

Not exactly. If he is under 18 at the time you become a Citizen, and if he has a green card and is living in your custody, he will automatically become a citizen on the date you become a citizen. He doesn't need to do anything. AFTER you become a citizen, you may file an N-600 to get a certificate of citizenship for him. Or you may directly apply for a US passport for him.

5. How long should I wait to hear from them after I filed my application?

You should get a receipt in a couple of weeks or so that says they received your application and they are processing it. It will probably take several months before they complete the processing. Watch here on this forum for a thread of applicants who filed in your month, so you can get an idea of how the processing time is going. Processing times change a lot.

6. Will they ask anything about my deceased husband?

Perhaps, but probably not in detail. You will have to list him on the N-400 form you filled out.

7. About this booklet, how can I avail that?

http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/M-476.pdf

8. What ques will they normally ask in the state of Arizona?

The questions are the same anywhere. A few of the answers to things like "who is your senator" or "who is your governor", "what is your state capital" are different based on your location. The questions can be found here:

http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments/100q.pdf

Minor correction: It doesn't matter HOW you got your green card, what matters is whether or not you've been married to and living with a US Citizen spouse. Someone who got a green card through work, and has been married to and living with their US Citizen spouse for a full three years, and has held the green card for three years, would be eligible to file, even though they didn't get the green card through marriage. Of course, the vast majority of people who file via the three year provision got their green cards through marriage, but there's no requirement that it be so.

The short answer is to read the N-400

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/N-400.pdf

As soon as you're eligible to check one of the boxes for part 2, you can file. Note that conditional permanent residence is as good as unconditional permanent residence for the purpose of naturalization.

The longer answer is to consult the M-476:

http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/M-476.pdf

Read especially the box at the bottom of page 22 of the M-476.

A minor clarification. If you're a US Citizen parent who has lived in the US for the required time (I think it's five years, at least two of which were after the age of 14), then your child IS a citizen automatically at the time of birth by the action of the law, and there's nothing you can do or fail to do which will change that. It's as though he was born inside the USA. See INA 301(g).

What your child lacks isn't US citizenship, it's documentation of his US citizenship. For that, file a CRBA, and/or apply for a passport.

Your US citizen child technically violated the law when he traveled to the US without a US passport. Don't worry, though, there's no punishment prescribed in the law, and I've never heard of it being an issue. Just get him a passport before his next trip.

I'd love to see Willie Brown come back to SF politics. Man I loved that guy.

Willie would have that bridge finished by Thanksgiving if he was running things.

Wait a minute... Though there's plenty of blame to go around, Willie Brown is one of those who worked hard to stall the replacement bridge. If he (and others like him) hadn't stalled it, it could have been finished almost a decade ago. And if he had gotten his way and not been shut out, it would have been delayed much longer than it actually was.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../ED7O1A4LES.DTL

It's crazy that a bridge which took three years to build initially using 1930s technology should take more than 20 years to rebuild using 21st century technology. Of course, the technology has little to do with it, but the political process moves a bit slower these days.

This is a reply to Payxibka, emt103c, lucyrich, and anyone who left a reply.

You all have made very strong points. I don't know what the correct interpretation of the law is for my situation. How would your opinion changed if I were to tell you that at the removal hearing the judge wrote in the court order that my wife did not violate the 180 day rule? This judge was not any judge. He was and is the Chief Judge of the Baltimore immigration court in Maryland. Here's his exact words, "Respondent is deporting US prior to her 180 day to AVOID the 3 year ban and immigrate as an immediate relative."

Further feedbacks will be greatly appreciated.

I think the issue about the 180 days for your case is clear. The judge interpreted the law, and gave a decision that is completely consistent with the law. The Adjudicator's Field Manual chapter 40.9.2 gives explicit guidance as to what constitutes "unlawful presence" for the purposes of INA 212 a9B, and the judge's ruling agrees with that. Unlawful presence cannot be accrued while an I-485 is pending; it doesn't start until the I-485 is denied. Besides, where there is an issue of law, the ruling of the judge who has jurisdiction IS the authority, more so than mine, yours, an attorney's, a consular officer's, or anyone else's (except an appeals court with proper jurisdiction).

