I-751 Waiver - Changes in Law

[Chica Yeyé 41]

If a foreign spouse dupes a US citizen into a sham relationship, its the USC responsibility to report it and prove it. Same thing with foreign spouses abused by USC, they would also have to prove it. Being divorced regardless of who is at fault does not mean an automatic 10yr green card anyway. Foreign spouse should still prove that marriage was entered into in good faith. After that, its USCIS responsibility to decide on the matter.

Bottomline, the law is the law! If the law allows foreign spouses to get permanent residency even after divorce... guess what?! there is nothing any of us can do about it.

Its also interesting to hear that this supposed change in US immigration law was reported in a british news channel (BBC) but it is not in the USCIS website.

Exactly my point. Until USCIS says different, I don't care of hearsay. And I like the BBC just fine.

[rsn 135]

"The US economy doesn't need any more taxi drivers and convenience store clerks from south Asia. The US doesn't need any more housekeeping workers, super store clerks, or day laborers from central and south America. We have many more of these workers than we need already. US immigration law is designed to control the influx of immigrants and preserve jobs and entitlements for people already living in the US. If the US opened it's doors to every immigrant who wanted to enter, the US would quickly become the same sort of 3rd world hell hole that many of these immigrants are fighting so hard to escape from. I guess the upshot is that nobody would want to come here anymore."

[/size]

That is very rude of you say what you just said! And your wife is Asian?? I don't think she would like what you just say in your post! You are nothing but a racist! Your post should be deleted!

"The US economy doesn't need any more taxi drivers and convenience store clerks from south Asia. The US doesn't need any more housekeeping workers, super store clerks, or day laborers from central and south America. We have many more of these workers than we need already. US immigration law is designed to control the influx of immigrants and preserve jobs and entitlements for people already living in the US. If the US opened it's doors to every immigrant who wanted to enter, the US would quickly become the same sort of 3rd world hell hole that many of these immigrants are fighting so hard to escape from. I guess the upshot is that nobody would want to come here anymore."

That is very rude of you say what you just said! And your wife is Asian?? I don't think she would like what you just say in your post! You are nothing but a racist! Your post should be deleted!

M.K - one thing that sometimes seems to send threads into a death-spiral that results in a closing is careless name-calling. If you can't argue/discuss like an adult, maybe you shouldn't say anything at all. If you disagree with something Jim said, then, by all means, provide a rebuttal. "You are nothing but a racist" is not a rebuttal, it is infantile. What is incorrect about Jim's post?

Edited November 5, 2009 by rsn

[Kathryn41 3,205]

I will also add my warning to keep the posts here civil and courteous. Name calling is considered a personal attack and is a violation of the TOS for this site. Violating TOS carries repercussions for the violator.

*************************

Regardless of the many rumours and the personal desires of the posters here, Lucyrich stated the situation very clearly. Whatever happens will require a change of the law by Congress - and Congress moves exceedingly slow. There has been no immigration legislation so far introduced by the Obama administration and until such appears, any discussion of what will and won't happen is purely speculative.

The USCIS can't get rid of the divorce/extreme cruelty waiver. It's not their call. Congress wrote that provision into the law (INA 216©(4)), and only Congress can change it. Until Congress does change it, the USCIS is bound to follow the law as written.

In order for Congress to change it, the change would have to make it through various committees, pass both the full Senate and full House of Representatives, and then be signed into law by the President. Or the President could veto it and the veto could be overridden by a supermajority of both houses of Congress (but I don't think it would be easy for Congress to override a veto).

This won't happen quickly, if at all.

Although Congress sometimes does things that surprise me, I seriously doubt they would change this little provision of immigration law without tackling some more broad sweeping immigration reform changes at the same time.

In other words, we'll hear plenty about such a change before it happens, if it ever does happen.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

"The US economy doesn't need any more taxi drivers and convenience store clerks from south Asia. The US doesn't need any more housekeeping workers, super store clerks, or day laborers from central and south America. We have many more of these workers than we need already. US immigration law is designed to control the influx of immigrants and preserve jobs and entitlements for people already living in the US. If the US opened it's doors to every immigrant who wanted to enter, the US would quickly become the same sort of 3rd world hell hole that many of these immigrants are fighting so hard to escape from. I guess the upshot is that nobody would want to come here anymore."

That is very rude of you say what you just said! And your wife is Asian?? I don't think she would like what you just say in your post! You are nothing but a racist! Your post should be deleted!

Why is that when anyone points out the obvious then they end up being accused of being a racist? If I said that most basketball players in the US were black, would that make me racist?

