How to stop fraud in Fiance/Spouse Visas

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

Now you're requiring the petitioner to have the financial means and flexible work requirements that would allow them to take at least one month per year of vacation in the beneficiary's country. Would you impose the same requirements of a married couple filing for a CR1?

Frankly, I think you could impose a minimum of six months "face time" per year, and it would only increase visa fraud. In many third world countries, the time the US citizen petitioner spends with the beneficiary is a holiday for both of them. The beneficiary lives like a tourist on the USC's dime. Most fraudsters would be happy to take a mandatory holiday every year with someone else paying the tab, even if the holiday is in their own country. It might increase the chances the USC would catch on that they're being played for a green card, but I think a substantial portion of fraudsters wouldn't have any problem keeping up the charade as long as necessary.

Yes I think this is about family based petitions, just becuase I run off to some 3rd world hell hole and get married doesn't add one bit of validity to my relationship , in fact it shows I lack the common sense to get to know the person I married within a week of first seeing face to face. Obviously once in the last 2 years isn't good enough. And if you do away with co sponsors you are going to get rid of a lot of those people that can't afford to travel.

[pushbrk 12,877]

Yes I think this is about family based petitions, just becuase I run off to some 3rd world hell hole and get married doesn't add one bit of validity to my relationship , in fact it shows I lack the common sense to get to know the person I married within a week of first seeing face to face. Obviously once in the last 2 years isn't good enough. And if you do away with co sponsors you are going to get rid of a lot of those people that can't afford to travel.

So, you think people who "can't afford to travel" should not have the opportunity to love, marry and live in the USA with their foreign spouse? It's useless to throw out ideas without thinking them through. What would you do with somebody in my town, where the a million Canadians live within 30 miles, or say Detroit where more than a million Canadians live within 20 miles? US Immigration laws will likely always be well thought out enough to give fair treatment to the vast majority that need access to them. They aren't perfect now but people who write and evaluate them are doing a pretty good job of considering the big picture and always have.

[sachinky 465]

How are joint sponsors related to fraud? Where's the connection?

[NigeriaorBust 4,087]

So, you think people who "can't afford to travel" should not have the opportunity to love, marry and live in the USA with their foreign spouse? It's useless to throw out ideas without thinking them through. What would you do with somebody in my town, where the a million Canadians live within 30 miles, or say Detroit where more than a million Canadians live within 20 miles? US Immigration laws will likely always be well thought out enough to give fair treatment to the vast majority that need access to them. They aren't perfect now but people who write and evaluate them are doing a pretty good job of considering the big picture and always have.

If they should be totally fair lets not have any care about an affidavit of support because that stops people from coming, then lets throw out the requirement that they met at all because some people just can't arrange travel . The thread is about changes that would reduce fraud. Requiring that they be together at least 60 days in the last 2 years may eliminate some people but so does the affidaivit of support and the requirement to meet or even pay fees. It would lead to less fraud by making them know each other more than a weekend fling

[jenkatx 52]

How are joint sponsors related to fraud? Where's the connection?

I am wondering the same thing. Also, does anyone else think that the wait for removal of conditions could be extended? I think it is 3 years (or is it 5)? To a 25 year old that is nothing, but 10 years is a LONG time. That would be a deterrent to a lot of people, knowing they have to stay married to their petitioner for 10 years. Of course it is not fair to those who are legit, but none the less I think some would think twice.

[JimVaPhuong 4,863]

If they should be totally fair lets not have any care about an affidavit of support because that stops people from coming, then lets throw out the requirement that they met at all because some people just can't arrange travel . The thread is about changes that would reduce fraud. Requiring that they be together at least 60 days in the last 2 years may eliminate some people but so does the affidaivit of support and the requirement to meet or even pay fees. It would lead to less fraud by making them know each other more than a weekend fling

The most significant thing Congress has done in the past 50 years to reduce immigration fraud is conditional resident status. The biggest problem with their plan was they provided a huge loophole - the conditional resident can remove the conditions and get a 10 year green card on their own, without filing jointly with their USC spouse. Most fraudsters who have the patience, and don't reside in a state with a mandatory separation period before divorce, will use the divorce waiver. The ones who don't have any patience, or who live in a state where divorce takes a long time, will resort to the VAWA waiver. The ones with absolutely zero patience will file a VAWA petition to get the initial green card. Closing this loophole would have a significant impact on the level of fraud. Increasing the period of conditional residence to five years would have a huge impact on the level of fraud.

Yes, I'm saying that if the marriage doesn't last five years then they should lose their permanent resident status and have to return to their home country. I think it would be fair if their US citizen spouse were obligated to provide for their transportation back to their home country - an additional condition of sponsorship.

I know a lot of people will claim that the alien spouse would then be held hostage in a loveless or even abusive marriage for the sake of the green card, but in my opinion any spouse who would ALLOW themselves to remain in a marriage such as that just because their immigration status depends on it is being motivated more by the green card then they are by their marital relationship.

