free to marry

[desert_fox 32]

there again you go with cascading arguments. My point is that if on the face of the decree there are no restrictions of remarrying, USCIS will take the decree as valid per se.

I asked you whether you have heard someone being denied because, according to the USCIS, there is a state impendiment to remarriage, but you are still going around this. This is different from the RFEs you describe.

They go the law of the state.....all states that Im aware of include the verbage in the final divorce decree if there are restrictions on getting remarried. But for some reason, some state does not include the verbage...doesnt magically make it a legal marriage. They will still go the law of the jurisdiction where the divorce was issued. Is this too complex for you???

Maybe I went to law school......which I did, but changed my mind. I can only tell you how wrong you are, and that no one should follow your advice without dire consequences if they have a divorce with conditions, either stated specfically or not on the final decree. The USCIS will know in spite of your preconceived ideas on how they operate and pay no attention to the state laws.

[asante 0]

I think the general theme of your posts is you try to connect what you know with how things SHOULD BE. Now you are extending your generalizations to ALL states? So if what you are saying is true, why has USCIS not added a statement on the I-129F so that applicants check on their state laws before submitting I-129Fs? I-129s only ask evidence that the marriage has been legally terminated. Are you saying that a decree that has no conditions is not enough?

By the way dont forget this guy is just filing an I129F. He is not remarrying. If his decree did not place restrictions, do you insist his I-129F would be denied?

Let me ask you for the third time: Have you seen an I-129F being rejected for the reason you say? You are just trying to give yourself credence by saying you went to law school, but this is not an academic issue, its a common sense issue. Liars (lawyers) will bend facts but it seems you have no luck in this case. If you say you went to law school, dont you think you are making people trust lawyers less, if thats what you learnt in law school?

there again you go with cascading arguments. My point is that if on the face of the decree there are no restrictions of remarrying, USCIS will take the decree as valid per se.

I asked you whether you have heard someone being denied because, according to the USCIS, there is a state impendiment to remarriage, but you are still going around this. This is different from the RFEs you describe.

They go the law of the state.....all states that Im aware of include the verbage in the final divorce decree if there are restrictions on getting remarried. But for some reason, some state does not include the verbage...doesnt magically make it a legal marriage. They will still go the law of the jurisdiction where the divorce was issued. Is this too complex for you???

Maybe I went to law school......which I did, but changed my mind. I can only tell you how wrong you are, and that no one should follow your advice without dire consequences if they have a divorce with conditions, either stated specfically or not on the final decree. The USCIS will know in spite of your preconceived ideas on how they operate and pay no attention to the state laws.

Edited August 6, 2006 by asante

[desert_fox 32]

I give up....whats the use?

Yeah....get married when ever, and where ever regardless of the laws of your home state. Maybe he should write some of the FAQs here. you are now the resident expert.....cant argue with someone not well equipped.....please dont become a lawyer.

[TomLena 0]

They go the law of the state.....all states that Im aware of include the verbage in the final divorce decree if there are restrictions on getting remarried. But for some reason, some state does not include the verbage...doesnt magically make it a legal marriage. They will still go the law of the jurisdiction where the divorce was issued. Is this too complex for you???

This pretty much supports what I just said but in a more specific way. Bottom line - it's very simple. Find out if it is legal or not for you to marry. If it is important enough for you to marry your fiancee, then make sure you seek an attorney's interpretation of the the law on this... and, if this attorney believes that you can file your I-129F right now, don't do it yourself, have that attorney handle it for you. If you file it yourself and the statement of being legally able to marry is incorrect, that's fraud. If the attorney does it upon his advice to you that it is perfectly legal and accurate, but it turns out to be untrue, that's malpractice. The USCIS will forgive you for an attorney's malpractice. The USCIS will not forgive you for a fraudulant application.

Simple - step 1: find out if you can legally marry anywhere in the USA, thus making you eligible or not to file the I-129F... step 2: Act based on what you discover in step 1. By no means try to circumvent this or assume that if the USCIS can't or won't find out that it would make it ok. It is probably safer to assume that if you ever fradulantly file this petition that the consequences of it could bite you at any time in the next 10 years.

[asante 0]

You probably need to write to USCIS and tell them to re-write the I-129F form; but as it is written, there is no indication that once you have a divorce decree that it is somehow insufficient, barring anything to the contrary contained in the decree itself.

I asked you for specific cases and you cant seem to point out any, which indicates that your positions are more of a theory than practice.

I give up....whats the use?

Yeah....get married when ever, and where ever regardless of the laws of your home state. Maybe he should write some of the FAQs here. you are now the resident expert.....cant argue with someone not well equipped.....please dont become a lawyer.

No, in this case, he cant file because the divorce decree expressly says that he is not free to marry until 6 months from the date on the decree.