Some of us have gotten into a side discussion about the possibility of a K-1 entrant adjusting status based on a marriage that happened more than 90 days after entry. While I believe that is possible if the I-130 and I-485 are filed together, I believe that is now irrelevant to your current case, because you are past that point. I apologize if that digression distracted from the discussion of your particular case.

Like the judge, I don't see any problem or issue with proceeding to file an I-130 and getting an immigrant visa abroad. In particular the 212(a) 9B bar won't be an issue as long as she departed before the judge said she had to depart.

I will look for the reference...

FWIW, the judge could not allow you to re-file because once you filed the I-485 (without the benefit of the I-130) you placed yourself in a path that was unrecoverable, because in order to recover, a decision was needed on the original I-485. The only decision available was a denial, and once a denial decision is rendered on an I-485, the law requires the alien to immediately be put in removal proceedings. Once you are in removal proceedings you are barred from re-filing.

ETA:

While not an official INA reference... look at the bottom of the page. I know similar language exists (or has existed) on the USCIS website.

Important: If you married the U.S. citizen but not within the 90-day time limit, your spouse must now file USCIS Form I-130, Petition for Alien Relative.

http://usimmigration.visapro.com/Adjustment-of-Status.asp

I'm slightly stumped here. I am very confident that adjustment is possible even if the marriage happened after 90 days, but such adjustment requires an I-130 in addition to the I-485. I've seen that on many attorneys' sites, and I've heard many reports of it being done.

But I can't find an official USCIS document that says it is doable, nor do I find an official law or regulation that explicitly allows it. In fact, it looks to me like it's disallowed by 8 CFR, but I don't trust my reading as much as I trust the numerous reports I've heard of it happening.

INA 245(d) says: The Attorney General may not adjust, under subsection (a), the status of a nonimmigrant alien described in section 101(a)(15)(K) 2aa/ except to that of an alien lawfully admitted to the United States on a conditional basis under section 216 as a result of the marriage of the nonimmigrant (or, in the case of a minor child, the parent) to the citizen who filed the petition to accord that alien's nonimmigrant status under section 101(a)(15)(K) . . That says that a K-1 can't adjust except on the basis of marriage to the original petitioner, but it doesn't place a 90 day time limit on when the marriage has to happen.

8 CFR 245.1©(6) says: The following categories of aliens are ineligible to apply for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident alien under section 245 of the Act: ... Any alien admitted to the United States as a nonimmigrant defined in section 101(a)(15)(K) of the Act, unless: (i) In the case of a K-1 fiance(e) under section 101(a)(15)(K)(i) of the Act or the K-2 child of a fiance(e) under section 101(a)(15)(K)(iii) of the Act, the alien is applying for adjustment of status based upon the marriage of the K-1 fiance(e) which was contracted within 90 days of entry with the United States citizen who filed a petition on behalf of the K-1 fiance(e) pursuant to § 214.2(k) of this chapter;

That says that a K-1 visa holder is ineligible to adjust status unless it's via a marriage to the original petitioner that happened within 90 days of entry. But that's not statute, it's regulation.

I'm reminded of the quote "The law doesn't say what it says, it says what the courts say it says". There's probably some case law, or some conflicting statute or regulation, or other practice that overrides the text I found in 8 CFR. It's dangerous to be too literal in reading one part of the regulations in isolation.

First of all, adjustment of status based on the marriage to a USC via I-130 and I-485 is very common, at which time the overstay will be forgiven, provided that the beneficiary entered the country with a visa to begin with, meaning not EWI. That's the case here, as a K-1 is a valid visa.

It beats me that they denied the AOS.

AOS was denied because no I-130 was filed. After the 90 days K-1 period expired, there's no basis for adjustment of status without an I-130. That was an unfortunate mistake.

More importantly, a US immigration judge ruled that if the OP's wife leaves the country by a certain date via VD, she would avoid the 3-year ban. The judge furthermore ruled that the bona fide qualifier of the marriage has been established.