The simple fact is that immigrants tend to live in areas where their fellow expats live, and do the same kind of work that their fellow expats are doing. This is why there are neighborhoods within a short drive from my home called "China town", "Little Kabul", and "Little Saigon". Like it or not, a large percentage of taxi drivers and convenience store clerks ARE from south Asia, specifically from India. For pete's sake, it's so obvious that Matt Groening stereotyped the character of "Apu", the clerk at the "Quicky Mart" in "The Simpsons" cartoon show. Did I say this was bad? Did I say that south Asians were bad? No, I didn't. I simply pointed out that these are unskilled jobs paying near minimum wage, and they were being performed by immigrants. I also pointed out that there is no shortage of unskilled workers in the US looking for jobs, and we don't need to be importing any more of them.

By the same token, there IS a shortage of health care workers in the US, and a large number of immigrant doctors come from the same south Asian country as the taxi drivers and the convenience store clerks. There are also a lot of nurses and other health care workers coming from the Philippines. Did I say that Indian doctors or Filipino nurses were bad? No, I didn't even mention them because we NEED them in the US. But, I guess that doesn't matter because I'm a racist.

By the way, she's not my wife yet. If you notice my profile, we are engaged. If the immigration laws weren't so difficult to deal with, especially the consulate in Ho Chi Minh City, then we would have been married by now and happily living in the US. Thanks to the huge number of visa scammers in Vietnam, and the recent trend at the consulate there, I expect we'll probably end up in AP like so many others.

Your thoughts are different. You have adviced the divorced so well on how to remove conditions. And today you look at the divorced with hostility. Something contrasting here.

Anyways, your advice is always helpful. Keep up the good work. Look at this whole issue from the eyes of an immigrant. That hostility will turn to compassion. Not all immigrants are fraudsters, scam artist and abusers.

I'd go so far as to say that the overwhelming majority of immigrants are not fraudsters. I've only seen a few posters in this subforum that I suspected were scamming their USC spouses, and I have avoided posting in those threads. The rest I suspect are sincere, and I'm happy to help them. There is even one member who joined VJ, never posted, and has contacted me at least a dozen time via PM for advice on his I-751 filing. I'm happy to help him, as well.

I have no problem with the vast majority of immigrants who are sincere. I have a problem with the few who scam their USC spouses, and the immigration system that allows them to get away with it. There are a large number of them in my fiancee's country. Thanks to them, the consulate is one of the most difficult in the world. As we get closer to the interview, the stress on both of us is mounting. It shouldn't be this way. I have been a law abiding citizen, paid my taxes, and even served in the military. My government should trust me. But, thanks to the visa scammers, they don't. And it pisses me off.

[TBoneTX 45,364]

Hey, #######. You are breaking the Terms of Service of this site. Reported.

Dittos & kudos to Sister Len for this, si man.

[NutMagnet 2]

Nut,

return to previous life is rarely possible (housing - sold to pay for immigration, children born, jobs and opportunities given up). It costs a LOT to go back to life as it was, and who's going to pay that bill? If justice is what you want, oblige the USC to split the cost. Then watch how many couples will stay married on paper just to avoid consequences of such law.

Otherwise, sure, just let the USCs to run the mail-in bride scam, use them aliens for two years and send them aliens back with nothing but clothes on their back. Children kept by the USC, if wanted, of course.

Marriage is a ####### shoot, 50% success. Be lucky that you found out NOW so that you may return to your previous life with the experience and knowledge that you gave gained from your experience. You are entitled to very little, if not nothing at all.

You rolled the dice against 50% odds, you lost. Stop your crying, take it like a man and continue on with your life, as it was, prior to this mistake. You are not the only one who has suffered such a disappointment, nor will you be the last.

Rika,

Two different people from different cultures meet each other, fall in love/lust, and/or recognize an opportunity to fulfill themselves by accepting a notion of commitment, and marriage, relative to the standards of their own individual expectations and cultures, for better or for worse, and happy ever after. Good luck.

Opposites attract as per the laws of physics. However domestically, each need to compromise and tolerate the differences of the cultures with the love and acceptance which comprised their wedding vows. No scientific formula is applicable to this "science", hence as dependable and as risky as any other wager of substantial significance and magnitude.

What happened to personal responsibility? You may be familiar with the old saying "don't put all your eggs in one basket." In this day and age it is both impractical and foolish to do so without reserving somewhat of a safety net to fall back upon. As pessimistic as it may seem, the only person whom you can really depend on is yourself. There are no guarantees in life with the exception of paying taxes and dying.

Every time you step out of your home you are taking a risk. Bravo to those of adventure!

It would be truly sad to learn that an intending immigrant had no choice but to sell their own house so that their USC fiancee could pay the fees for their immigration costs. Please tell me it wasn't so.

Nobody "wins" in a divorce. Both parties are losers. The family courts have the responsibility to ensure the equitable division of marital property and if necessary, award payment by one spouse to the other for future support for a given period of time for the purpose of re-education and/or day to day living until they are able to stand on their own.

