drug use

[josearmando 0]

hello evey one i have question the drug use effect on the ir1/cr1 visa

my husband he have judge soon for using drugs and maybe it show on the police certificate is that will be a probleme? just smoking weed and its been a year he stopp that ######

[rsn 135]

hello evey one i have question the drug use effect on the ir1/cr1 visa

my husband he have judge soon for using drugs and maybe it show on the police certificate is that will be a probleme? just smoking weed and its been a year he stopp that ######

Who is your husband, the immigrant from Thailand or the citizen from the U.S?

Edited October 15, 2011 by rsn

[josearmando 0]

he is from thailand and he is coming here to united state

[Ning 619]

hello evey one i have question the drug use effect on the ir1/cr1 visa

my husband he have judge soon for using drugs and maybe it show on the police certificate is that will be a probleme? just smoking weed and its been a year he stopp that ######

Please try to be more clear with the questions.

I have to assume he is going before a judge in Thailand. Is that what you mean? Or is he the USC?

If he is found guilty in Thailand it will show on his police record. If that is the situation I dont think he will be approved for a visa.

Maybe rsn knows what can be done to try to overcome the drug charge if it is on his record.

[Jojo92122 1,924]

Google "immigration inadmissibility crime drug use."

It seems that a drug use conviction could be a basis for denial of an immigration visa. The reasoning is that the US does not want to admit drug users as immigrants which seems reasonable. If the drug user commits to rehabilitation, then it's possible to overcome the drug use issue. Your husband should consider going to a rehabilitation center. You should consult with an immigration lawyer since your husband could be permanently bar from entering the US because of his drug use.

------------------

http://www.everythingaddiction.com/public-policy/federal-law-addiction/drug-immigration-law/drug-related-grounds-of-criminal-inadmissibility-into-the-united-states/

Drug-Related Grounds of Criminal Inadmissibility into the United States

If a foreign national triggers one of the US immigration drug-related criminal grounds of inadmissibility (section 212(a)(2) of the Immigration & Nationality Act), he or she could be permanently barred from entering the US. Most drug-related criminal inadmissibility is potentially waivable for non-immigrant visas. Many of those who have been convicted of drug offenses, however, find that immigrant waivers are very hard to come by.

Controlled Substance Violations

In a nutshell, those who are convicted or who admit to having committed the essential elements of any crime related to a controlled substance pursuant to Section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (CSA) is inadmissible. This 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) bar includes those who are convicted of conspiracy or attempt, if not for the actual crime. This is a very unforgiving ground of inadmissibility as there is no waiver available except for the very limited exception for those who possessed thirty grams of less or marijuana for personal consumption. Section 102 of the CSA lists over 100 drugs that qualify for treatment under the ground of inadmissibility.

While possession, intent to distribute and actual distribution are the usual drug related offenses that we think of in terms of criminal law, the controlled substance bar to admissibility has been extended to include simply being under the influence of drugs, facilitating the sale of a drug, and possession of drug paraphernalia. One case, Desai v. Mukasey, found that a person who distributed imitations of one of the CSA drugs was inadmissible. United States immigration law takes illegal drug issues very seriously.

The effect this prohibition has on those with drug addiction issues is severe. In some cases, simply admitting to having been under the influence of an illegal substance can ruin your chances of immigrating to the US. Unlike in some state criminal courts, where judicial authorities recognize that certain drug-related crime is intimately linked to the offender’s drug addiction issues, immigration law does not consider rehabilitation through attendance at a drug rehab or overcoming a drug addiction sufficient to warrant lenience in evaluating an applicant’s danger or value to American society.

For those with one violation for 30 grams or less of personal marijuana, evidence of rehabilitation can be extremely important, as those applicants are given the opportunity to file an immigrant waiver to try to overcome the inadmissibility. Medical records that show enrollment in treatment centers, attendance records for recovery meetings, and a history of clean drug testing or drug counseling is essential in proving that the person recovering from drug addiction deserves a chance to enter the United States or be granted a particular benefit.

