S2N

When you say you want to travel back to the U.S., is it permanently because of a job offer or just to visit as tourists? If permanently and you have a job offer, etc. you could potentially see if the local consulate is willing to entertain Direct Consular Filing (DCF) for the children while the spouse is overseas. More experienced posters might have thoughts on how likely this is, but it’s free to ask the local consulate if they’d accept.

That’s what we did as well; in addition to being the right thing to do, it makes future business with the government easier if you have to worry about getting a security clearance in the future or providing/working on government contracts, plus whatever potential future issues could arise when trying to naturalize if a future administration decides to issue guidance on standards of review of people who AOS’d on an overstay. My initial response was mainly to let you know that there’s not much to worry about. You’re intending to follow the law. Currently USCIS and CBP aren’t even prioritizing enforcing the law for blatantly fraudulent spousal overstay AOS cases. If you’re intending to follow the law and you have a decent way to show that’s the intent, there’s a very low chance of there being issues at the airport or when filing a petition.

Sorry for beating a dead horse but your wording here is a bit ambiguous. The requirement isn’t 5 consecutive years. It’s 5 total years in your life, including two after 14. Doesn’t need to be 5 recent years. Doesn’t need to be 5 years before birth. It’s 1825 total days in your life with 730 days being after 14.

I would reach out to the U.S. sponsor and see if they have it. If it’s a government sponsor and they say they can’t find it FOIA them to get the people who are skilled at finding records involved.

If it was a public institution try a state level FOIA request. That’ll get the public information officer involved and lead to a more thorough search (hopefully.) Might take longer, but if you’ve already reached out worth a shot.

If the children are indeed US citizens, depending on the timeline OP could apply for a passport with secondary evidence rather than apply for a CRBA and then a passport. A US passport is definitive evidence of US citizenship and it’s an entitlement of a citizen even if they don’t have previous primary documentation of citizenship. OP would just need to prove presence in the U.S. for five years, two of which after the age of 14. Could be accomplished by social security statements, high school or university transcripts, employment contracts/paystubs, leases, etc. Essentially the same evidence as a CRBA. Obviously getting a CRBA would be preferable first, but if there’s a time crunch that step can be skipped. I’d recommend getting one or a citizenship certificate as well after getting a passport since those never expire, but there’s also other options if there’s a rush to travel.

If their plans change it’s allowed. What’s not allowed is planning to do it on entrance, though USCIS basically overlooks that type of fraud these days. ESTA->Green card and AOS after 91 days and claiming plans changed is averaging 4-6 months these days and is easily the quickest way for a loved one who resides overseas to become an LPR. Under Biden legalizing those overstays became the priority vs. processing consular applications. Like @pushbrk I’m not suggesting that just pointing out the elephant in the room. I’m doing consular processing and I think it’s the right thing to do, but even under Trump USCIS has taken a very lenient approach to AOS for spousal overstays on ESTA, and is approving them at a quicker rate than counselor cases.

Someone on Reddit mentioned to double check the signature sections for online filed I-130s because apparently its been a trend for people to sign them wrong, and while I didn't screw that up, while I was scanning through it I noticed that my response to question 13 (my husband's residence outside the US) was showing up as blank on the PDF (screenshot attached.) I vaguely remember getting an error on the online form when trying to type in SAME because it didn't like for formating or something like that. Since we'd already provided his physical address is leaving this blank something I need to be worried about or should I submit unsolicited evidence clarifying it?

USCIS for the most part hasn’t been hit by those (yet)

Correct. But taking a call while in the United States isn’t working a 9-5. What’s work vs. what’s business is context specific and the one of the key distinctions is whether it’s temporary, and there’s also the nature of the work performed (i.e. are you actively creating something productive or are you taking meetings, etc.) Your situation is more of taking a call once and a while.

For anyone who has worked in the federal sphere — Adobe esignatures are the federal government’s preferred form of signature for doing business and most federally generated documents have one these days. Haven’t seen a wet signature on a federal document in over five years. Now whether or not they’ll accept your electronic signature is agency-by-agency. The IRS in particular has weird rules on it. But a consulate will definitely accept a government generated esignature on a government document because like pushbrk showed — it’s what they use.

No, it does not count as work for ESTA. You are allowed to do the same activities you would do on a B1/B2 visa and conducting business in your home country from the United States is allowed under those. People on the internet always forget that business is a valid use of those visas and it’s not the same as work. Example: a businessman comes to the United States from Chile and takes a call from his hotel in Miami with his Chilean employer while attending a conference at a hotel there. Clearly allowed under the terms of a B1/B2 visa. Therefore clearly allowed under ESTA. Your suegra is visiting you in the United States and takes a call from her property manager to tell him how to manage business in Chile. That’s even less work than the example above — she’s a businesswoman managing a business in her native country while legally in the U.S. permitted under B1/B2; therefore permitted under ESTA. The basic test is “would this be allowed if I replaced [family member] with 'businessperson visiting the United States'”

Ask the CBP or airline “greeters” after you get off the silly Dulles people movers which line to get in. Every airport processes these in a different way and if you’re entering with your spouse the answer might change. You’re not entering on ESTA though and don’t use Global Entry. For what it’s worth Dulles these days is one of the more relaxed CBP stations around. Depending on the time of day it’s also pretty quick. Usually takes my husband 20 minutes max to get through CBP after the plane lands, but he’s always arriving between midnight and 2am.

Printed tax return transcripts from the IRS website are official records and are accepted as definitive proof of what your tax return said virtually everywhere — that includes when dealing immigration.

