Used to be broken

I am getting a little tired of playing twister with you. sigh My point was the conservative departure from the position that "illegal is illegal" makes no sense and is inconsistent with the enforcement only mentality, which gives rise to the question of it's legitimacy in the circumstances suggested earlier going on in Florida, someone advocating a pass for the paler tourists.
While you may cling to a belief system that denies a significant portion of the illegal population entered the country by means other than illegally crossing the border ie business and tourist VISA's, according to the Congressional Research Service that is simply not true.;
Reliable estimates of the number of nonimmigrant overstays are not available, and the most recent sample estimates range from 31% to 57% of the unauthorized population (depending on methodology) in 2006. Combined, visitor visas issued for tourism and business comprised the largest group of nonimmigrants in FY2008, with about 4.7 million or 71.1% In 2006, the Pew Hispanic Center applied the Warren methodology (with some modifications) to their estimates of the unauthorized resident alien population in 2006. Their estimates suggest that out of an unauthorized resident alien population of 11.5 million to 12 million, about 4 million to 5.5 million, or between 33% and 50%, are nonimmigrant overstays.38 The 2006 estimate remains the most recent calculation.
While I agree those that have already adjusted status are no longer a part of the illegal alien community and have questions of equity regarding that path as it relates to the treatment of an EWI vs someone who came with intent to immigrate. During the period from the day their VISA expires until they adjust status, they are considered members of the illegal alien population. Don't forget the mantra, "illegal is illegal".

I guess the point is lost that it seems odd that a conservative would depart from the enforcement only approach to the don't inconvenience Cannuck's on vacation approach. Regardless of how many people cross the southern border daily they estimate that 40% of all illegal immigrants are not coming from there. So if you are going to "get tuff" get tuff on everyone don't take a U turn when it comes to enforcement to as the goof ball said, provide "comfort language".
Once they start rousting Canadians and other paler folks in high tourist areas, then and only then will some of the issues that "profiling" come into the light. Primarily the pain and inconvenience of interacting with DHS agents in the course of conducting ones daily affairs.
I think DHS rousting tourists is a good thing actually and fits well with the conservative mantra oft heard "if it looks like duck walks like a duck, its probably a duck". High traffic tourist areas should be fertile ground for Enforcement Only type behavior, filled with lots of foreigners who "might be illegal". If you live in Arizona and your brown, or for that matter florida its what 1/3 Hispanic population? So its a one in three chance if you get pulled over you get
additional questioning about your legal status. I think when they pull over anyone.. they should just check to make sure they are here legally.. enforce the laws !

Well, that is great news!.. I thought that the last email you got meant that the interview date was the next email you would get in a couple of days, but didn't want to get your hopes up too much because other posters thought that it meant something else entirely.
I hope you and your family have a wonderful holiday and can find some reasonable airfares. (hint flying on Thanksgiving day is usually a bargain and has lots of extra seats on the plane)
Have your spouse go ahead and get medical done as soon as possible so you don't have any hangups with a re-do on a TB test or annoying stuff like that, so you will have time to deal with it. The medical is good for a year I think.

The problem is they have no medical training just like the folks here on VJ have no immigration legal training :0 That said I would not trust the process to the medical folks faxing something to the CSC.
Make up a letter with the treating physicians letterhead information or get letterhead from his office, you put the following information on it using medical lingo and laymens terms and get the Dr. to sign it, its typed its neat they can read it and spells out what is going on;
Patient Name:
Diagnosis:
History:
Medications:
Prognosis:
Treatment Plan:
Recommendations: *here goes tying the need for your/spouses presence to improve patient condition
THEN GET Dr. Signature Block and Dr's signature and/or stamp.
*** Dr will not be good at doing this and confused by what is being asked likely what they send to CSC will not help.
Also add information from NIH website (national institute of health) about the condition.
Your letter should spell out why you need the expedite. This is a chronic condition, but that is not expedite criteria, there are lots of folks with chronic serious conditions in this process, its not a ticket to faster processing, but if there is a situation going on that escalates the immediate seriousness of the child's condition that should suffice for expedite. In order to get approved you have to tie the need for the expedite to what emergent situation is going on right now that will alleviate suffering by speeding up this process, not simply proving a condition exisits
Hope this helps, Good luck.