The bigger question is in cases where there are no restrictions placed on the face of the divorce decree. Thats where the beef is.

They go the law of the state.....all states that Im aware of include the verbage in the final divorce decree if there are restrictions on getting remarried. But for some reason, some state does not include the verbage...doesnt magically make it a legal marriage. They will still go the law of the jurisdiction where the divorce was issued. Is this too complex for you???

This pretty much supports what I just said but in a more specific way. Bottom line - it's very simple. Find out if it is legal or not for you to marry. If it is important enough for you to marry your fiancee, then make sure you seek an attorney's interpretation of the the law on this... and, if this attorney believes that you can file your I-129F right now, don't do it yourself, have that attorney handle it for you. If you file it yourself and the statement of being legally able to marry is incorrect, that's fraud. If the attorney does it upon his advice to you that it is perfectly legal and accurate, but it turns out to be untrue, that's malpractice. The USCIS will forgive you for an attorney's malpractice. The USCIS will not forgive you for a fraudulant application.

Simple - step 1: find out if you can legally marry anywhere in the USA, thus making you eligible or not to file the I-129F... step 2: Act based on what you discover in step 1. By no means try to circumvent this or assume that if the USCIS can't or won't find out that it would make it ok. It is probably safer to assume that if you ever fradulantly file this petition that the consequences of it could bite you at any time in the next 10 years.

[TomLena 0]

No, in this case, he cant file because the divorce decree expressly says that he is not free to marry until 6 months from the date on the decree.

The bigger question is in cases where there are no restrictions placed on the face of the divorce decree. Thats where the beef is.

There are a few things that factor into what would decide the jurisdiction (if not simply 'federal') over whether or not someone can legally marry in this country under the mentioned circumstances...

First - think about any papers that were signed prior to the wedding (marriage license application, etc). Those are legally and binding contracts between the parties to be married and the state govt. If they agree to abide by the state laws and regulations regarding the marriage (including divorce laws), then it is as binding a contract as any.

If there were any papers signed regarding the divorce, it falls into the same situation as the above.

If there were no papers signed that in effect state that they agree that they will wait 6 months before they will be free to marry again, or that stated in more generic terms something along the lines of "they will abide by the terms and conditions set forth by applicable state law", then they are only bound by the laws of the state while they are physically within the borders of the state, which means that a legal marriage can take place elsewhere.

It really comes down to having a real attorney look at this, and, if they believe the petitioner can legally marry as of today, then let the attorney file the application as well (being sure to include the additional documentation that indicates such representation).

[Ban Hammer 13,334]

from reading all of this, it would seem that desert fox has a very valid point. john, what is your take on things?

If there were no papers signed that in effect state that they agree that they will wait 6 months before they will be free to marry again, or that stated in more generic terms something along the lines of "they will abide by the terms and conditions set forth by applicable state law", then they are only bound by the laws of the state while they are physically within the borders of the state, which means that a legal marriage can take place elsewhere.

It really comes down to having a real attorney look at this, and, if they believe the petitioner can legally marry as of today, then let the attorney file the application as well (being sure to include the additional documentation that indicates such representation).

i believe in the situation you cite above that the state retains jurisdiction in the divorce case and if there is a 6 month ban on being remarried any other state will honor that. it's just like child support cases, the state filed in retains jurisdiction.

[rebeccajo 14]

You probably need to write to USCIS and tell them to re-write the I-129F form; but as it is written, there is no indication that once you have a divorce decree that it is somehow insufficient, barring anything to the contrary contained in the decree itself.

OMG. Let's spell this out for you asante.

It's not called the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA for nothing. Each state has separate laws. Marital law is one of the areas in which EACH SEPARATE STATE has jurisdiction.

Similarly, each state has jurisdiction over laws that dissolve a marriage.

SO....if you divorce in a state that has some sort of stipulation before you can remarry, that stipulation stands. Period.

Likewise if you wish to marry in a state that has a bar to marriage then no official office will issue a marriage license without proof of that bar having been met.

If you think that USCIS and DOS write their adjudicator manuals with no regard for state law you are sorely mistaken. I believe the constitution of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA prevents that.

[asante 0]

Rebecca,

You are preaching to the choir. Thats not what we are talking about.

All I have said is that for I-129F, only the divorce decree is relevant. For example, if I have decree for a divorce today, I can go file an I-129F tomorrow, provided my decree does not say I have to wait any number of days to remarry. Anything else anyone telles you is their opinion and as you, like an a*hole, we all have one.

You probably need to write to USCIS and tell them to re-write the I-129F form; but as it is written, there is no indication that once you have a divorce decree that it is somehow insufficient, barring anything to the contrary contained in the decree itself.

OMG. Let's spell this out for you asante.