This is a very powerful document, which makes me believe that it should be sufficient to get a spousal visa in Brazil.

What in the immigration world can trump the ruling of an immigration judge?

Exactly.

If you want to see the law that requires you to carry your green card, it's INA 264(e)

(d) Every alien in the United States who has been registered and fingerprinted under the provisions of the Alien Registration Act, 1940, or under the provisions of this Act shall be issued a certificate of alien registration or an alien registration receipt card in such form and manner and at such time as shall be prescribed under regulations issued by the Attorney General.

(e) Every alien, eighteen years of age and over, shall at all times carry with him and have in his personal possession any certificate of alien registration or alien registration receipt card issued to him pursuant to subsection (d). Any alien who fails to comply with the provisions of this subsection shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction for each offense be fined not to exceed $100 or be imprisoned not more than thirty days, or both.

I haven't heard of this law being enforced very strictly. But it IS the law and it IS on the books.

That's one of the great benefits to applying for US Citizenship once you're eligible. When you become a citizen, you don't have to carry any documents with you.

Also note that, as already stated, if you falsely claim US Citizenship at any time, you're immediately deportable and permanently barred from re-entering the US, So if you're ever caught without your green card, do NOT try claiming US citizenship.

Where are you getting this information? Is it your personal opinion or is your opinion based on law? Can you direct me to this law on the internet?

Thank you for all the comments.

To whom are you directing that query?

Anyway, here's yet another reference, direct from the USCIS, that you'll probably want to read in great detail.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/nativedocuments...edesign_AFM.PDF

Note especially example 2 on page 10. It describes a situation very similar to the one you describe, where an alien's I-94 expired, but he filed an application to adjust status. When the I-94 expires, he begins a period of unlawful status, but there is no period of unlawful presence for the purpose of the 9B bars while the application for adjustment of status is pending.

Thank you for your comment. My wife's I-94 expired on May 1, 2008. I am not a lawyer so I can speak with 100% certainty that the I-94 should or should not expired in 90 days. I am simply stating the facts about my case. We went by the date on the I-94. I have a couple of questions. Should my wife be penalized for a mistake on the date stamped by someone else? How can any goverment agency hold my wife accountable for not noticing that mistake, if indeed, the I-94 should only last for 90 days? I would also like to point out that the judge during the removal hearing did not ruled that the I-94 had to expired 90 days after my wife entered the USA. The judge knew that my wife I-94 was 1 year and 3 months long. Any further comments will be appreciated.

regardless if it is May 1, 2008 or June, 2007... in either situation with a January, 2009 departure the facts would support one of the re-entry bans... because the minimum threshold of 180 days was exceeded.

I'm not sure that's right. Generally, out of status time does not accrue while a petition is under consideration, so filing the AOS before the I-94 expired and leaving within 180 days after the petition was denied would not trigger a ban. If the immigration judge says there she would not be banned, I think you should not assume there will be one because of advice from VJ.

Exactly right. If anybody is qualified to interpret immigration law as it applies to a particular case, it would be an immigration judge. That is the judge's job, and the judge's word is the authority. I'd trust the judge before I'd trust an immigration attorney or a random VJ poster.

Not only that, but in this case, the judge's judgement is backed up by the Department of State:

http://www.immigrationlinks.com/news/news309.htm

IN GENERAL, ALIENS WHO HAVE A PENDING APPLICATION TO ADJUST STATUS TO PERMANENT RESIDENCE UNDER INA 245 ARE CONSIDERED IN A PERIOD OF AUTHORIZED STAY FOR PURPOSES OF INA 212(A)(9)(B) ("9B"). THEREFORE, SUCH ALIENS WOULD NOT ACCRUE ANY UNLAWFUL PRESENCE FOR 9B PURPOSES DURING THE PENDENCY OF THE APPLICATION TO ADJUST STATUS.

So as long as the I-485 was filed before the I-94 expired, then even if the I-94 expired, the "180 day" clock wouldn't have started ticking until the adjustment of status application was denied.