Take a look at the dates to determine each individual overstay and how long it was. If no proceedings were entered into and it was less than 180 days each time on all overstays you might not have an issue; I don't think they add them up but look at each entry and exit. You were probably denied another entry because of this but you might not have a bar. And no you cannot submit the I601 before you get the VISA interview and they tell you what bar you have. If you were denied entry at POE instead of consulate, you might have to file I212? Not sure on that
H. Unlawful Presence - INA 212(a)(9)(B) and ©
1. Inadmissibility Provisions Based on Unlawful Presence
Inadmissible under
INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I)
If an alien has resided unlawfully in the U.S. for an un interrupted
period of more than 180 days but less than 1 year and then voluntarily
departed, prior to the initiation of removal proceedings, he or she is
inadmissible to the U.S. for a period of 3 years from the date of
departure.
NOTE: If removal proceedings are initiated before the alien has been
in the U.S. for more than a year, and the alien leaves after initiation of
the removal proceedings pursuant to a grant of voluntary departure, but
before the alien has been unlawfully present for more than one year, the
alien is not subject to the three year bar. This is based on language in
the statute itself, which provides that someone with more than 180 days
continuous unlawful presence, but not more than a year of unlawful
presence is inadmissible only if he or she leaves before a removal
proceeding has been initiated. Thus, pursuant to statute, if the alien
leaves after removal proceedings are initiated (e.g., the NTA is filed
with EOIR and served on the applicant), INA 212(a)(6)(9)(B)(i)(I) no
longer applies. However, in this case, there is a chance that the alien is
inadmissible for failure to having attended a removal proceeding (INA
April 28, 2009
40
section 212(a)(6)(B)) and may also be inadmissible based on an in
absentia order of removal (INA section 212(a)(9)(A)). Therefore,
carefully check whether other ground of inadmissibility may apply in
this case.
Also, if the person stays more than one year, the person is inadmissible
under INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) which applies regardless of whether the
applicant is in proceedings or not.
See, 9 FAM 40.92 N2.1, INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I) Departure Prior to
Commencement of Proceedings Required.
Inadmissible under
INA
212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II)
If an alien resided unlawfully in the U.S. for an uninterrupted period of
one year or more, then voluntarily departed or was removed from the
United States, he or she is inadmissible to the U.S. for a period of 10
years from the date of departure or removal.
NOTE: INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) does not include the “prior to the
initiation of removal proceedings” language that is included in
212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I). Thus, if the alien has been unlawfully present for
one year or more, the 10-year bar of inadmissibility applies whether or
not removal proceedings were ever initiated against the alien, and even
if the alien left once the proceedings were initiated.
2. Time Counted as Unlawful Presence
General time that counts as
unlawful presence
Unlawful presence includes any time spent in the U.S. after
April 1, 1997 after the alien’s authorized stay expires, and any
time spent in the U.S. after April 1, 1997, following entry
without inspection or parole, unless one of the exceptions
noted in section 3 below applies.
Unlawful presence must be
uninterrupted and alien must
have left the U.S.
The stay of the alien during which he or she accrues unlawful
presence must be uninterrupted, and the alien must have
subsequently departed from the U.S. for the alien to become
inadmissible under INA 212(a)(9)(B). The alien is not
inadmissible under INA 212(a)(9)(B) if the alien has accrued
the requisite amount of unlawful presence but never departs
the U.S.
Example: If an alien spent 90 days unlawfully in the U.S.,
departed from the U.S., spent 2 weeks abroad, returned to the
U.S., spent 100 days unlawfully in the U.S., and departed from
the U.S., the alien would not be inadmissible under INA
212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I). Despite having a total of 190 days of
unlawful presence in the U.S., the alien did not have at least
181 continuous and uninterrupted days of unlawful presence in
the U.S.

If she is over 18 its probably going to be a problem, and if she attend the interview and she is over 18 more than likely could result in her being detained and deported. Might be something else she can qualify for, so check out the situation with an attorney familiar with this situation BEFORE you go to interview. Also you might not want to show up there without her unless you have extensive and irrefutable proof of you own citizenship so you don't run into several hours of detention as well.
Good luck

If she is over 18 its probably going to be a problem, and if she attend the interview and she is over 18 more than likely could result in her being detained and deported. Might be something else she can qualify for, so check out the situation with an attorney familiar with this situation BEFORE you go to interview. Also you might not want to show up there without her unless you have extensive and irrefutable proof of you own citizenship so you don't run into several hours of detention as well.
Good luck

Sorry to hear about the family illness. Your mention of a 5 year ban is odd. The ban for overstay of 6 months is 3 years and the ban for overstay of 1 year or more is 10 years. You mention you have been living in Texas since you got married almost 2 years ago and have been living here since then, so you are facing a 10 year bar. The other posters are correct you now have to have your husband apply for the I130 and after that is approved and you have your interview you will be able to submit the I601 which is the hardship waiver and depending on how they view your encounter at the border possibly a I212 application as well. The i601 adjudications take roughly 6 months to a year to adjudicate depending on which post handles them.
Depending on the extent of the hardship to your husband you may or may not be approved.
To answer your question regarding a "compassionate VISA" unfortunately the fact that you are married to a US Citizen effectively rules out that type of VISA since it is a non-immigrant VISA therefore it is impossible for the consulate to rule favorably on it since clearly you do have the intention to immigrate.
If it were me I would file simultaneously for my husband to immigrate to Canada in case they do not rule favorably on your I601 application since it can cut down on the time you are apart.

Someone who wants a little peace and quiet?