It's not called the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA for nothing. Each state has separate laws. Marital law is one of the areas in which EACH SEPARATE STATE has jurisdiction.

Similarly, each state has jurisdiction over laws that dissolve a marriage.

SO....if you divorce in a state that has some sort of stipulation before you can remarry, that stipulation stands. Period.

Likewise if you wish to marry in a state that has a bar to marriage then no official office will issue a marriage license without proof of that bar having been met.

If you think that USCIS and DOS write their adjudicator manuals with no regard for state law you are sorely mistaken. I believe the constitution of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA prevents that.

[desert_fox 32]

You probably need to write to USCIS and tell them to re-write the I-129F form; but as it is written, there is no indication that once you have a divorce decree that it is somehow insufficient, barring anything to the contrary contained in the decree itself.

I asked you for specific cases and you cant seem to point out any, which indicates that your positions are more of a theory than practice.

rewrite the I129F??

As far as I remember, they only ask for proof that you are free to marry. Obviously this person is not. Doenst matter if the verbage is explicitly stated or not in the decree. They go by state law...they are not ignorant of the law of the states.....they have attorneys.......they sign off on the petition......they are not as dumb as you portray them.

Please rewrite the FAQs here so that ppl can begin to get voidable divorces and voidable marriages to somehow speed up the process.

Im sure that many have tried and many have been denied to go around this issue.

Why dont write and tell them? I already understand the intent of the law.

Edited August 6, 2006 by desert_fox

[TomLena 0]

While, according to today's law, and following the law to the letter, we have to take the 'free to marry' question on the I-129F to include any restrictions that one must legally abide to by not filing the I-129F if they are not 'free to marry' as of the date of application.... Asante still has a very valid point...

We should, in fact, be writing to the USCIS to change their form because I believe that the spirit of what they're trying to impose by asking this question and setting forth this regulation is to prevent people from filing an I-129F while they still have a pending (and in many cases not even started) divorce. They want you to finish what you've started first (the divorce) before starting the process with them. I don't believe that this has taken into consideration certain waiting periods and whatnot, which causes the original poster to this thread to probably have to wait an additional 6 months for no truly good reason, because, after all, it's not like anything is going to be able to happen in that 6 months that couldn't happen to just about anyone applying to change his marital status from 'single'. I believe that the USCIS just doesn't want to have their time wasted by applications coming from petitioners who are going through a divorce when there is still a chance that the divorce will never actually happen.

This boils down to being a 'spirit of the law' vs. 'actual law' scenario. Whenever there is a discrepency between the spirit of a law and the actual law, it is our duty as citizens of the United States to provoke changes to the laws so that they then will apply as intended... but until then, the law is the law and we must abide by it...

Perhaps there is some sort of a waiver that can be applied for in this situation to allow for the application without the 6 month wait? That's another question a lawyer can answer.

[dwar49 0]

I am not going to get into this legal debate between you two. However asante has real bad habit of giving out opinion as fact. Nothing worse than a person who gives off the cuff answers without researching his facts.

[asante 0]

while your theory is correct, in practice this is not happening, otherwise the I-129F would explain what you are trying to say:that even though you have a divorce decree, the marriage has not yet been terminated. How do you expect other people except lawyers to know this?

In practice, having a divorce decree is prima facie evidence of being legally free to marry.

You probably need to write to USCIS and tell them to re-write the I-129F form; but as it is written, there is no indication that once you have a divorce decree that it is somehow insufficient, barring anything to the contrary contained in the decree itself.

I asked you for specific cases and you cant seem to point out any, which indicates that your positions are more of a theory than practice.

rewrite the I129F??

As far as I remember, they only ask for proof that you are free to marry. Obviously this person is not. Doenst matter if the verbage is explicitly stated or not in the decree. They go by state law...they are not ignorant of the law of the states.....they have attorneys.......they sign off on the petition......they are not as dumb as you portray them.

Please rewrite the FAQs here so that ppl can begin to get voidable divorces and voidable marriages to somehow speed up the process.

Im sure that many have tried and many have been denied to go around this issue.

Why dont write and tell them? I already understand the intent of the law.

[KarenCee 3]

*popcorn time*

asante...you have an attitude problem. If everyone took your advice there would be a ton of RFE's...possibly denials. Thank the gods you aren't an attorney. I'm with becca on this one. To spout out advice of the kind you give here is scary. Some newbies will take it to heart, make a bad decision based ON that advice and then something happens.

Be careful with your advice please. I for one would not want a newbies RFE or denial happen because of advice given my me. As for your problem with others on here, they've been around a heck of a lot longer than you and know a bit more than you or me. You would do well to listen.

Edited August 6, 2006 by KarenCee

[Cristy 4]

They want to know if you are free to marry, you are not.