Seventh Circuit Ruling re VWP and AOS

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Was there a news article about this a while back? Or is there a sticky note in the AOS from Student etc area to advise that there is now is a very REAL possibility of deportation if attempting to AOS from VWP after stay expires???--

This: http://www.immigrantjustice.org/litigationupdate/7thcircuit/bayo012010blog.html specifically:

"5. The next question is whether there's a conflict between INA 245© - which bars VWP visa overstays from adjusting, except for immediate relatives - and the VWP waiver provisions. The CtApp resolved the apparent ambiguity by interpreting 245©(4) to apply only where someone applies for adjustment of status before falling out of VWP status, and thereafter awaits adjudication of the Adjustment application." [emphasis added]

Also this: http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=651746 specifically this:

"I don't know what else this case might mean (there are some other issues that may be setting new precedent on other topics) but I do think that the posters here who have claimed 'overstay doesn't matter' should be aware that it might matter now, and people adjusting from a VWP should know that what was, in the past, may not be, in the future."

If not, I think there should be. I didn't know until I read a post about people not reading the rules (about filing an I-130 WITH the I-485) and because they refiled AFTER the I-94 expired, now the dude's getting deported.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Vanessa - I don't know if you could say you 'missed' it.

There is no one on Vj who is designated as a person to forage for and post REAL immigration news. So members here will not necessarily get the real important stuff just by going to the News forum. We have to rely on someone just finding it and posting it.

Secondly, this is a really good example of why it's important to read other forums besides VisaJourney. And that's not a slam towards this website. I read at least four different immigration sites almost daily. It's just the smart thing to do if you are a 'student' of this process.

Lastly, this isn't a new rule so to speak. It's another court ruling in a different circuit which is against the plaintiff. What these rulings are doing is setting precedent in case law AGAINST persons adjusting from the visa waiver BECAUSE the courts are finding on the technicality that a visa waiver entrant waives their right to an appeal. It's a trend in case law, not a change in the INA. This single decision alone doesn't present a real danger to VWP adjustees as much as a recent waive of decisions. It's like "bad news" building up towards future adjustees.

[Otto 83]

Kind of an FYI to folks:

If you post a news topic/article and it doesn't show up after a short while, PM a moderator so someone can check it out (sometimes new topics get missed).

** Topic moved from Site Discussion to Immigration News and Discussion.

[VanessaTony 3,567]

Vanessa - I don't know if you could say you 'missed' it.

There is no one on Vj who is designated as a person to forage for and post REAL immigration news. So members here will not necessarily get the real important stuff just by going to the News forum. We have to rely on someone just finding it and posting it.

Secondly, this is a really good example of why it's important to read other forums besides VisaJourney. And that's not a slam towards this website. I read at least four different immigration sites almost daily. It's just the smart thing to do if you are a 'student' of this process.

Lastly, this isn't a new rule so to speak. It's another court ruling in a different circuit which is against the plaintiff. What these rulings are doing is setting precedent in case law AGAINST persons adjusting from the visa waiver BECAUSE the courts are finding on the technicality that a visa waiver entrant waives their right to an appeal. It's a trend in case law, not a change in the INA. This single decision alone doesn't present a real danger to VWP adjustees as much as a recent waive of decisions. It's like "bad news" building up towards future adjustees.

Long story short it doesn't really affect me but i don't want to be handing out "overstay is FINE" news to people now that I know this exists.

I don't also think anything has really changed, so much as they've decided to try and make it less ambiguous and decided to interpret this particular law (that already existed) in a way different to how it's always been carried out.

Either way, it seems to me the standard answer to "I'm planning to overstay my VWP and AOS" should be a warning that people HAVE been denied once the I-94 date is passed and that it's VERY risky. That's the only reason I mention this. It this thread: http://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/256575-strict-reading-of-visa-rule-trips-up-more-couples/ that had me think about this