If you send something today, they probably won't be able to match it up with your first submission, so I would expect that it will never reach your file.

The safest thing to do is to wait until you hear from them. They'll either reject your submission and send the whole package back to you, or they will accept the submission, and when it gets to the desk of the person who wants to see the green card copy, they will put your file aside and send you an RFE with instructions on how to submit the required paperwork in a way that it will reach the right place.

Yes, this is likely to cause a delay, but it won't be a very long delay.

What about the State Tax. The IRS transcripts shows only the federal tax returns right? Is there similar transcripts that can be obtained from the state? In my case California.

Immigration is a federal matter, controlled by the federal government. They don't care about state taxes. Not all states even HAVE income taxes. You won't need to provide state tax returns at any point on the immigration journey.

Sorry, I just want to clarify the process...

You take the written test, and then you have 1 year to take the driving test?

You take the written test, and that allows you to have a "learner's permit". The learner's permit allows you to drive with another licensed driver in the passenger car. It doesn't allow you to drive by yourself. After you get the learner's permit, you can practice driving with another person for up to a year. You can take the driving test whenever you feel you're ready. After you take the driving test, you are issued an actual driver's license that allows you to drive a car by yourself.

Also, I'll clarify a point about the original question: A foreign license can be used in California while the person is a temporary visitor maintaining their permanent residence out of the state (or out of the country). After the person starts living in California, they can continue the foreign license for only 10 days. After 10 days, they must stop driving in California, or else they must get a California license. This part of California law was written without regard to immigration law, and the definition of "residence" doesn't have anything to do with one's immigration status.

And as has been pointed out, you can't get a California license until you get EAD.

Combine those two, and it looks like there may be a gap period when you're not authorized to drive. That would be between the time your ten day "grace period" expires, and the time you get your actual California Drivers license, after EAD.

Your oath letter has a series of questions on the back. Things like, since your interview, have you travelled outside the USA, etc. There's one there covering citations. A speeding ticket is nothing to worry about, but the officials get upset if YOU decide it's nothing to worry about instead of letting THEM decide it's nothing to worry about. Failure to disclose can be a serious offense which can jeopardize your naturalization at a later date. So the safe thing to do is to disclose it on the oath letter, which you'll bring to the oath ceremony.

What would the situation be for someone (not me) who has a 10 year GC and who was married at the time but divorced virtually as soon as they received the GC? Do they now have to wait for the 5 years instead of three ?

And suppose that someone married again (to a USC), how long would they have to wait then to apply?

It depends on the exact dates. Read the N-400 for details. Your friend can apply as soon as he's eligible to check box 2a or box 2b, whichever comes first.

http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/N-400.pdf

To check box 2a he'd need to be a LPR for five years.

To check box 2b he'd need to have all three of the following be true:

* Be LPR for the past three years

* Be married to and living with one USC spouse for the past three years

* The USC spouse would have to have been a US Citizen for the past three years

So, if he got a 10 year green card, via whatever method, and then married a USC one year later, he'd be eligible to check box 2b on the third anniversary of marriage, which would be after having four years of LPR status. If he got married to that USC more than 2 years after he got the LPR status, then the marriage won't provide a shortcut; he'd be eligible to check box 2a before he'd be eligible to check box 2b.

Also read the box on the bottom of page 22 of the M-476. He can file his paperwork 90 days before completing the required LPR time, but if he's checking box 2b the 90 day shortcut only works if, on the day he files, he has completed the full three years married to his USC spouse. So if the marriage happened after gaining LPR status, that effectively means there's no shortcut on the three year route.

The next major thing you've got to do is removal of conditions, so you might want to go to that forum and have a look. You'll be filing for removal of conditions in approximately one year and nine months, but go over there for more details on the window of dates.

Start a folder with evidence of your bona fide marriage. Any joint documents you collect, financial things, insurance, lease, etc., as well as joint social things. It's easier to collect such joint evidence as you go rather than all at once. Again, look in the removal of conditions forum for ideas of what to put into your folder of evidence.