[TBoneTX 45,273]

Many of the above ideas sound very good on the surface. However, what if there are U.S. children, and the marriage doesn't last five years, and the beneficiary (say, the wife) is required to return to her home country? What becomes of the children?

[LoveNigarmostyle 164]

First of all, thanks Jenkatx for posting this. There is a great need for changes in our immigration system to help the petitioners, this is apparent and undeniable. With the internet making the intercontinental, intercultural marriages more frequent, the immigration laws need to improve and change to accommodate the needs of our nation's security, and to better serve its' citizens.

Fraudulent individuals are being allowed in, regardless of the rigorous sifting of the "infamous COS" abroad. A revamped system is need. It's the innocent, that we need to protect and help. Individuals, who are suffering in the process of this weeding out "the bad". Some petitions are being automatically stereotyped and denied, based on where the beneficiaries are born. This doesn't automatically make every beneficiary from "a high fraud country" a con artist. With changes in the system, one hopes it will leave less room for the unnecessary denials, and the break up of many families.

Make changes early on, and expect the petitioner & beneficiary to comply with them and enforce them, while the case is still in the US and before sending it to the Embassy abroad, so the CO can play "God" with people's lives. Most petitioners, if given the statistics of the existing rate of the failed relationships due to fraud, will make a sound decision with the availability of such info prior to filing. If there are any "the red flags" in their relationship, which will cause a denial at the embassy level, then make the petitioner aware of these facts and let them be prepared fully with strong proof. Don't tell them after years of waiting, that they did not spend enough time with each other, or made enough trips to see each other and so on and so forth. Vital information such as this, should be provided by USCIS or DOS to each petitioner on their website before filing, and not only on VJ or other sites. (For some people, will not discovered these sited early on in their visa journey).

As suggested, a lie detector, background and internet search should be a mandatory requirement on each beneficiary, prior to or at the time of the interview. Although, this might not discourage "some" of the con artists from pursuing with their scam, but it will give them something to fear and reconsider in advance in case they are caught.

How about a mandatory prenup or legally drawn contract by the government, such as an "affidavit" between the couple and the government, something similar to the affidavit of support, which will bind and obligate the beneficiary to fulfill specific expectations or would lose their visa, green card, or the eligibility to become a citizen, and the ability to sponsor or file for anyone else, indefinitely. If the beneficiary was to take off without providing a good cause or provide a current address, then they lose all rights. A contract, which will not allow the beneficiary access to the petitioner's assets, if divorce occurs too soon and fraud is proven. A legitimate, well prepared contract with a copy kept in the file of each the case.

If anyone would like to shed some light on this subject? I would appreciate it. Thank you.

[LoveNigarmostyle 164]

Many of the above ideas sound very good on the surface. However, what if there are U.S. children, and the marriage doesn't last five years, and the beneficiary (say, the wife) is required to return to her home country? What becomes of the children?

The child is a USC, then the custody issues should be decided by the courts. Most of the time, it is 50%-50%, but with a child that young it will probably be rewarded to the mother having more physical custody of the child. It is a sad reality, which effects a lot of children of divorce and not just the ones effected by immigration.

[LoveNigarmostyle 164]

The most significant thing Congress has done in the past 50 years to reduce immigration fraud is conditional resident status. The biggest problem with their plan was they provided a huge loophole - the conditional resident can remove the conditions and get a 10 year green card on their own, without filing jointly with their USC spouse. Most fraudsters who have the patience, and don't reside in a state with a mandatory separation period before divorce, will use the divorce waiver. The ones who don't have any patience, or who live in a state where divorce takes a long time, will resort to the VAWA waiver. The ones with absolutely zero patience will file a VAWA petition to get the initial green card. Closing this loophole would have a significant impact on the level of fraud. Increasing the period of conditional residence to five years would have a huge impact on the level of fraud.

Yes, I'm saying that if the marriage doesn't last five years then they should lose their permanent resident status and have to return to their home country. I think it would be fair if their US citizen spouse were obligated to provide for their transportation back to their home country - an additional condition of sponsorship.

I know a lot of people will claim that the alien spouse would then be held hostage in a loveless or even abusive marriage for the sake of the green card, but in my opinion any spouse who would ALLOW themselves to remain in a marriage such as that just because their immigration status depends on it is being motivated more by the green card then they are by their marital relationship.

Well said, I think this is a great idea. Thanks.

[LoveNigarmostyle 164]

So, you think people who "can't afford to travel" should not have the opportunity to love, marry and live in the USA with their foreign spouse? It's useless to throw out ideas without thinking them through. What would you do with somebody in my town, where the a million Canadians live within 30 miles, or say Detroit where more than a million Canadians live within 20 miles? US Immigration laws will likely always be well thought out enough to give fair treatment to the vast majority that need access to them. They aren't perfect now but people who write and evaluate them are doing a pretty good job of considering the big picture and always have.

