BaronB

What's funny is, I could see this happening. Folks outraged that this dude can't hang a flag or noose in his yard. We shall see how it plays out.
I'm trying to be nice and set the bar as low as I can without being insulting...

Is it in poor taste? Absolutely.
Is it illegal? Probably not - some people in the US seem to feel it is their right to offend anyone else. The comment "screw em" sums up that mentality to a tee.

Yes there is nothing to stop her from looking for a job. If the employer is willing to wait for her work clearance there is nothing that says you cannot look for a job. Don't let people tell you you are wasting your time, not everyone here has only a high school diploma.

Long story short, my Canadian fiancée and I (US citizen) are getting married at the end of this year in Canada. We want to move to the US immediately after getting married. However, because of our ignorance of the US immigration laws prior to booking venues and spending thousands of dollars on nonrefundable things like that, our options for having my fiancée be able to immediately move to the US after marriage complicated. Obviously the K-1 Visa requires that one gets married INSIDE of the US after coming over within a 90 day period. That isn't usable by my us since we'll be married before she comes over. Our only choice would be to hold a "religious ceremony" that involves no marriage license although that can cause issues too. The next option is the CR-1, but with a 1-year+ wait time, that's not ideal either. This is where things get interesting.
I had a consultation with an attorney, and she recommended that we just get legally married in Canada (just like a regular wedding - as in, with a real marriage license, licensed pastor, and everything), and then all my fiancée (wife) has to do is cross the border legally and apply for adjustment of status after 30 days of her crossing the border. She said that as long as she (1) doesn't cross the border with all of her belongings, (2) doesn't put her foot in her mouth by crossing by mentioning that she is planning on staying here and adjusting for status, and (3) doesn't apply for AoS for 30+ days, she'll be fine. She said that my then wife could just be crossing the border for gas, to visit me for a weekend, to go shopping, or to go to church and just never come back until she got her green card. She said that's what she did in order to get her green card and eventual citizenship. The lawyer (who is Canadian) said she was going to Disneyland, which she was, and she just didn't go back until she got her green card. So my fiancée wouldn't be able to leave the country for 3+ months, but that was expected anyway with the K1, and it's certainly better than waiting for the CR-1 Visa before she can come over. She said that the US doesn't care about immigration intent. She said they care a lot more about a legal entry and that we're a legitimate couple, which we are. She said she's never had someone rejected who did what she suggested. What are your thoughts on this? Is the legal entry and the legitimacy of the relationship what matters most to the USCIS? Or is immigration intent a bigger deal for the USCIS than this lawyer is letting on? Is Canada a special case perhaps?

What is this? The dumb story of the day?

The OP has made up their mind already. Trying to convince them to do other arrangements is pointless is my honest opinion. This is their choice and we should respect it. There is nothing that say you cannot get married and move from a K-1 to a IR-1/CR-1. I'm sure it's not the first time this has happened. Life is lived in moments and experiences, not timelines.

Did you not read the following? :
If it were up to me, i would complete the K1 visa since i waited 8 month until approved. However, I have to respect her and her father's wishes. I'm sure she would have done the same if she was in my place.
We don't know all the personal details of this couple but it's clear to me OP wants to respect their future spouse. That's the point of getting married right? Getting a Greencard comes secondary to loving someone.

Thank you for your hysteria. I had NO IDEA! I am turning myself directly into federal prison officials. No wait, I am going to attempt to escape to Belarus before my FELONIOUS CONDUCT is discovered!!!
"Trauma Doc" indeed. Perhaps you should consult a Non-Trauma Doc for some tranquilizers. I am no more a doctor than you are a lawyer, but my preliminary diagnosis is leaning toward clinical insanity.
I am indeed both my wife's husband her attorney of record.

Did you not read the following? :
If it were up to me, i would complete the K1 visa since i waited 8 month until approved. However, I have to respect her and her father's wishes. I'm sure she would have done the same if she was in my place.
We don't know all the personal details of this couple but it's clear to me OP wants to respect their future spouse. That's the point of getting married right? Getting a Greencard comes secondary to loving someone.

You can file the CR-1 as soon as you get married. I don't how to cancel the K-1. The money will be lost from the K-1. IR-1/CR-1 average over a year now, you can check the Processing Times above. Only K-1s are being transferred from TSC to CSC so your petition will most likely go back to TSC (which is not the worst service center for CR-1s)

Did you not read the following? :
If it were up to me, i would complete the K1 visa since i waited 8 month until approved. However, I have to respect her and her father's wishes. I'm sure she would have done the same if she was in my place.
We don't know all the personal details of this couple but it's clear to me OP wants to respect their future spouse. That's the point of getting married right? Getting a Greencard comes secondary to loving someone.

