Myopia

VAWA application are being totally abused...its the replacement path for Anchor babies ( from the 70's-80's). The min requirements for it are set to low....crazy

Bumping a thread from 2009 is weird.

Arizona is one of those states with Border Patrol roadblocks. She is still out of status until she has an approved green card.

I would fly before I drive and face one of those road blocks.

Actually Just-a-shooter is right. USCIS considers using someone elses SSN (esp if that person is a USC) as pretending to be a USC and carries a lifetime ban.

http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/291953-got-married-to-my-wife-who-overstayed-have-a-few-questions/

And if you don't trust VJ try the SSA: http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/1253/~/using-someone-else%27s-social-security-number this post was updated 8th Feb 2011 unlike your link that's from Dec 2010. She might not get charged by the courts, but she will get a lifetime ban from immigration.

I don't believe it matters how old my link is.

The most recent judicial body to take on the issue, the Colorado Supreme Court, ruled last month that a man who used his real name but someone else's Social Security number to obtain a car loan was not guilty of "criminal impersonation," overturning convictions by lower courts.

And this was a ruling from the Supreme Court.

That follows a ruling last year by the U.S. Supreme Court that a Mexican man who gave a false SSN to get a job at an Illinois steel plant could not be convicted under federal identity theft laws because he did not knowingly use another person's identifying number. The ruling overturned an opinion by a federal appeals court in St. Louis -- and contradicted earlier findings by circuit courts in the Southeast, upper Midwest and the Gulf states.

I get that it's apples and oranges though. Thanks.

so you have commited the crime of identity theft, even if your friend gave you permission to use her number.

to identify yourself falsely to the IRS or any other governmental agency is to commit another crime. if the number belongs to an American citizen, then you have a criminal de-facto claim to US citizenship going against you as well (3 crimes). that one is good for a lifetime ban that is not waiverable, as well as deportation.

telling you the truth is helping you, and yes, i am experienced.

Really. Experienced at what?

Courts ruling that using someone elses ssn is not a crime??!

I just heard the news from my friend. His wife did her interview today, and got approved. They said the greencard is coming within the next 2 to 4 weeks.

And then they have to spend the rest of their lives worrying that the ex husband doesn't rear his head and try to immigrate to the US.

Oh well.

Perhaps if you mean that in a generic way. Having a removal order withdrawn and cancellation of removal both result in the removal order going away. The similarity ends there. Cancellation of removal is a very specific form of relief. An alien must be qualified to receive it, and must specifically ask for it. A non-immigrant alien generally needs 10 years of presence in the US, no inadmissibilities, and proof of extreme hardship to a qualifying relative before they can even ask for cancellation of removal.

I don't think USCIS is not sure how to handle a case where a removal order has been issued. There's really only two ways they could have come down on this; deny the AOS application for lack of jurisdiction, or hold it in abeyance until the impediment to adjudication no longer exists. The fact that they have a policy means they've already decided how to handle it.

Hold on. Wasn't the entire question pertaining to this memo regarding whether filing for adjustment constituted cancellation of removal; at least that's what I thought you were talking about on the other thread. When you used that phrase I understood it to mean that applying for an adjustment was the same thing as cancellation of removal and that was the issue that was causing issues in the courts as they ruled that a VWP asking to adjust was the same thing as asking for cancellation of a removal(Or was that appeal)

Anyways it makes sense that ICE would remove the impediment before the adjustment could go forward. Sounds like they are using the memo that was issued last year from ICE and the subsequent memo from USCIS as a springboard for this.

An B1 overstayer in removal proceedings will have the opportunity to have their AOS adjudicated and ICE will give them the opportunity to do that.

A VWP overstayer who has a removal order will have to have ICE withdraw the order before their AOS can be adjudicated. The difference being VWP entrants will be held in abeyance(An internal hold) rather than going through the court system like other overstayers.

Have I got it?

Sure, I will explain it to you. I used my friend ss# to apply for a job with pay check month by month, filed tax every year since 2006. You can also go to the front door of home depot or Orchard supply every morning to see how those people get a job. I don't want to go any further or sitting here argue with you and i don't need you to change your mind everyone have their own opinion. I came here for advise and help from those with the experienced.

You really didnt owe him an explanation.

The average american doesn't understand how taxes work. You paid taxes every time you bought food, clothes, or paid a utility bill.