Drug Trafficking

Drug trafficking is another issue that United States immigration authorities take very seriously. Pursuant to INA 212(a)(2)©, an applicant who was a knowing and conscious participant or conduit in an attempt to smuggle a controlled substance is inadmissible to the United States. There is no waiver available for this ground of inadmissibility, even if it can be shown that the trafficking charge is related to an individual’s drug addiction.

To be inadmissible as a drug trafficker, a conviction, or even admitting to the essential elements, is not necessary. If a consular officer or the attorney general has reason to believe that the person trafficking drugs, that’s enough. The reason to believe must be supported by reasonable, substantial, and probative evidence, similar to the probable cause standard from US criminal law. However, if the consular or immigration officer does not detect that the applicant possesses a controlled substance at the time of inspection and admission, they cannot later be deported on this ground of inadmissibility as, obviously, the officer cannot show that he had a “reason to believe” at the time of admission.

The list of drugs which could trigger a drug trafficking charge are found in 21 United States Code 802. The definition of trafficking includes knowingly assisting, abetting, conspiring, and colluding. Further, spouses and children of traffickers who knowingly obtained a financial benefit from the trafficker in the five years prior to application are also inadmissible.

Millie Anne Cavanaugh, Esq. is a Los Angeles immigration attorney and former insurance defense attorney. She is licensed to practice law in California and Massachusetts. The information contained herein is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as a solicitation for your business or as legal advice on any subject matter. You should not act or refrain from acting on the basis of this information without seeking independent legal advice.

---------------------

http://www.addictiontreatmentmagazine.com/addiction-news/addiction-the-law/crime-substance-abuse-issues-in-united-states-immigration/

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…unless they are criminals, alcoholics, drug addicts, sick or really poor.” You may recognize the first part of that sentence as the most famous phrase from The New Colossus, the poem written by Emma Lazarus and etched on the Statue of Liberty over 100 years ago. It represents America’s history of encouraging foreign nationals, who are seeking a better life, to come to America to live and work. The second part of the sentence reflects current US immigration inadmissibility and deportability law under the Immigration & Nationality Act (INA), federal case law, and administrative regulations.

Many of my immigration attorney peers have barely hidden, or even completely transparent, contempt for United States immigration laws and the people who administer them. Some practitioners feel that we should have no border, that everyone who wants to come should be able to come, and that we should never ever “tear families apart” by deporting someone or barring their admission, no matter how dangerous or undesirable they are. That’s not me.

On the flip side, some immigration reform advocates label all aliens as criminals and feel that we should kick ‘em all out, lock the place down, and never interact with another foreign national again. That’s not me either. I’m somewhere in the middle. I believe that a sovereign nation has the duty to regulate its border in such a way does not harm it’s citizens or threaten its future existence by allowing terrorists into the country. We do not have room for everyone who wants to live in America, so exclusions need to be made. Thus, we get to be choosy. However, I believe that we treat certain individuals, such as those suffering from medical or psychological disorders, much more harshly than they deserve to be treated.

Like many social issues in the United States, immigration ignites passions on both sides of the aisle. But, compared to other civil rights movements like race or gender, some laws which regulate immigration in America do not reflect modern norms and need to be overhauled. Take HIV, a communicable disease whose mode of transmission was nailed down at least two decades ago; persons infected with the HIV virus were inadmissible to the United States up until…a few months ago. When the ban was enacted the public health risk of HIV was admittedly serious enough to warrant it, if only because no one knew for certain how it spread. But, even in the face of new evidence that the risk of transmission from casual contact was slim, the law was never repealed. How many thousands of individuals were made to feel the devastation of being told, “you’re not worthy of coming to the US” simply because our government was too lazy to, essentially, update a spreadsheet. And don’t get me started on the fact that being gay or having an extramarital affair could prevent you from becoming a naturalized US citizen. Still.