You can come back to this forum in about three years to file for citizenship, if desired. But that's an optional thing.

Yep, you've got old info. The INS became USCIS sometime in 2002, I think. They switched from the 3/4 view to full frontal view in September of 2004 (we filed our initial petition with 3/4 view photos, but needed full frontal for everything thereafter).

Here's a printout of the requirements, which are the same as the requirements for US passports. Note that if you're getting these taken outside the US, other countries may have similar passport photo requirements, but there's some variation on the size. US passport photos are 2"x2", or 5cm x 5cm.

http://www.travel.state.gov/pdf/Photo-Qual...equirements.pdf

I'm surprised that Chavez's speech wasn't completely blaming the U.S. for their water shortage

That's b/c this speech had to be kept under 3 hours.

I don't think he's ever kept a speech under 3 hours in his life.

I think the reason the US blame wasn't reported in this story is because the reporter fell asleep after the first three hours of Hugo's speech, and the talk about the imperialist yankees who are to blame was confined to the latter five hours.

Aló presidente!

Whether he gets another citizenship or not isn't particularly relevant to how he can get some sort of legal status in the US. Suppose he could magically get Canadian citizenship next week. That still doesn't help him, because he's already accumulated enough illegal presence time that he's got a bar to re-entry. If he enters the US in violation of that bar (and he might be able to get across the border as a Canadian citizen claiming to be a tourist without having the inspector notice his prior illegal presence), then he still can't adjust status, and it'll be hard for him to do anything without making a misrepresentation. A misrepresentation makes him deportable and permanently inadmissible with no waiver available.

As has been said, he can't adjust status while remaining in the US. Even if he marries a US Citizen. Barring unusual situations such as a credible case for asylum or a petition already filed for him during the INA 245(i) time (before 2001), his only option under current law is to leave the US, get a visa, and enter legally with that visa.

As soon as he leaves the US, he'll trigger a 10 year ban if he's been in the US out of status for more than 1 year. The ban is only 3 years if he's got more than 180 days but less than 1 year of illegal presence. If he's got less than 180 days of illegal presence, there's no bar to re-entry (but he'll probably have trouble proving non-immigrant intent if trying to enter on a basis that requires non-immigrant intent).

A waiver is sometimes available for the 3/10 year bans, but it's a long process with no guaranteed success. Success depends on showing "extreme hardship" to a US Citizen.

I'm not sure what complications the arrest record may present. Has he ever had contact with immigration officials? Has he entered the US after an immigration violation? That can make things much worse.

He should schedule a half hour discussion with an immigration attorney or two, to verify this and to explore whether or not there are any other options that may apply to his case. Note that getting married, leaving the country, or filing paperwork with the USCIS could make things better or worse, but they are actions that are hard to undo once done, so a consultation before taking one of these irreversible actions may be a wise thing.

Ours was a couple hours, with some speeches, a video from the President, some administrative details, and such.

By "proper attire" they generally mean no shorts, tank tops, or excessively informal clothing. We saw some people dressed fairly casually, and others quite formally. Probably whatever you wore to your earlier immigration interviews would be fine. If you want to dress up with a patriotic flair, that would probably work, too.

No need to disclose speeding tickets, if they didn't lead to an arrest.

Perhaps, but there's no reason to keep them a secret, either. You won't be denied citizenship for disclosing them. You don't have to provide any documentation related to them. Disclosing them is very cheap insurance.

If they didn't want you to disclose citations or detentions, the question would have been written, "Have you ever been arrested", not "Have you ever been arrested, cited, or detained". A speeding ticket is a citation. The word "citation" is usually written right there at the top of the paper.

You see, after you're done with this whole naturalization thing, you are permanently a citizen of the US, and the US government cannot take away your citizenship for any reason unless you voluntarily revoke your citizenship. Look up "Afroyim v. Rusk" for details. The supreme court says some very nice things about citizenship in its ruling, how in the US the citizens are the sovereign ones, and the government serves the citizens, so the government doesn't have the right to unilaterally break that relationship, while the citizens do. But I digress.