The minute men were one of the most vocal anti immigrant group for a long time. You could not turn on your tv without seeing them, wonder how they are enjoying the fruits of YOUR tax money waiting for their death sentence.One of them killing a 9 yr old execution style.

Minute men or bust!

Minutemen American Defense founder Shawna Forde, 43, decided to fund her border protection group by robbing and killing people she suspected were drug smugglers, according to prosecutors

Funded By Crime!

Why shouldn't a tourist on VWP have to go back to their country and start the process as a CR1?

And how many people can REALLY just go on a vacation or whatever and decide in the middle of the trip to leave their lives in home countries behind (school, job, bank accounts, lease or house, bills, other unfinished business...) because they met someone, fell in love and got married? Not many. That's why I think that most people that come here on VWP, get married and adjust status do that to avoid visa and that's just wrong.

Well speaking for myself, if there is the ability to do so, why should I? Some came here on VWP as a child, some came and were abused by USC, there are a multitude of reasons that someone overstayed.

Actually, I was referring primarily to a removal order issued by a DHS agency other than USCIS, such as CBP or ICE. Any immigration officer that catches a VWP overstay can order them summarily removed. Any removal order stands as an impediment to adjudicating the AOS application. If the removal order were withdrawn then the impediment is removed, and USCIS could adjudicate the AOS application.

Cancellation of removal is a completely different matter. It's an appeal, initiated by the alien, for relief from deportation proceedings. A VWP visitor can't file any sort of appeal.

But by withdrawing a removal order, is it not effectively the same thing as cancellation of removal?

I understand that VWP entrant will not be able to file. Thats crystal clear BUT if ICE withdraw a removal, isnt that a cancellation?

Obviously USCIS are not sure as those cases will be held in abeyance.

Yes, I am waiting for approval for my AOS, as mentioned, I already submitted all documentations to the USCIS (i-485 and i-30) they are all under INITIAL REVIEW, and recently they sent me a BIOMETRICS appointment and I did them already last April 8. But I suppose since I do not have any California ID, yet, I only have Philippine IDs to show. The documentations which I can show are the receipt forms and biometrics forms from USCIS in case they have questions. However, these forms indicate that receipt of such does not mean an appropriation/approval yet of of a status, so that means I am out of status right?

Arizona is not a state that I would go to being out of status.

Actually not true. There are conditions on the residency of the parent that would determine if the baby is a natural US Citizen or not. If one parent is a US citizen then they must have been a resident of the US or an outlying territory for a cumulative time of 5 years, 2 of which must be since they were 14.

Errrm It is true.

"Anchor baby" is a derogatory term for a child born in the United States to immigrant parents, who, as an American citizen, supposedly can facilitate immigration for relatives.[1] The term is generally used as a derogatory reference to the supposed role of the child who automatically qualifies as an American citizen and can later act as a sponsor for other family members.[2] It has been charged that this is a politically charged term, used to spark resentment against immigrants.

The term "anchor baby" is a misnomer – it implies that by having a baby in the US, temporary or illegal immigrants can "anchor" themselves in the US. In fact, a US citizen child cannot file for a US visa for that citizen's parents until 21 years of age, and upon reaching that age, the citizen applicant must also be earning at least 125% of the US poverty threshold to be able to apply.[5] Thus, temporary or illegal immigrants who have babies in the US have no means of remaining legally in the US; they must return home and wait at least until the child reaches age 21. Illegal immigrants usually cannot immigrate even after the child turns 21 since they usually face a multi-year or lifetime ban from immigration to the USA, regardless of sponsorship.[6]

I understand the laws of derivative citizenship. The term "anchor baby" in this instance...in any instance is incorrect and derogatory.

To the OP- It is a shame that the situation is as it is for you at this time. The sad thing is you will not be able to adjust your status in lieu of immigration reform because you did not marry the person who petitioned you to enter the US in the first place.

What you need to do now is consider what the best course of action is. You will have to leave the US and start the process from your home country. If you are married to the US citizen that you are pregnant for(I am assuming he is a USC) then you are able to file a CR1 visa and waivers to return. As long as you are married to the father of your child, the child will be able to have a claim to US citizenship regardless of where the child is born.

The choice is yours. Most importantly take care of yourself and your unborn child. Stress is a terrible mimic for diseases so try to stay stressfree.

It turns my stomach to see the baby being the path back to the usa. And they say there's no such thing as an 'anchor baby'.

OP, does your husband know of your status?