Drug Addiction & Alcohol Abuse

The same complaint can be made about the treatment of drug addicts and alcoholics by the INA and, to a larger extent, the people that make and implement the federal immigration laws. Over the past 10 years, states have turned the traditional way of handling drug addicts who commit addiction-related crime on its head. Gone are the days of mandatory jail sentences for drug offenders and zero tolerance for recidivism. Judges recognize that crime that occurs in conjunction with or to facilitate drug abuse will not stop until the abuser stops using. Jail does not work for these individuals, either because drugs can be obtained behind bars or because temporarily blocking access to drugs during a period of incarceration does nothing to help reduce the addiction; many start using again immediately upon release. Instead of sentencing addicted criminals to jail, many states sentence drug addicts to treatment, with reduced or eliminated criminal sanctions upon successful completion of the program. Studies show that the treatment model is more successful than the incarceration model in reducing recidivism.

However, substance abusers are treated particularly harshly under the federal immigration system; simply admitting to having been under the influence of an illegal drug can bar you permanently from immigrating to the United States. Although a few immigration laws recognize that drug or alcohol addiction is a disease, the major provisions regulating inadmissibility, deportability and naturalization continue to treat substance abusers like criminals. Given that be labeled by immigration authorities as a criminal, by itself, is not the same as a conviction in criminal court, why should someone care if they are deemed to be a “criminal” alien by immigration officials?

Criminal convictions or a history of criminal activity can have dire consequences for non-citizens who are in the US or want to come to the US. Removal of criminal aliens is a top priority for the United States government, and ICE (Immigration & Customs Enforcement) in particular. In 2007, ICE removed 275,00 aliens and initiated 165,000 new removal proceedings under the Criminal Alien Program. While aliens who suffer from strictly medical disorders, such as cancer or diabetes, escape the focus of ICE’s removal program, those who suffer with substance abuse can be deported as criminals under certain provisions of immigration law. Criminal defense counsel must be adept at advising clients on immigration matters, especially on the consequences of certain convictions or sentences under state and federal law. Conversely, immigration attorneys must know how certain criminal matters can effect a client’s immigration status or immigration benefit eligibility prior to filing a benefit application and exposing the client to potential issues.

It is important to understand that, unless someone is a US citizen, they are never completely insulated from running afoul of the US immigration system. A person’s eligibility to visit, live in or work in the United States is examined over and over again at various points in the immigration process. In addition, if an immigration official makes a mistake and admits someone who was actually inadmissible, immigration benefits can be stripped and the person can be deported.

Given this temporary nature of immigration benefits, it may seem that all eligible foreign nationals should apply for US citizenship as soon as they become eligible. However, given that applying for citizenship allows immigration officials to, once again, examine issues related to ineligibility, deportability and good moral character, it is essential to consult with an immigration attorney prior to filing a naturalization application. An immigration attorney can help identify issues that could not only make the person ineligible for citizenship, but could also get them deported.

ADMISSIBILITY

Unless you are an American citizen, you need permission to visit, enter or live in the United States. Although your right to be in America is re-evaluated at various times, all aliens must undergo an admissibility evaluation by an officer of the Customs & Border Patrol (CBP) when attempting to enter the United States at a designated port of entry. Even if you have been approved for and received a visa at a foreign consulate, United States CBP has the authority to determine that you cannot enter the United States and can turn you right around. A visa gives you the right to knock on the door; CBP decides whether or not to let you in. When evaluating whether or not a foreign national can enter, immigration officials refer to section 212 of the Immigration & Nationality Act (INA). For example, some applicants who have drug-related crimes or have been found to be addicts due to drug or alcohol issues may be barred from entering the United States.

DEPORTABILITY & REMOVABILITY

After a foreign national has been admitted, he or she does not have the right to stay here permanently. Events such as expiration of a visa, commission of a crime, or commission of an immigration violation can cause the United States government to roll up the welcome mat and send the alien home. Known as removal, or deportation, the process of determining if someone has the legal right to remain in the United States is regulated by section 237 of the INA. These deportation grounds determine an alien’s right to be in the United States unless, or until, the alien becomes an American citizen through naturalization.

GOOD MORAL CHARACTER

Certain immigration benefits are so valuable to a foreign national that not only must they overcome the grounds of inadmissibility and deportability, but they also must show that they have good moral character. Good moral character is more than just being a nice person. It is a legal term of art in immigration law and is a confusing concept for aliens, practitioners and even immigration officials to understand. Examples of benefits that require good moral character include naturalization, cancellation of removal and certain forms of relief for victims of domestic violence.

