How to stop fraud in Fiance/Spouse Visas

[pushbrk 12,879]

NigeriaorBust, you are attempting to prove a point, which continuously is being overlooked and ignored. The CO is being allowed to continue to act as "GOD" and rely on his gut feeling, and is being praised for having this complex!

Ultimately, what is being said here is why should everyone pay for an equal opportunity and treatment for all, if they don't directly benefit from these changes!

Also, I love how assumptions are being made about those who have "not been issued" visas. What happened to "innocent until proven guilty"? Did we have a judgment day and I missed it!

We can continue to agree to disagree, but the saddest thing is the problem continues. How do we solve this injustice people???

Innocent until proven guilty applies to people being prosecuted in the US judicial system. It does not, never has and likely never will apply to the process of obtaining a visa to enter the USA. On the contrary, our laws specifically require the Consular officer to do the opposite, to work on the presumption that every visa application is at attempt to circumvent US immigration law unless and until compelling evidence is presented to the contrary. There is vast experience to support this as the only reasonable approach.

Equal opportunity and equal treatment are separate issues. The former is in practice, the latter is inappropriate. "Treatment" is expected to fit the circumstances. All have equal opportunity to access the system. What one can expect is equal opportunity and "fair" treatment. Now we're back to the difference between equal and fair. Fair considers circumstances. Equal does not. Whenever you want any special consideration for your circumstances, you are asking for fairness, not equality. So, if you want "consideration" you definitely don't want equal treatment.

Edited August 11, 2011 by pushbrk

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Many CO's act as gods because they know there is almost nothing that can be done to them no matter how outlandish their decisions. If they were accountable for their decisions they should be more sane in what they do ( or if they are costing the government too much in lost legal actions they would be reassigned to trash collection ) People that don't have experience in having to work an extra year to bring their SO to the country don't care about the pain this causes they worry about the dollars it costs ( it would be less than a penny per citizen probably ) If we all had the same free pass to bring a bed toy our childrens age visa common from some cultures we wouldn't have this topic going on.

Wow that is a REALLY judgmental comment comming from someone who is railing on COs for being judgmental and playing god.. As I seem to be the only recent poster to this thread from one of "those" countries that have the reputation of importing the "bed toys" I feel compelled to mention that my wife is well into her 30's ...

To your points: The old guy bringing in the young woman is going to have a high rate of divorce.. The difference between the guy and his "bed toy" and the type of fraud this thread is talking about is the intent of both parties. The job of the CO is to determine the intent of both parties, that is their function.. Yeah in the case of the 45 year old guy bringing in the 19 year old hottie there is a bit of dilusion going on on both sides. The COs job is not to judge if the people involved are doing something stupid (that would be stepping over the line and be playing god right?), but to see if the relationship is real and determine if the intent of the couple is to stay together.

I read yours and others comments here and get the feeling you would prefer they just open the floodgates to anyone that can produce a stack of papers - you really do not care one whit about the fraud, you just want the hurdles out of your way.

Edited August 11, 2011 by OnMyWayID

[pushbrk 12,879]

, you just want the hurdles out of your way.

Really? Ya think? Seriously, yes, it sounds that way to me too.

[LoveNigarmostyle 164]

Got to love being an American! everyone can put their two cents worth and think they are right!

[SimranS 9]

I'm sorry, but no. These are law mandated 55,000 visas (5000 goes for NACARA - Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act) and you don't get to re-allocate just because nuclear family should be kept together. All 50,000 are used up in each fiscal year and nothing is re-distributed to other categories as this is specifically for DV. We're talking about people who have sufficient or above required level of education (bachelors, masters and even doctorate degrees) and English speaking skills who find jobs pretty much on landing in the US.

On the other hand, I know people who brought family members who end up on means tested benefits within a month of arriving, speak no English and don't even care to learn it, let alone seek gainful employment.

Then why is financial sponsorship required for family-based cases even where the beneficiary is educated and English-speaking? If a DV person can immigrate without an AOS then why the double standards with equally educated family-based immigrants? As per today's system a highly educated English-speaker with great job prospects in the USA cannot get a green card to live there with their USC spouse just because that spouse happens to be a housewife or a student (assuming they can't find a joint sponsor).

[milimelo 4,477]

Then why is financial sponsorship required for family-based cases even where the beneficiary is educated and English-speaking? If a DV person can immigrate without an AOS then why the double standards with equally educated family-based immigrants? As per today's system a highly educated English-speaker with great job prospects in the USA cannot get a green card to live there with their USC spouse just because that spouse happens to be a housewife or a student (assuming they can't find a joint sponsor).

Written in the law? I know of cases where DV immigrants were asked to produce I-134 before they would be issued a visa. For some, nothing was asked.

I can tell you that I also had to have my husband's I-864 (military service member at the time) for my CR-1 through DCF. Educated and English speaking - with a job in 2-3 months post POE.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Then why is financial sponsorship required for family-based cases even where the beneficiary is educated and English-speaking? If a DV person can immigrate without an AOS then why the double standards with equally educated family-based immigrants? As per today's system a highly educated English-speaker with great job prospects in the USA cannot get a green card to live there with their USC spouse just because that spouse happens to be a housewife or a student (assuming they can't find a joint sponsor).

