Brit1

This is wrong - you can get married while visiting on a tourist visa. Just because one gets married, it doesn't mean one isn't "visiting".

I'm not sure how many times I have to write the same thing, but again this is incorrect. An I-9 is required to be on file for employees, sure, but again you are not required to fill in an I-9 form until you are offered employment. An employer is not permitted to verify your employment status until you fill in an I-9 form which, again, you are not required to do (in fact, not permitted to do, according to the form instructions) until offered a job.

This is incorrect. The I-9 form specifically states that the employee must(!!) not provide the A# information, or information about their citizenship or otherwise until offer of employment has been made. This is to prevent discrimination between different types of work authorized people. 
 
https://www.uscis.gov/system/files_force/files/form/i-9-paper-version.pdf?download=1
 
You are mixing this up with an employer's need to verify work authorization *after* having made an offer of employment. Of course, it is appropriate to request information for this process (through the I-9 form).

I don't think anyone knows right now. I suspect more will become clearer in the next week or so. I'm sorry you're having to go through this, it must be an awful time

It seems like the EO is targeting the 7 specific countries.
 
As a side note: I highly doubt the order barring current LPR's from those countries will remain intact for very long. It's already been blocked for now  
 
LPR's belong here. This is as much their home as it is my home as a natural-born USC . LPR's went through an incredibly mentally taxing and emotionally stressful process just to be here; the general public won't let them be kept from their home. 

Temporarily until the federal court hears the case. The stay means the deportation is blocked until the court can hear the case and make a ruling.

This is wrong - you can get married while visiting on a tourist visa. Just because one gets married, it doesn't mean one isn't "visiting".

This is wrong - you can get married while visiting on a tourist visa. Just because one gets married, it doesn't mean one isn't "visiting".

This is wrong - you can get married while visiting on a tourist visa. Just because one gets married, it doesn't mean one isn't "visiting".

This is wrong - you can get married while visiting on a tourist visa. Just because one gets married, it doesn't mean one isn't "visiting".

One would have to be naive to think anyone but the American consumer would end up paying for this wall. One way or another. 

USCIS just wants to see that you're free to marry and have met in person. I'm not saying you shouldn't include chat records, but they can be faked and are just not compelling evidence. I've never bothered to read them. I highly doubt any officer will take the time to look at them. 

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

B2s are to visit, not to live.

But there are no unusual circumstances here - again, stop trying to scare people with misinformation.
 
The OP has been in a relationship for several years, and they have spent upwards of 10 months together in the past 3 years. The last time she visits, they decide they've had enough of the long distance, so marry at a court house.
 
One might argue that this is far more "natural" a relationship progression than the couple who meet online, meet in person for a week then file a K-1 application. 
 
To the OP, again you will have no problem.  It would be a good idea to start collecting evidence of financial comingling - so try and get put on the lease (if you rent), or open a joint bank account, added as a dependent to your husbands health insurance, beneficiary to any life insurance, etc. Then, by the time your interview comes around, you'll have lots of evidence.

But there are no unusual circumstances here - again, stop trying to scare people with misinformation.
 
The OP has been in a relationship for several years, and they have spent upwards of 10 months together in the past 3 years. The last time she visits, they decide they've had enough of the long distance, so marry at a court house.
 
One might argue that this is far more "natural" a relationship progression than the couple who meet online, meet in person for a week then file a K-1 application. 
 
To the OP, again you will have no problem.  It would be a good idea to start collecting evidence of financial comingling - so try and get put on the lease (if you rent), or open a joint bank account, added as a dependent to your husbands health insurance, beneficiary to any life insurance, etc. Then, by the time your interview comes around, you'll have lots of evidence.

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

You're posting so much misinformation. They do not have to convince USCIS of anything of the sort - CBP granted entry, and thus the OP showed no intent of marrying. Now, they just proceed like a normal AOS.
 
Seriously, people need to stop this labelling those who didn't use the K-1 process as "illegal". 

Had I known this, I wouldn't have spent my time worrying about the repercussions of marrying so quickly. lol Still good to know now though. Thank you very much!  

You're over thinking it

Thank you very much!  
It's as I said above, we have discussed marriage before I came to visit him in the US but we never made any real/sure plans. It just happened. Right now I'm between staying here and filing AOS or returning to my home country and getting a Spouse Visa but I'm now leaning more on doing the former if there won't be any real problems doing it (like me being deported or something?).