canadian thinking of getting married on a "visit" to usa

[Lona.C. 16]

before my husband and I went for the k1 we traveled every month to see eachother for a week or 2

from 2004 till we aplied in 2007 during the time of left and right ( US/Canada and backwards ) travels,

there where multiple boarder officers who askd the purpuse of the vist when they heard to visit the fiance ,

they told us that we dont have to travel so much to see eachother if we intend to get married

I could stay in the US get married and adjust the status ,

we told them its not that easy since I still got responsibilities in canada but we do intent to get married in the future

so they said if i would want to get married out of the blue in the future and could drop all responsibilities

show prove that i was expected back in canada i could do the AOS in the future ,

if that option doesnt suit us next best option would be K1 ,

we went for K1 as the AOS was to risky in our eyes since they already knew of our intend to get married

[luv2uallday 1]

I used to live in Atlanta on a work visa for two years. I moved back to Canada this summer and now my boyfriend and I are doing long-distance. I have visited him in atlanta almost monthly. How hard will it be for us to get married on one of my visits there? Would this make it hard for me to file papers because I came with the intent to visit?

Has anyone done this? What happened?

have two words for you

VISA FRAUD

do it the honest way like everyone else.

No...what the original poster is asking is NOT visa fraud, so long as she intends to leave the country and file for CR-1 status afterwards. Coming into the U.S. to get married is NOT fraudulent. Coming into the U.S. to get married and stay in the States without status IS visa fraud.

Some of the other suggestions in this thread point to visa fraud, but that's NOT what the OP seems to be intending.

Well the poster is vague on this one. using common knowledge. MOST people who come on one visa and marry in the usa stay and adjust status. Since the poster didn't specify what path going to take. it's assumed will take the path like a majority of people do that are in his situation. If he does it that way THEN IT'S FRAUD using your visa for purposes other than what you wrote on the application. If the poster marrys but doesn't adjust status and files papers in his country then IT'S NOT fraud as you have stated. Just depends since the poster didn't specify his intentions

To the poster when married what was your plan afterwards? stay here? or leave the country and apply?

[trailmix 77]

While it's nice that someone (not talking about he OP here as two lines and no information gives us no details of what they doing) may not have to prove this once they are all safe and tucked up in their U.S. SO's home - that is not the point.

When people say - just hop over the border, get married, adjust status and you're all good - they always conveniently forget to address the fact that the poster will have to get across that border. When they are asked where they are going and why - you presume they will lie - because I guarantee you that if they told the truth, as Wyatt mentioned - they would not be entering the United States that day and in fact will probably incur a ban.

I would hope all of you that advise people to do this have some kind of a savings fund you have started so that when these posters get turned back at the border and possibly banned, when they have probably given up their accomodation and job - you will, of course, be there to bail them out and help support them in the meantime.

This is why:

All persons traveling to the U.S. as visitors or students, Canadian or other nationality, under U.S. law are deemed to be intending immigrants and thus inadmissible for temporary purposes until they have an immigrant visa in hand. The burden of qualifying for any visa for entry to the U.S. rests solely with the applicant. Entry to the U.S. is solely up to a Department of Homeland Security/Customs and Border Protection (DHS/CBP) officer at the Port of Entry. While intending immigrants may have and lawfully seek to exercise a dual intent to be a visitor or student now and an immigrant later, it is against U.S. law to enter the U.S. as a visitor or student with the intent to wait for or seek immigrant status while in the U.S. Anyone who attempts to enter the U.S. by misrepresentation, or unlawfully, may face severe sanctions up to and including permanent ineligibility to enter the U.S. link

[Boiler 45,519]

The answers have been given, the OP only has to read them.

For some reason there are many people on this web site that like to limit other people's options, best to just ignore them.

[trailmix 77]

The answers have been given, the OP only has to read them.

For some reason there are many people on this web site that like to limit other people's options, best to just ignore them.

I don't think I implied that replies should be limited? I just hope that you take responsibility for your reply. It is after all yours and I assume you stand behind it?

[Wyatt's Torch 45]

I find it interesting that the two people who are proposing a "border hop" didn't follow that same path themselves (one being a K-1, the other being a CR-1 applicant). It has a whiff of hypocrisy to it...

Lying to a border guard and subsequent immigration officials on the AOS form makes one a de facto illegal alien. Whether that person "gets away with it" or not shouldn't be relevant. What IS relevant is that the person entered the country under false pretenses, which completely undermines the thousands of us who have opted to do it completely legally, and have borne the lengthy separation for the sake of doing things properly.

[rsn 135]

I find it interesting that the two people who are proposing a "border hop" didn't follow that same path themselves (one being a K-1, the other being a CR-1 applicant). It has a whiff of hypocrisy to it...

Lying to a border guard and subsequent immigration officials on the AOS form makes one a de facto illegal alien. Whether that person "gets away with it" or not shouldn't be relevant. What IS relevant is that the person entered the country under false pretenses, which completely undermines the thousands of us who have opted to do it completely legally, and have borne the lengthy separation for the sake of doing things properly.

I find it interesting that your reading comprehension is so poor. Take another look at my post before you put words in my mouth. I did not propose anything, I simply proved that you don't know what you are talking about.

[Krikit 1,164]

Moving thread from IR-1/CR-1 forum to General Immigration Discussion.

Please note the following statement in the Terms of Service:

..... you agree that when using the Service, you will not: Condone or instruct, either directly or indirectly, others on how to commit fraudulent or illegal immigration activities in any way, shape, manner or method.

[Wyatt's Torch 45]

I find it interesting that your reading comprehension is so poor. Take another look at my post before you put words in my mouth. I did not propose anything, I simply proved that you don't know what you are talking about.