The OP has made up their mind already. Trying to convince them to do other arrangements is pointless is my honest opinion. This is their choice and we should respect it. There is nothing that say you cannot get married and move from a K-1 to a IR-1/CR-1. I'm sure it's not the first time this has happened. Life is lived in moments and experiences, not timelines.

Did you not read the following? :
If it were up to me, i would complete the K1 visa since i waited 8 month until approved. However, I have to respect her and her father's wishes. I'm sure she would have done the same if she was in my place.
We don't know all the personal details of this couple but it's clear to me OP wants to respect their future spouse. That's the point of getting married right? Getting a Greencard comes secondary to loving someone.

Did you not read the following? :
If it were up to me, i would complete the K1 visa since i waited 8 month until approved. However, I have to respect her and her father's wishes. I'm sure she would have done the same if she was in my place.
We don't know all the personal details of this couple but it's clear to me OP wants to respect their future spouse. That's the point of getting married right? Getting a Greencard comes secondary to loving someone.

Did you not read the following? :
If it were up to me, i would complete the K1 visa since i waited 8 month until approved. However, I have to respect her and her father's wishes. I'm sure she would have done the same if she was in my place.
We don't know all the personal details of this couple but it's clear to me OP wants to respect their future spouse. That's the point of getting married right? Getting a Greencard comes secondary to loving someone.

I understand the moral aspect.
But it is not against the TOC to help people do it the legal way.
Many threads I see and know the answer but do not participate for a variety of reasons. On this one his legal USC wife was asking, I probably would still have participated even if it had been him.

You will not:
Post Content intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a broad demographic or group of people identified by a unifying trait or characteristic (discrimination). For instance, racist or sexist content may be considered hate speech.
This part needs clarity especially when it comes to certain posters who comment on gay rights articles. Some of their opinions are extremely homophobic yet they are allowed to voice their opinions unchecked. Times are changing and people are being given rights for the first time in US history. It would be sad if the mindset of certain moderators didn't evolve with the times. When I have questioned this behaviour my comments are deleted and I was even banned for doing so. If this site wants to cater to heterosexuals only, then do so. But state that upfront to new members so they won't be offended when they are met with homophobia.

Thank you so much for your help

She can visit on her tourist visa while her application is pending. It might make it more difficult to visit but as long as she brings strong ties to her home country when visiting she should be ok. Please note that a family Greencard for a sibling (sister/brother) takes a LONG time - more than 10 years in most cases.

Yeah, all that's missing now is a gofundme page.

He must just say he is there for a vacation. You are not even engaged so he won't even need to mention the word fiance. The truth is that you are just friends at the moment. Plan whatever you want to do AFTER he gets there so you don't need to tell lies now.

Which basically means you can't call someone who is obviously being a giant "donkey" out on it, otherwise you are the one in trouble. LOL.
Next perhaps we will have lashings in public for having a logical opinion of something?

I would also suggest that we go back to the rule that a copy from a reputable news source be required as the basis for all new threads in CE&HT forum. As of lately it has become a plenary for racism and bigotry, with threads based on 'copies' - and I use the term loosely - gleaned from hate websites.

Seems like US based website VJ is turning more and more conservative. How strange is that...
There will be plenty of people in bikinis during the summer all over US.
Perhaps those members who find it unacceptable should reconsider migrating to US.

Well I don't know what situation you were referring to but the situation I'm talking about involved calling Jim Morrison (the late Jim Morrison) a three letter word with an @ symbol instead of an 'a'.
There was no personal attack involved, unless we're worried about the feelings of Mr Morrison, and somehow I doubt he would have much to say about it.
The moderation arose because several posters were poking fun at VJ moderation - in a collective sense (not singling out any individual) because a moderator removed a post because they felt it was 'interpretable as a personal attack'. The conversation went along the lines that a personal attack on a celebrity or even a fictional character would be enough for someone to wheel out the nuclear option. Which is exactly what happened.
The irony is breathtaking.
Of course no doubt there is a caveat somewhere in the bowels of the VJ law library of rules in the mod forums that even relating this story is itself a TOS violation. Personally I think it's hilarious.
We've arrived at a situation where the site moderation is actually using the TOS and arbitrary unwritten rules to browbeat people that it sees as being troublemakers - either to get them of the site or force them to capitulate. Hence one poster gets penalised for evading the word filter, yet others who do the same do not.