An anchor baby usually has no ties to the US other than having been born there. The parents arent US citizens or LPR's.

Her baby would be a citizen through the father regardless of where the baby was born.

I believe that USCIS is advising field offices to hold those cases in abeyance to determine if the removal order is executed or withdrawn. As long as that removal order is hanging over the alien's head then USCIS can't adjudicate the AOS petition without effectively granting an appeal of the removal order, which the statute won't allow them to do. If the removal order is executed, and the alien leaves the US, then USCIS can close the AOS case as abandoned.

But wouldn't withdrawing the order be the same thing as cancellation of removal? Or would there be a difference because USCIS initiated it rather than the applicant?

Congratulations.

We're kind of getting off the topic of the thread. The subject of whether a VWP visitor should be able to adjust status is certainly worthy of debate, but at the current time the law specifically allows it if the basis is that the alien is an immediate relative of a US citizen. If you have strong feelings about this then you should write your congressman and/or senator and ask that this be included in any immigration reform legislation.

There have been a number of recent circuit court rulings that have cast doubt on whether a VWP overstay can take advantage of the AOS exception in the law. This resulted in an inconsistency in the way that field offices have been handling AOS cases for VWP overstays. The topic of this thread is a policy statement from USCIS, given in response to a question from AILA, and whether that statement will finally restore some consistency to the way that USCIS field offices are handling AOS cases for VWP overstays.

Seeing the response from USCIS in black and white is great. Thanks to Myopia for posting the link. This answers at least one of Mr. Montag's questions - whether AILA got the quote right. There are still several factors that remain to be seen.

What will this policy look like when it's added to the AFM?

In other words, AILA is saying that because this wasn't the issue the courts were being asked to decide then USCIS should just ignore the court's opinions on the matter. If USCIS is willing to proceed on that basis, what happens if a case lands in one of these circuit courts dealing with a VWP overstay who was NOT subject to a removal order, such as one of the cases recently denied in San Diego? What happens if the court reaffirms it's previous opinion that a VWP overstay cannot adjust status, and reaffirms the denial? How is USCIS going to handle this, since it would be diametrically opposed to this policy statement?

Opinions?

I concur with your first observation.

I am curious as to how this will actually play out. USCIS have said clearly that adjusting with the VWP is allowed.

I still think that San Diego is an anomaly and I would be very surprised if they actually started to approve VWP overstay cases.I think the District Manager clearly has his own interpretation of the law and in spite of there having been a memo that did go out, they still remained committed to their own policy.

Do they have to follow a national memo or will they remain rigid until the AFM has been updated?

Obviously this story has not ended because there are cases that are now going to be held in abeyance. I find that a bit odd actually as if they are held in abeyance, that means that USCIS still are not clear on how to deal with the entire cancellation of removal issue.

I was wondering what would happen to those people who were denied in San Diego. I think that they probably will not be able to get a second shot within the US. I can barely find any cases online that are specifically San Diego cases so we may just have to wait and see.

vkn & jsb, I agree with your above points. I believe VWP is abused much more than students who adjust from F-1. First of all VWP is exactly that, a waiver. You get on a plane, you show up get your passport stamped and done. Tourist visas should not be allowed to be abused for purposes of adjusting status. For an F-1 you have to be admitted to a school, show adequate financial resources and go for an interview. Sure, there is abuse of this system too but 9/10 people on F-1 do not Adjust as Myopia claims since this VISA is already considerably difficult to get granted if you are from a "poor" nation. More often than not, upon completion of their studies, F-1s end up with H1Bs or simply do OPT and leave. Sure, plenty overstay and that IMO is a serious crime. The fact that F-1s do meet people (me included) and get married is not a surprise. When you are in a country for 3,4 or more years (typical for a higher degree), is it crazy to think you might have had a relationship with someone that got serious? I had all serious intent to return to the UK when I was done, but I met my husband, we hit it off and got married. Did I need to adjust status through him? No, my future employer was happy to pay for an H1B. Plenty of aerospace industry in Europe, but the PhD programs in the UK just weren't up to par for my specialization, hence why I came here. Tarring all F-1s with the one brush is grossly unfair.

Most of what I wrote about the F1 was tongue in cheek just as the 9 out of 10 that I drew from the air means nothing.