Back to personal responsibility, marriage is not a guarantee with a 50,000 mile warranty, it is a risk. People change drastically every seven years on average. Moreover, marriage takes a lot of work, some decide to quit that job and move on. That's life, you cant change anyone but yourself and that's where compromise steps in, how much are you willing to bend to make the relationship work 50% of those married have made that decision.

The disposable mail order bride situation was addressed by the implementation of IMBRA in March 2006. Still, the majority of premeditated green card fraud comes from the Eastern block, Russia, for example.

The immigrant is as responsible for knowing their USA petitioner prior to contracting marriage as well as the USC is to know their Petitioner.

The family courts ensure that both parties in marital termination proceedings have had the opportunity to to have an attorney represent them in court, and if not so desired, i.e. pro se, a signed waiver of council is executed. This includes immigrants and citizens both.

Bad things really do happen to good people. But bad people get what they deserve in the long run.

Hang in there

NM

[TBoneTX 45,364]

Profanity is a crutch for conversational cripples.

The Devil you say, si man! As a sobering thought, what about the use of antifanity?

[NutMagnet 2]

Profanity is a crutch for conversational cripples.

The Devil you say, si man! As a sobering thought, what about the use of antifanity?

Dunno, but quadfanity is a building with four apartments.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

"poof"

[caybee 21]

<sing>

La Junta de Policía que viven dentro de mi cabeza

La Junta de Policía que vengan a mí en mi cama

La Junta de Policía vienen a detenerme ..

Oh, ohhhhh!

sounds like Cheap Trick

[TracyTN 237]

I've heard the opposite. From the 'pinned' topic (at the top of this forum):

http://www.ilw.com/articles/2009,0924-lee.shtm

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

The US economy doesn't need any more taxi drivers and convenience store clerks from south Asia. The US doesn't need any more housekeeping workers, super store clerks, or day laborers from central and south America. We have many more of these workers than we need already. US immigration law is designed to control the influx of immigrants and preserve jobs and entitlements for people already living in the US. If the US opened it's doors to every immigrant who wanted to enter, the US would quickly become the same sort of 3rd world hell hole that many of these immigrants are fighting so hard to escape from. I guess the upshot is that nobody would want to come here anymore.

There is a huge exception to these strict immigration controls - an immediate relative of a US citizen, or a foreigner who intends to marry a US citizen, is not subject to the quotas. They are immediately eligible to immigrate. This isn't a special courtesy the US government grants to these immigrants. It is a courtesy they grant to the US citizen who is sponsoring them. It is by virtue of their relationship to the US citizen that they are permitted to jump ahead of millions of people waiting in line to immigrate to the US. When their relationship to the US citizen ends, the presumption under the law is that their immigration benefit ends as well.

Unfortunately, the immigration law provides two relatively easy paths an immigrant can take to retain their immigration benefits, in spite of the fact that the basis for their immigration no longer exists. These are abuse and divorce. These paths were provided with the best intentions of the US government to allow an immigrant to stay in the US when the relationship ended through no fault of their own. The sad fact is that these paths are heavily abused by immigrants who did NOT enter the relationship with sincere intentions, and whose ulterior motive from the beginning was immigration to the US. As a result of those who abuse these paths to retain immigration benefits they would otherwise not be eligible for, many intending immigrants who have or want a marital relationship with a US citizen end up being put through the wringer by the US consulates in foreign countries.

blistex27, you view immigration law as an immigrant who benefited from the sponsorship of a US citizenship, and now wants to keep those benefits in spite of no longer being eligible for them under the law. I view the law as a US citizen who wants to marry a foreigner and bring her to the US. Because US immigration law is designed to give YOU the benefit of the doubt when applying to keep your immigration benefits, US citizens like ME have to wait longer, spend more money, and endure being suspected of fraud by our own government.

I'm sorry, but I view the abuse and divorce waivers as loopholes that need to be closed. The law establishes that your immigration benefit is based on your marriage to a US citizen, which is why joint filing of the I-751 is required. The law presumes that your eligibility to retain these benefits ends when your relationship with the US citizen ends, which is why a waiver of the joint filing requirement is needed to self-petition. It is far too easy for a foreigner to dupe a US citizen into a relationship, and then get permanent legal resident status in the US. As far as I'm concerned, positive immigration reform would mean making it so difficult to keep the immigration benefits after ending the relationship with the US citizen that nobody would dream of marrying a US citizen just for the immigration benefits. If you remove the incentive for fraud, the fraud will end, and it will be much easier for US citizens to sponsor foreign spouses and fiancees.

In other words, the law should ALWAYS favor the US citizen.

Possibly the best submission I have ever read on VJ.

[NutMagnet 2]

Possibly the best submission I have ever read on VJ.

I agree, apart from yours giving it honorable mention.

[William33 110]

Inappropriate posts removed and spammer ejected from the site.

Please continue....

[NutMagnet 2]

Please continue....

Ano bayon?!?!