Figuring out exactly how the three major eligibility provisions of the INA (inadmissibility, deportability and good moral character) deal with drug addicts and alcoholics requires time, patience and organization. It also requires a fundamental understanding of the two major ways that drug addicts and alcoholics can be classified, sometimes simultaneously: those who are regulated by the medical provisions of immigration law and those who are regulated by criminal provisions of immigration law. Aside from the US tax code, US immigration law is probably the most complicated set of statutes and regulations that a lawyer has to navigate.

To complicated matters further, more than one section of the Immigration and Nationality Act may apply to a particular situation. For instance, a person applying for citizenship through naturalization must meet good moral character requirements (as discussed in Section 101(f) of the INA). However, in addition, the applicant will also be subject to the grounds of deportability under section 237 and, if any of those grounds apply, will be given a demand to appear at immigration court for deportation proceedings instead of an invitation to attend a citizenship ceremony. For adjustment of status, applicant must satisfy both the grounds of inadmissiblity found in INA 212, as well as the deportation grounds of section 237.

Any evaluation of an alien’s US immigration status or eligibility for benefits should begin with a thorough and comprehensive evaluation of his or her medical, criminal and immigration background. In addition to interviewing the client extensively about all facets of their background, copies of an FBI fingerprint check, arrest reports, sentencing reports, court transcripts, court dispositions, probation reports, and substance abuse treatment reports should be obtained so that the immigration attorney can get a very clear picture of how any criminal or medical issues will affect the immigration case.

--------------------------------

http://www.drugrehabwiki.com/wiki/Grounds_of_inadmissibility

Evaluating Criminal Activity such as Substance Abuse Violations under Immigration Law

Whenever a potential client contacts me about an immigration issue, one of the first things I ask is whether that person has any criminal history. Besides prior immigration violations, crime is the ground of inadmissibility or deportability most widely used by immigration officials to bar someone or deport someone from the United States.

Not all criminal grounds require the applicant to have been convicted of the crime; for example, simply admitting to the elements of a controlled substance violation can make someone permanently inadmissible. In some instances, subsequent rehabilitation will not overcome criminal inadmissibility or deportation. However for crime related to alcohol abuse or drug addiction, enrolling at an addiction treatment center could help show that a person is in remission.

Edited October 15, 2011 by Jojo92122

[rsn 135]

he is from thailand and he is coming here to united state

I don't really have much knowledge or experience in this area, but if he has a drug-related conviction on his record, I'd say it is unlikely that he will ever be able to obtain a visa. Hopefully someone on here knows how to deal with such a situation, but I am sure that it will be a difficult and long journey. My wife tells me that she met someone who was convicted of a drug crime in Thailand 10 years ago and is still unable to obtain a visa.

Edited October 15, 2011 by rsn

[Ning 619]

he is from thailand and he is coming here to united state

After reading the reponces from others it doesnt look good for him to get a visa. However I have a suggestion.

The only chance he has is to go before the court to ask the judge to consider not convicting him. He may be able to convince the judge he has learned a lesson while explaining that he will be moving to the USA to change his life. Possibly a new found sense of responcibility will allow the judge to give him a second chance. He better think of something to tell the judge or forget the idea of a visa.

Pay attention to what rsn said here.

[Karee 4,190]

It's all about the police report from the cops at Pathumwan. If it shows up there, forget it. No chance.

Of course the beneficiary has to tell the truth on CONVICTIONS. No conviction, no problem. Conviction that shows up on the Thai police report, forget it.

[Jojo92122 1,924]

It's all about the police report from the cops at Pathumwan. If it shows up there, forget it. No chance.

Of course the beneficiary has to tell the truth on CONVICTIONS. No conviction, no problem. Conviction that shows up on the Thai police report, forget it.

It's not just convictions that one has to disclose. It is also arrests. He would have to disclose his arrest.

[rsn 135]

It's not just convictions that one has to disclose. It is also arrests. He would have to disclose his arrest.

Yes, that's correct. Even arrests must be disclosed.