Even ignoring the gay or the immigration component, getting legally married in the US is significantly easier than in Latin America. If you’re fine with not doing in person Utah is a good way to go.

Oh, it’s absolutely the reason why it’s there. SCOTUS just called their bluff on it and ruled that approach unconstitutional so it’s essentially a meaningless question once you actually are naturalized since there’s a recent Supreme Court precedent ruling against USCIS/DOJ. But that’s the kicker — you have to get naturalized first and no one really wants to be the test case for it being an unconstitutionally vague question before the point of naturalization… If they go over it while reviewing the form mention it then.

Yeah, agreed the situation is different (revoking for a non-material lie is different than not granting for a non-material misleading statement.) I did think it worth noting though that the question has drawn ridicule from the Chief Justice of the United States for essentially being a gotcha question that has no right answer. It’s not going to be updated anytime soon, but if everyone interpreted it as literally as USCIS wants, everyone would have to check yes and that’s also clearly not within the intent of the INA/how courts read the situation. All that to say — I think OP is going to be fine and just need to verbally mention it at the interview.

Depends on your country and the embassy wait times. L1 is a dual intent visa. You’re allowed to enter the U.S. with the intent of applying for a green card with it. If it were me I’d wait to see if the L1 is approved first and if it is adjust once you’re here. There’s no disadvantage to you to letting someone sponsor you for an L1 as you can work while you’re here waiting for the AOS to process. If the I-130 is approved first and you get an IR-1 interview before an L1 is issued, obviously go for that I’m assuming money isn’t a consideration here as IR-1 rather than AOS from L1 is cheaper.

If you get an L-1 approved and enter the U.S. on it you can file an I-485 after arriving in the U.S. If the I-130 is pending you send in an AOS package (I-485 and related forms) with the I-130 receipt as a cover. If it’s approved and sent to NVC send them an email/upload a letter informing them of your intent to adjust status and send the I-485, etc. to USCIS.

And really October 15 is the cut-off because of the automatic extension.

If you filed electronically see if you can get the transcripts. IRS processes them pretty fast these days (mine were available next day last year) and they’re preferred. They don’t always process that fast though. If you need to use a 1040 for processing delays or some reason what Crazy Cat said is correct.

OP — file form 4868 to request the automatic extension and either email a PDF of the confirmation email or email a scan of the paper form you mail in. You can do it yourself using any of the tax prep softwares assuming your wife has an ITIN or you’re married filing separately. In that case the IRS will email you a receipt notice. If you’re filing jointly and she doesn’t have an ITIN you can paper file the extension request, but you don’t get a receipt. In that case just scan a copy of it and send to the IRS via certified mail so you have proof of mailing and scan the proof of mailing to your wife. Both of those will show you’re in compliance with the Internal Revenue Code and also why taxes aren’t filed yet in April. Actually filing would be better, but documentation that you’re telling the IRS that you legally might not file by 4/15 should help if the returns are requested. You can still file by 4/15 even if you request the automatic extension. 1099s have a 2/15 deadline and are frequently screwed up by the issuer, and K-1s get sent out late March. In theory everyone should have everything they need in order to file by 4/15, but people with complex tax situations usually don’t, which is why the automatic extension exists.

If it’s something that worries you, disclose it in the interview and say you misunderstood the question. Generally speaking US government officials are good at determining the difference between intentional lying and an honest mistake. And like I said above, that question was mocked by a Supreme Court justice for how ridiculous it is since it would include jaywalking and speeding, which are "offenses" but not crimes. The wording is so broad as to make the only answer yes. You are not the first person to misunderstand that and check no when you’d previously admitted drug use and you won’t be the last. Immigration officers get it’s a weirdly worded question and disclosing it orally will likely be enough, especially since it was decades ago. If you’re going to keep worrying though, it might be worth talking to a lawyer to ease your anxiety. I don’t think this is that complicated, but there’s value in it if it puts you at ease with a course of action.

I guess Maslenjak concerned removing naturalization after it’d already been approved, but the case history here contained discussion of this question on the N-400. The only correct answer to it as literally worded is “yes” for anyone filling out the form, which the Chief Justice pointed out in oral arguments — the lawyer from the government agreed with his interpretation that as written it would require disclosing every time you speed and don’t get a ticket. With the new administration who knows how USCIS will look at stuff, but the principle of the law is that immaterial false statements, even if knowingly false, are not bars to citizenship. I think OP would be fine clarifying in the interview their confusion and probably doesn’t need a lawyer, but it never hurts to get one if there’s cause for concern. Also for anyone curious, the oral argument exchange on this was somewhat funny: https://m.soundcloud.com/cnn/maslenjak-v-us-oral-argument-april-26-2017 Starts around 25:50

Marijuana has special rules in place vs other drugs on the good moral character question. It’s extremely unlikely that trying it 20-something years ago would make someone ineligible for citizenship. If I was OP, I’d mention it in the interview to be safe and explain their confusion, but it’d also probably fall under the "immaterial false statements" from Maslenjak v. United States. For anyone unaware of the context of that case: the wife of a Serbian war criminal lied on her naturalization application/interview about her husband’s status as a war criminal and SCOTUS unanimously ruled that alone wasn’t sufficient to strip her of her naturalized citizenship without the government proving it had an impact on the decision. Yes, tell the truth, mention it in the interview if you feel that the most honest answer is “yes”, but if a conservative Supreme Court sided with a war criminal’s wife on this, I’m going to guess that someone being confused on how to answer a question about smoking pot in their 20s is on solid legal ground.