"So, you think people who "can't afford to travel" should not have the opportunity to love, marry and live in the USA with their foreign spouse?"

In a different post, you had mentioned that the couple will need to live together abroad for months at a time, or expect nothing less then of a denial or the same outcome they encountered with their previous visa. How does that apply to your statement here?

Edited August 3, 2011 by LoveNigarmostyle

[rika60607 215]

Oh, this is even worse than what I suggested

And there was pushbrk's comment for me:

"This suggestion would require the foreigner to leave their life behind in their country and give complete control over to their US Citizen loved one. I can just see the arguments now. Do what I say or I'll send you home to your country. (In shame, because all their friends expect they've left for a much better life in the USA.) It's a license to abuse and would be used that way widely."

Yet, I'd even be up for it, but only if beneficiary was not necessarily sent back to their home country, but rather restored to their previous status "sans prejustice". Why? Because some people AOS from work and student visas, and for them divorce and loss of GC would mean they will never be able to do what they came to the US for - work or study. I would have never married a USC under conditions you propose, nor would I endanger my career to benefit a relationship in any way. Safety first

The most significant thing Congress has done in the past 50 years to reduce immigration fraud is conditional resident status. The biggest problem with their plan was they provided a huge loophole - the conditional resident can remove the conditions and get a 10 year green card on their own, without filing jointly with their USC spouse. Most fraudsters who have the patience, and don't reside in a state with a mandatory separation period before divorce, will use the divorce waiver. The ones who don't have any patience, or who live in a state where divorce takes a long time, will resort to the VAWA waiver. The ones with absolutely zero patience will file a VAWA petition to get the initial green card. Closing this loophole would have a significant impact on the level of fraud. Increasing the period of conditional residence to five years would have a huge impact on the level of fraud.

Yes, I'm saying that if the marriage doesn't last five years then they should lose their permanent resident status and have to return to their home country. I think it would be fair if their US citizen spouse were obligated to provide for their transportation back to their home country - an additional condition of sponsorship.

I know a lot of people will claim that the alien spouse would then be held hostage in a loveless or even abusive marriage for the sake of the green card, but in my opinion any spouse who would ALLOW themselves to remain in a marriage such as that just because their immigration status depends on it is being motivated more by the green card then they are by their marital relationship.

[rika60607 215]

Here are some nice recommendations on preventing marriage fraud.

http://www.cis.org/marriagefraud

All and any of them would be great - BUT USCIS/visa processing should not take a year. It should take 1-2 months at most. That way fraudsters would be deterred and legitimate couples would not be put through unreasonable periods of separation.

[jenkatx 52]

Here are some nice recommendations on preventing marriage fraud.

http://www.cis.org/marriagefraud

All and any of them would be great - BUT USCIS/visa processing should not take a year. It should take 1-2 months at most. That way fraudsters would be deterred and legitimate couples would not be put through unreasonable periods of separation.

That is a really good article, thanks for posting that!

[pushbrk 12,877]

The most significant thing Congress has done in the past 50 years to reduce immigration fraud is conditional resident status. The biggest problem with their plan was they provided a huge loophole - the conditional resident can remove the conditions and get a 10 year green card on their own, without filing jointly with their USC spouse. Most fraudsters who have the patience, and don't reside in a state with a mandatory separation period before divorce, will use the divorce waiver. The ones who don't have any patience, or who live in a state where divorce takes a long time, will resort to the VAWA waiver. The ones with absolutely zero patience will file a VAWA petition to get the initial green card. Closing this loophole would have a significant impact on the level of fraud. Increasing the period of conditional residence to five years would have a huge impact on the level of fraud.

Yes, I'm saying that if the marriage doesn't last five years then they should lose their permanent resident status and have to return to their home country. I think it would be fair if their US citizen spouse were obligated to provide for their transportation back to their home country - an additional condition of sponsorship.

I know a lot of people will claim that the alien spouse would then be held hostage in a loveless or even abusive marriage for the sake of the green card, but in my opinion any spouse who would ALLOW themselves to remain in a marriage such as that just because their immigration status depends on it is being motivated more by the green card then they are by their marital relationship.

I see your point but many marriages entered into in good faith, don't last five years. The foreign spouse often has left their whole lives behind including their careers for a new life in the USA with their spouse. They sincerely attempt to build a successful marriage but fail. Now, you want to send them home in shame to start their lives and careers over from scratch. Too harsh a penalty, IMO.

IMO, this is the reason one can remove conditions by showing they entered the marriage in good faith. If they truly did, why would we deport them? I know some slip through and use these loopholes but so it is with all our laws. Blocking the fraudsters before entry always has been and will be the best course of action.