Jump to content

dave312

Members
  • Content Count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About dave312

  • Rank
    Newbie
  • Member # 286483

Immigration Timeline & Photos

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yes, I read everything on the website already. She's not in removal yet, so they obviously haven't filed for cancellation. I'm positive that what you copy/pasted only applies to people who apply for healthcare after applying for COR.
  2. We live in a pretty conservative state, so that's why I'm not exactly optimistic about her chances. In addition, USCIS found that she had committed fraud in the process, so that is another nail in the coffin. Given that context and her minuscule chance of obtaining COR, I don't think it's even worth it to try and pay back the subsidies. First of all, she would be putting herself back in the spot light. Second, the healthcare.gov application states that they will not share information with DHS, except to verify one's status, and the DHS states that they won't use it against the immigrant. That means that there is a good chance it might not even be brought up in removals. Third, only my relative is currently working, so their income is legitimately low enough to receive subsidies. They do not have the means to purchase private insurance. Fourth, it's been several years since her NTA was issued, and it could another couple of years (hopefully) before the hearing is scheduled. That would be a long time without insurance.
  3. Thanks for your response. Their attorney cannot give them a definite answer on how they should proceed. I don't think most immigration attorneys know much about the ACA. It's a relatively new development and I imagine that the subset of their clients who are in removal proceedings, is married to a USC spouse, and have ACA coverage is probably minuscule or non-existent. They can drop their current coverage and refrain from applying for future coverage, but that still leaves the question of what to do about their previous subsidies. Can you please elaborate? Are you saying that the typical COR has a low chance of success, but will allow for the deportee to remain in the country a little longer?
  4. Long story short, my relative's I-751 filed on the basis of her marriage with her ex-spouse was denied and she was issued a notice to appear. It's been several years since and she's remarried to another USC spouse. The USC spouse submitted a marketplace application in his name, but with my relative as the beneficiary. They were also eligible for ACA subsidies, which they are currently receiving every month. When the marketplace couldn't verify her status and asked for more evidence, they submitted only their I-130 receipt from USCIS, but not the notice to appear. This was apparently enough for the marketplace and they sent a notice stating that her status was verified. After some research it looks like she is not eligible for ACA coverage due to her not having any actual status. Their lawyer told them that her only avenue of relief from deportation at this point was to try for a cancellation of removal via her USC spouse. However, we are worried that her having received entitlement from the government might hurt her cancellation of removal chances and she might receive a "public charge" on top of what she has already. What should she do at this point to mitigate that risk? Should her spouse pay back the subsidies and withdraw the application? Do nothing and decline to receive them in the future? Would the immigration authorities be able to find out that she's receiving subsidies? The application is under her spouse's name. From my point of view, her cancellation of removal chances are not exactly superb (maybe 20-50%) and, with the recent case backlog, she might not see a merits hearing in 3-6 years or maybe even longer. That is a very long time to live without insurance.
  5. I have a relative that is currently in removal proceedings. Since I am very close to this person, I have been doing lots of research on her situation, but I seem to be going in circles at this point. I am trying to find her a lawyer, but I would love to have the privilege to get some input from the helpful folks on this forum. Background: She has been in the U.S. for almost 20 years now. She married twice (both to U.S. citizens). She has USC children with the second spouse only. Her marriage to the first USC is the basis for her removal. She was issued an NTA back in 2012 with no date specified. The NTA states that she is removable under section 237-a-1-d-1, due to her being "inadmissible" under section 212-a-6-c-i for "willful misrepresentation". The charges are quite severe: it looks like the DHS is accusing her first marriage to be fraudulent and done to gain immigration status. I am aware that she will be permanently barred from the U.S. with few or no forms of relief available if she is adjudicated of these charges. However, I am uncertain whether she should try to fight to charges or accept the charges and file for relief (if any). Around the same time that her NTA was issued, her current USC spouse filed an I-130 on her behalf. The application has basically been stuck in limbo, with the last update 3-4 years ago. I’m not sure if this is a good or bad thing; whether it is delaying her deportation or lower her chance to adjust her status (and cancellation of the removal). If she has no chance to stay in the U.S., then she hopes to at least delay the proceedings until her child goes to college (4 more years). I am honestly not certain of the authenticity of the accusations - whether or not her first marriage was bona fide. She obviously will not tell me. But based on what she's told me so far and the documents she has to support her first marriage (basically several years of tax returns, bills, and photos), I would say she does not have an amazing chance at fighting this charge. Regarding hardship, her current spouse is retired and they have USC children together. To me, she would have a slightly better chance with filing a waiver on the basis of hardship for her spouse. But I've been told that a fraud charge is almost death sentence for these types of cases, so I am not so sure. Please let me know if you have any input on her case, especially if you have gone through the waiver process with the charges she has.
×
×
  • Create New...