I think that is kind of harsh. There is no way we can know what this persons circumstances are. Further I think its pretty common for people who actually meet in person fall in love and are in the US to run into insurmountable immigration obstacles. US Citizens can virtually travel 80% of the planet without VISA as can most EU and Canadians, so its the last thought in the mind. Of course being in love you are kind of mildly blinded and although the OP mentioned her family member experience with not being to able to travel, thought that because she was Canadian she could come and go ..the fact she married did change the playing field. Now her life is a nightmare and so is the US Citizen spouse and child.
The reality is the "immigration landscape" if you will is very different depending on the circumstances of your meeting your spouse. Families that are involved in chain migration, arranged marriages and first generation families have recent memory of immigration issues. Someone from the US with no recent immigrants in their family wrongly thinks its "automatic" when you marry someone they let you in. People that meet in the online forums seem to have a leg up on the process because they meet with the intention of eventually immigrating and or bringing someone here.

I think that is kind of harsh. There is no way we can know what this persons circumstances are. Further I think its pretty common for people who actually meet in person fall in love and are in the US to run into insurmountable immigration obstacles. US Citizens can virtually travel 80% of the planet without VISA as can most EU and Canadians, so its the last thought in the mind. Of course being in love you are kind of mildly blinded and although the OP mentioned her family member experience with not being to able to travel, thought that because she was Canadian she could come and go ..the fact she married did change the playing field. Now her life is a nightmare and so is the US Citizen spouse and child.
The reality is the "immigration landscape" if you will is very different depending on the circumstances of your meeting your spouse. Families that are involved in chain migration, arranged marriages and first generation families have recent memory of immigration issues. Someone from the US with no recent immigrants in their family wrongly thinks its "automatic" when you marry someone they let you in. People that meet in the online forums seem to have a leg up on the process because they meet with the intention of eventually immigrating and or bringing someone here.

Sorry to hear about the family illness. Your mention of a 5 year ban is odd. The ban for overstay of 6 months is 3 years and the ban for overstay of 1 year or more is 10 years. You mention you have been living in Texas since you got married almost 2 years ago and have been living here since then, so you are facing a 10 year bar. The other posters are correct you now have to have your husband apply for the I130 and after that is approved and you have your interview you will be able to submit the I601 which is the hardship waiver and depending on how they view your encounter at the border possibly a I212 application as well. The i601 adjudications take roughly 6 months to a year to adjudicate depending on which post handles them.
Depending on the extent of the hardship to your husband you may or may not be approved.
To answer your question regarding a "compassionate VISA" unfortunately the fact that you are married to a US Citizen effectively rules out that type of VISA since it is a non-immigrant VISA therefore it is impossible for the consulate to rule favorably on it since clearly you do have the intention to immigrate.
If it were me I would file simultaneously for my husband to immigrate to Canada in case they do not rule favorably on your I601 application since it can cut down on the time you are apart.

Sorry to hear about the family illness. Your mention of a 5 year ban is odd. The ban for overstay of 6 months is 3 years and the ban for overstay of 1 year or more is 10 years. You mention you have been living in Texas since you got married almost 2 years ago and have been living here since then, so you are facing a 10 year bar. The other posters are correct you now have to have your husband apply for the I130 and after that is approved and you have your interview you will be able to submit the I601 which is the hardship waiver and depending on how they view your encounter at the border possibly a I212 application as well. The i601 adjudications take roughly 6 months to a year to adjudicate depending on which post handles them.
Depending on the extent of the hardship to your husband you may or may not be approved.
To answer your question regarding a "compassionate VISA" unfortunately the fact that you are married to a US Citizen effectively rules out that type of VISA since it is a non-immigrant VISA therefore it is impossible for the consulate to rule favorably on it since clearly you do have the intention to immigrate.
If it were me I would file simultaneously for my husband to immigrate to Canada in case they do not rule favorably on your I601 application since it can cut down on the time you are apart.

Thanks , he was there today and to put it politely they are not "reasonable" , and they insisted that he needed the original so I told my husband to find a color printer and print it on that. Our case number is not on the website it still lists May appointment dates.
I emailed both consulates the Polish in Minsk and the US in Poland and attached the packet I got from NVC. I asked the US Consulate in Poland to Fax a copy of the appointment letter to the Embassy in Minsk.
*What kind of ticks me off is that I asked NVC to schedule him in Moscow so we would not have this problem with VISA's.
Having visited this part of the world several times I can say they love their bureacracy. spl?

There is no "rewards" for honesty with DHS period. The only thing that can come of this type of disclosure is futher inquiry. STOP what you are doing and find a board certified Attorney registered with AILA. It might seem expensive but making a misrepresentation in error ..in the eyes of DHS is very serious.

I would disagree with this statement, the Constitution and the bill of rights does address free association and there are court cases that support a right to family unity.
That said USCIS and the State Department do not recognize this and Congress has put laws in place that interfere with these US Citizen rights. Some day we might see a court case to deal with Mixed Status family rights. In the meantime a good attorney would be the best route to family reunification.

I don't think you are getting any responses on this because its not clear what is happening. Do you have an NVC number? Have you paid all fees? Sent from whom to whom and why would they send it back to you?
If you just have an approved petition from USCIS and hadn't paid fees entering into the NVC process, you might be able to "activate" your case by paying a fee or emailing NVC ?

There is no "rewards" for honesty with DHS period. The only thing that can come of this type of disclosure is futher inquiry. STOP what you are doing and find a board certified Attorney registered with AILA. It might seem expensive but making a misrepresentation in error ..in the eyes of DHS is very serious.