That is a good argument - I do not know any of the particulars of DV visas. I assume the obligation for an AOS is lifted for the DV applicant because by defnintion they do not have no sponsor.. A good argument could be made that a highly educated person should only require only minimal support. This would especially be true for a poor USC since the addition of a highly educated person would make the USC less likely to need benefits in the future.. A win-win for all concerned (including the country)..

[SimranS 9]

Written in the law? I know of cases where DV immigrants were asked to produce I-134 before they would be issued a visa. For some, nothing was asked.

I can tell you that I also had to have my husband's I-864 (military service member at the time) for my CR-1 through DCF. Educated and English speaking - with a job in 2-3 months post POE.

By definition DV immigrants have no sponsor or petitioner in the US, so who would submit an I-134 on their behalf if they know no one there? All family-based immigrants require the I-864, which binds the sponsor for life unless certain conditions are met, unlike the I-134 which is temporary and used for nonimmigrant visas.

[SimranS 9]

That is a good argument - I do not know any of the particulars of DV visas. I assume the obligation for an AOS is lifted for the DV applicant because by defnintion they do not have no sponsor.. A good argument could be made that a highly educated person should only require only minimal support. This would especially be true for a poor USC since the addition of a highly educated person would make the USC less likely to need benefits in the future.. A win-win for all concerned (including the country)..

Very good thinking.... a suggested reform might be to allow the I-864 AOS requirement to be waived for family-based immigrants, provided they have the education/marketable job skills and English skills to land a job which would make them and their family members unlikely to become public charges.

[SimranS 9]

LPRs are NOT citizens and as such ARE subject to quotas. I do not agree with that seeing H1s and F1s can bring in their dependents whereas LPRs cannot. I think there should be a way where they can bring their spouses/kids over with some restrictions similar to F2 status. But I digress, that has nothing to do with fraud.

I totally agree that LPRs should also be allowed to bring their spouses and minor kids without a wait. At the same time I do kind of see the difference between F1/H1 dependent cases and F2A cases in that the green card is a much more valuable thing to get... it's lifelong residency which allows the spouse to work immediately upon entry unlike F1/H1 dependents who can't work at all. Unlike the F1/H1 the GC can't be taken away if employment is lost or someone leaves school.

[pushbrk 12,879]

I totally agree that LPRs should also be allowed to bring their spouses and minor kids without a wait. At the same time I do kind of see the difference between F1/H1 dependent cases and F2A cases in that the green card is a much more valuable thing to get... it's lifelong residency which allows the spouse to work immediately upon entry unlike F1/H1 dependents who can't work at all. Unlike the F1/H1 the GC can't be taken away if employment is lost or someone leaves school.

Why? Apples are not oranges. Acquiring LPR status can be accomplished in several ways. An LPR is NOT a citizen. Other visa categories such as H1 are there for a different purpose, and so reasonably have different requirements and privileges. There are REASONS for different privileges, results and treatment. Again, think "fairness" not "equality" and understand the purpose behind things instead of just seeking what YOU think will make YOU happy.

Really, the "She has this, so why don't I get the same?" is little kid stuff. Grow up!

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

So you talk about equal and fair, My husband and I both hold engineering degrees , both speak english, are both over 40. We had communication records for 4 years when the first interview happened and photos with 17 different family members. Our photos covered 5 different Nigerian states and included a school calander documenting my visit to the school. More than enough to get past the CO in almost any consulate.

[pushbrk 12,879]

So you talk about equal and fair, My husband and I both hold engineering degrees , both speak english, are both over 40. We had communication records for 4 years when the first interview happened and photos with 17 different family members. Our photos covered 5 different Nigerian states and included a school calander documenting my visit to the school. More than enough to get past the CO in almost any consulate.

What's you're point? When I talk about equal and fair, it is to point out that they aren't the same. Don't expect equal. Expect fair. Fair is based on circumstances. I don't pretend to know about your case or circumstances. If you think you weren't treated fairly, perhaps you weren't. I don't know, but don't expect equal treatment. Your circumstances are not "equal" to any other case and Lagos is not equal to any other Consulate. The beneficiary being from Nigeria is part of the circumstances being considered.

Edited August 12, 2011 by pushbrk

[SimranS 9]

Why? Apples are not oranges. Acquiring LPR status can be accomplished in several ways. An LPR is NOT a citizen. Other visa categories such as H1 are there for a different purpose, and so reasonably have different requirements and privileges. There are REASONS for different privileges, results and treatment. Again, think "fairness" not "equality" and understand the purpose behind things instead of just seeking what YOU think will make YOU happy.

Really, the "She has this, so why don't I get the same?" is little kid stuff. Grow up!

Did you actually read my response or just the first line? I clearly stated that I could see the difference between GC and H1 visas since they do indeed have different purposes and privileges. At the same time if someone is of the opinion that the law should be changed to do away with quotas for the F2A category they have every right to think that way. Slow down and take the time to actually read what someone is saying.

[pushbrk 12,879]

Fair means that 2 petitions/couples with the same amount of evidence of a bonefide relationship would have the same results.

No, "2 petitions/couples with the same amount of evidence of a bonefide relationship would have the same results." would be "equal" not FAIR. To achieve fairness, the totality of circumstances must be considered before making a decision, not just the quantity of one kind of "evidence". The rest of your post is really nothing more than an off topic and entirely inappropriate rant.