Oh, I read your post. And I also don't find phrases such as "generally be granted in the exercise of discretion" to be all that reassuring.

It is ALWAYS up to the discretion of the consular officer and/or the POE border guard. And yes, discretion IS the key word there. If someone can "fool" the consular officer or POE guard, then absolutely, that person will have successfully circumvented the immigration process through deceptive means. But if that consular officer or POE guard has any whiff of ulterior motive, then he is able to EXERCISE HIS DISCRETION and levy a ten-year ban.

[Boiler 45,519]

I find it interesting that the two people who are proposing a "border hop" didn't follow that same path themselves (one being a K-1, the other being a CR-1 applicant). It has a whiff of hypocrisy to it...

Lying to a border guard and subsequent immigration officials on the AOS form makes one a de facto illegal alien. Whether that person "gets away with it" or not shouldn't be relevant. What IS relevant is that the person entered the country under false pretenses, which completely undermines the thousands of us who have opted to do it completely legally, and have borne the lengthy separation for the sake of doing things properly.

It did not suit my circumstances, it was what I was advised to do by an Immigration Lawyer.

http://www.shusterman.com/ytmarriage.html

Watch it

[rsn 135]

I find it interesting that your reading comprehension is so poor. Take another look at my post before you put words in my mouth. I did not propose anything, I simply proved that you don't know what you are talking about.

Oh, I read your post. And I also don't find phrases such as "generally be granted in the exercise of discretion" to be all that reassuring.

It is ALWAYS up to the discretion of the consular officer and/or the POE border guard. And yes, discretion IS the key word there. If someone can "fool" the consular officer or POE guard, then absolutely, that person will have successfully circumvented the immigration process through deceptive means. But if that consular officer or POE guard has any whiff of ulterior motive, then he is able to EXERCISE HIS DISCRETION and levy a ten-year ban.

You are reading into this too much. My post simply showed that the immigrant does not need to prove that they did not have an intent to immigrate when crossing the border. I never said or suggested that anyone should misrepresent themselves in anyway.

Edited December 7, 2009 by rsn

[Chris_Жанна 11]

The answers have been given, the OP only has to read them.

For some reason there are many people on this web site that like to limit other people's options, best to just ignore them.

And for some reason ppl on this site like yourself don't seem to care about giving wrong advice and the potential damage you could be doing to others lives. What you are telling the OP to do is lie and weasel around the system. From the OP's statements they seem to be well enough versed in immigration law to understand there may be a problem with staying here after marring on a tourist visa/visa waiver, Which could earn the beneficiary a possible life time ban from the US if they find you are falsifying and information. The OP already stated their intent and is aware of the law, having said that, they are aware and this would be fraud. Why do you think that ppl with B-2 and from visa waiver countries still go through the K-1 process? Because they like to wait??? No.

To the OP, you can come here and get married, But you will have to return back home and file for the appropriate visa. If you are questioned by the CBP upon arrival and you lie there about your intention you could be setting yourself up for trouble. Honesty, is the best policy here. If you are here and marry and decide to stay here when you go to adjust status and the interviewer thinks you are lying and that you were trying to circumvent the immigration process there is a possibility of deportation and a ban. So, I don't know if you like to gamble with things like this but that is the reality of the situation.

I hope the OP can discern fact from ####### here.

[Boiler 45,519]

The answers have been given, the OP only has to read them.

For some reason there are many people on this web site that like to limit other people's options, best to just ignore them.

And for some reason ppl on this site like yourself don't seem to care about giving wrong advice and the potential damage you could be doing to others lives. What you are telling the OP to do is lie and weasel around the system. From the OP's statements they seem to be well enough versed in immigration law to understand there may be a problem with staying here after marring on a tourist visa/visa waiver, Which could earn the beneficiary a possible life time ban from the US if they find you are falsifying and information. The OP already stated their intent and is aware of the law, having said that, they are aware and this would be fraud. Why do you think that ppl with B-2 and from visa waiver countries still go through the K-1 process? Because they like to wait??? No.

To the OP, you can come here and get married, But you will have to return back home and file for the appropriate visa. If you are questioned by the CBP upon arrival and you lie there about your intention you could be setting yourself up for trouble. Honesty, is the best policy here. If you are here and marry and decide to stay here when you go to adjust status and the interviewer thinks you are lying and that you were trying to circumvent the immigration process there is a possibility of deportation and a ban. So, I don't know if you like to gamble with things like this but that is the reality of the situation.

I hope the OP can discern fact from ####### here.

Not by reading your post.

Not exactly a new issue but why are people so keen forcing their views down other peoples throats?

It is not a moral issue.

[trailmix 77]

Not by reading your post.

Not exactly a new issue but why are people so keen forcing their views down other peoples throats?

It is not a moral issue.

Pot calling kettle etc etc.

Ok boiler, answer this then, if you will.

Let's just assume that the OP wants to go tomorrow, to the U.S., marry her fiance and adjust status.

Tomorrow morning she drives to the border and the border guard says - where are you going and what is the purpose of your visit?

How should she reply?

Edited December 7, 2009 by trailmix

[Chica Yeyé 41]

The common agreement is that you should not do it. You should file for a K-1 visa; OR get married and file for the CR-1 (since it has been proven the K-3 is a piece of ####### visa). To advise the OP to come in, get married, and adjust status is wrong -accompanied by a "darrrrling, it will all be ok" and could potentially put the OP in quite the nasty pickel. Plus, I must add, it is against the Terms of Service.

Immigration procedures are in place, and we know better than to advise how to give them the run around. We don't have to like them, but we have to follow them.

wth.