While the government can't say "you were naturalized, but now we'll revoke your citizenship", the government CAN go back and say you were never properly naturalized in the first place, if they want to badly enough, and if you provide them with ammunition in the form of a failure to disclose. Any failure to disclose a material fact, even something as minor as a speeding ticket, may give them grounds to say your naturalization wasn't properly performed, and therefore, despite the fact that you've held a certificate of naturalization and a US passport for all these years, you were never really a US citizen.

Chances are you won't become a target of an overzealous official anyway, so maybe it doesn't matter so much. But what benefit is there in taking that chance? BTW, I'm not just making up the hypothetical situation. They HAVE done this many times, including the case of a woman who was growing a houseplant which police mistook for marijuana. The police took her in for questioning, but then determined the plant wasn't marijuana, so they let her go. She had never done anything wrong, it was all a police mistake, so she didn't think she had to disclose the incident. She filed her N-400, was naturalized, and everyting seemed fine, but then the USCIS later denaturalized her for failure to disclose. Read about this and other cases here: http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=3480

When you read the N-400 and instructions carefully, you find that you don't have to provide any further documentation for minor traffic offenses, but you are not freed from the obligation to disclose them. So go ahead and admit that you got a couple of traffic tickets (they can probably look it up for themselves, if they're that interested). It won't hurt your chances for naturalization. You don't need to provide any documents. And it just may help your chances for naturalization, and/or keeping your citizenship at a later date.

I apologize if this question has been asked before.

I had my citizenship interview on 10/13/09 and I passed, ia have my oath ceremony on 10/23/09 and I'm from Romania. I would like to have a dual citizenship but I don't know exactly how or what do I need to do.

Please help me if you have any ideas.

THANK YOU.

I didn't think the US allowed people over 18 to have dual citizenship. I have a friend who had dual (Australian and US) while she was a child but once she turned 18 she had to choose. Maybe it's different now - that was 20 years ago.

US law only determines whether or not a person is a US citizen. The other country's law determines whether or not the person is also a citizen of the other country. US law doesn't care whether another country still considers you to be a citizen after the US considers you to be a citizen. But once you're a US citizen, US law doesn't give you extra privileges in the US for being a foreign citizen, too.

The US doesn't make you choose when you turn 18. But another country might force you to choose; either you renounce your US citizenship or they would revoke your citizenship in their country.

The dual citizenship FAQ goes over this and other points. It should probably be required reading for anyone in this forum.

http://www.richw.org/dualcit/

One other thing to point out: If she came here on a K-1 visa, she can't ever adjust status except on the basis of a marriage to the original petitioner. No other adjustment of status is possible.

There have been a few sad stories posted here of people who fell in love with someone who had entered years ago on a K-1, and instead of marrying the original petitioner and adjusting, the alien stayed in the US after the original relationship ended. That kind of alien is illegal in overstay status, and, unlike most overstaying situations, there's nothing simple the new US Citizen fiance or spouse can do to fix the situation. The alien must leave the US and get another visa, but as soon as the alien leaves the US, she's under a 10 year bar for the prior overstay of more than a year. In addition, she's got to convince immigration officials that, "this time, it's for real", in spite of her prior conduct.

I translated all our documents that needed translating. And I certified them, using the model language on the USCIS site that's already been quoted on this thread. I have no formal language credentials, but enough fluency to do the job. Nothing was notarized. It worked just fine.

Something like a birth certificate usually doesn't have a whole lot of language on it that's subject to subtle re-interpretation, with shades of meaning and connotations involved, so the translation is generally pretty straightforward. If you're translating something that may seem a bit controversial and you want to avoid the appearance of conflict of interest, go ahead and hire a neutral third party to do the translation and certify it. But if you're confident in your ability and you want to save money and time, do it yourself. Be sure that you're comfortable with the possibility that the USCIS might get their own language expert to look at your translation (not that they will, but they could). If their language expert found you had distorted the meaning in a significant way, it would spell serious trouble for your case.