Obviously not all F1's come with the intent to meet someone and stay in the US but if statistics were available, I bet my bottom dollar that the same amount that overstay on different visas are about the same. Yes, you could have got a H1B Visa but you would have waited years for a green card. Keep it real.

don't get me wrong, let's not argue about this since I see you getting upset

There is no argument. I understand both sides of the coin and happily for both of our sakes so does the US government.

hi all, the topic title says it all, i guess. the only thing i should add is that, we had a religious marriage ceremony overseas and then reentered the states with my F1 visa. at the time i wasn't considering changing my status. we then got a marriage certificate here in the USA and had a civil ceremony at the local county clerk. we recently decided that it would be best for the both of us if i applied for a green card, we just want to make sure whether we should hire a lawyer or not considering that we had a religious ceremony overseas then got married again here in the USA. i'm not sure if that's legal or not. my visa is still valid for another 3 years if that makes any difference.

anyway, i appreciate any advice or pointers as my wife and i really don't know what we're doing.

thanks in advance.

Where did you get married? Depending where you got married, your religious marriage may be legal.

If it was just a nikkah with an Imam and witnesses that was done in the masjid/home/etc that was performed, in the UK for example, then it would not be legal for immigration purposes as the UK does not recognize religious ceremonies that are done without a license.

However if you married in a land where the nikkah is legally recognized then it would be legal for USCIS purposes.

I got married religiously and civilly to my husband at separate times in a state that a) recognizes religious marriages that are performed without a license and b) allows a man and woman to marry more than one time to the same person.

We got married religiously first then married civilly on the advice of a lawyer which was good advice as I later discovered that USCIS can deny I-130/I-485 marriages that are not recorded even if they are legal in the state that you live in (Ie. Common law marriages) I wanted to play it safe. I also sent USCIS a letter detailing the fact that we were married religiously.

I have read about one couple who were denied adjustment because they did not mention the fact that they were married outside of the US, They had come to the US and married in the US and used that secondary date for their adjustment. Both marriages were legal yet they were denied for concealing the first marriage.

- If he listed you as his dependent in his tax returns, take those forms. He probably listed you as one of his dependants when you weren't working and so it means he had to take care of you financially. We put my name in my husband's tax return as dependent as I wasn't working at that time.

Your husband should not have claimed you as a dependant. If he did then did he file as head of household?

He should have filed as married filing jointly at the very least.

You can amend your taxes if it is within the past three years at no fee but you may owe them money or they may owe you.

Ok so this really doesn't apply to me but I believe this is a mistake and VWPs shouldn't be allowed to adjust status, period.

Why? coz like many have said you are a tourist you came here with a special program and you don't even own a visa, visit the country and go back. On that notion a B1/B2 tourist visas shouldn't be allowed to adjust status too, they are too are tourists.

It shouldn't/doesn't matter if you had intent or not, it shouldn't be allowed.

On the other hand work and student visa should be able to adjust, now i am not saying this coz i am an F1 but because...

an F1 student or an individual holding an H1B is living here for many years. A student roughly lives in the States for 4 years. Learning the cultures etc.etc. his/her mind adjusting to the country... same goes for an H1B person, they can carry it for 6 consecutive years... so adjusting from student and work visas MAKES SENSE.

But allowing a VWP or B1/B2 to adjust status is just doesn't make any sense. and even should be considered fraud/illegal from the start. Like i said before, so called `intent` is irrelavent. You can't have a sudden change of hearts once you are in the country! `Oh i guess i like it here i am gonna stay...`. No no this is just wrong, what's worse is it is not FAIR to those on IR1/CR1.

but you know what guys... yes current system doesn't MAKE SENSE but since it is approved, I think we should all shxx the hell up, including me

Why should an F1 be able to adjust any more than a B1/B2/VWP?

The F1 comes to the US to study but 9 times out of 10 meets a USC and gets married. How is that fair to those that come from more educated nations who don't need the F1 as badly as those from those less developed countries? The F1 has been used as a way to meet and marry a spouse, that is common knowledge.

How many posts have I read from F1 holders who say that they dropped out of school etc and want to adjust. I guess school wasn't as important as finding a way to get into the US and money talks. If the US government see that you have money to pay for your education (that stimulates the economy in a way) then you are more likely to get that visa as opposed to a regular B1.

Why shouldn't an F1 have to go back to their country and start the process as a CR1?

If you want to deny the adjustment for those others then I think F1's too.

The only legitimate adjusters in this case would be K1 or H1b holders (As after all, if you slog your guts out for umpteen years you should be able to get some social security at the end of it!)

Maybe so, but in most cases there is no way to prove intent or not. It's easy to say "well I came here and this happened" with no real proof required. Anyone can say that.

I do think everyone (including K-1s) should be interviewed for AOS because that is one of the most important applications we submit, but at least K-1s have already had an interview before that point.

I get all your points. I do. I want you to know that I'm not this gleeful person who doesn't understand other peoples opinions. I do. I hear similar types of opinions from my family members in the Uk who are livid at the Immigration process in the Uk and absolutely detest the types of immigrants that can live and work in the UK. I don't share their view because I believe in a global community.

The thing is the VWP is an allowance than is made for the ease of travel for citizens of certain countries and until one or more get kicked off the program for whatever reasons, the VWP is always the easiest way for short term travel to the US. It is a privilege and I am glad that it is available for my relatives who can use it to visit me and the US. Its a privilege that they believe that they deserve as British citizens.

Overstaying is a crime just as driving without a license is a crime and burning the american flag is a crime. The fact that it is a crime that is forgiven on marriage to a spouse is a sign that this is a crime that can be squashed just by spending $1500. If every squashing of every crime was so easy! :innocent

Ps. I think only a fool would promote overstaying. You don't get to go to your country whilst out of status. That is not easy.

In that case send the whole family back....they will be togeather.

Most likely when they lost their home and children had to go to counseling that was also aid by taxpayers.

At least they owned theirs.

The children's mother is an American. Are you saying the American children of an American mother should not be able to benefit from their home country?

If you've been married for 10 years and don't have LPR status in the US, then you must have it somewhere else. If you have been living here for 10 years without LPR status well then that's a whole other issue.

Don't get me wrong, I fully understand that separating a couple is extremely hard on the couple, but most of us who came here in a K visa had to do exactly that. We had no choice. Why should people who cheat the system get to stay here while those of us who did it properly had to stay away and wait for approval? One rule for everyone.

It is not cheating the system if there is no intent. I am going to keep banging that point over and over. Not everyone comes to the US with a notion that residency here is akin to owning the golden fleece. There are umpteen reasons that someone could overstay. Umpteen reasons why someone would not have got on that plane back to their own country. Not everyone comes to the Us with a spouse in mind and a plan in hand.

I dont even get these attitudes because adjusting is allowed in most western countries. Even in Australia.

The old adage of " line jumpers" doesn't even fit in these situations because spouses of a US citizen have an immediate number available.

When you file the K1, it goes through a whole other process to someone who adjusts off the VWP. The only way that there is some comparison in timelines is when the VWP and K1's go through the AOS process in the USA. ALL VWP adjustments have an interview. The same can not be said for K1's.

I really find these comments interesting.

Department of Homeland Security? Am I right?

The legislative branch of government write the laws. They consist of congress, the senate and the house of representatives. If you dont like the way that the law is written than write to your congressman and senators.

You do the same exact paper work and it would cost the same too, but you skip the line and enter the country by lieing and the file for AOS.

VWP was never designed for ppl who marry a USC and then enter as a visitor and file for AOS.

For the same purpose we have K1 and CR1, unless as a VWP you want to cheat the system and use the VWP to enter the country and file for AOS.

VWP was never meant for entering the country and file for AOS.

The criminal background check done before someone enters the country has much more restrictive power and same goes for the Medical check as well.

I am not sure how many immigration systems you have gone thru or process you have gone thru, but I can say for myself I have seen plenty.

This certainly is a loophole in the VWP Process, you agree or don’t does not matter.

If you are married to USC then you wait for your time as everybody else does and complete your K1 process or your CR1 process and then enter US.

It may surprise you but not everyone comes to the US and lies. Not everyone got on the plane with the hidden intention of finding a spouse and adjusting status. I think there is probably about an equal number of men and women who dupe USC and come on a fiancee/spouse visa.

I come from a Western country so obviously travel for me has always been different than for someone living in a high fraud country. On the European passport I can live and work in over 27 countries without ever having to go through the immigration process, I can visit numerous others and get a visa at point of entry and obviously enter the US as part of the VWP. I guess that is the benefit that I have being born in the UK.

I think the medical check is probably more restrictive if you come from a place where certain diseases are not eradicated yet, like TB in the Philipines but a medical check from the UK is hardly going to cause issues for most of the population as there is an active immunization system.

I dont have to agree with you. I agree with the way that the US government see the situation and that's the only opinion that counts.