Oh my gosh! Somebody please help me!

[paul_kay 31]

Well, the embassy plans on giving him random drugs tests throughout the year. This could be the start of that. Why not start the random testing at the interview?

If he told the embassy that the last time he tried drugs was 4 years ago and he tested positive now, then wouldn't he receive a lifetime ban for lying? The consulate asked him during the interview if he was on drugs and he replied "no" so if his test was positive, he is committing fraud. If he told the embassy he had tried drugs 4 years ago and he continually tests negative now and throughout the year, the consulate can give the visa knowing that this applicant has been clean and is true to his word.

My point is that if he actually tested positive, then I would think he would be facing harsher penalties, like misrepresentation and fraud, not just a one-year ban.

I agree. It wouldn't be just a 1 year ban. Should be more if he was Positive. Maybe the second druug test was the start of the random drug testing.

[Inky 1,110]

Maybe the second druug test was the start of the random drug testing.

The drug test was done at the interview. They were told about the random testing and denial over a month after the interview after being in AP. I doubt they would start the random testing without telling him right off the bat at the interview that he was denied and will be submitted to random drug testing for 1 year before he can interview again.

[Gosia & Tito 199]

I think that if he told the Embassy he smoked weed 4 years ago, that is probably why he got denied. Thus, I think step 1 is simply found out if the tests were negative. If they were, they denied him for a year simply because of the admission. Others could probably chime in with more knowledge, but if that is in fact the case I see no need for a lawyer nor the need to go there have private tests done etc. This is your best case scenario, it means no lies were told to you and it's simply a 1 year denial b/c of the admission. Obviously, he needs to stay clean for a year as they have stated they will do random testing, but other than that I personally would now be much more at ease (after you find out the two tests were negative).

If admission is the reason for denial, Why going over the testing then? Of course, it is always possible that the first test came negative and they decided to re-test in case if was an incorrect test; but then 2 negative tests would outweigh (I would think) any subjective opinion the CO has.

So far, no one here or the OP really know what are the results; and as others have pointed, that is the first thing to find out, either from the Embassy of from the testing facility. Only then can the OP define/decide what is the best course of action.

[sachinky 465]

Any admission of drug use during the medical or interview is sufficient reason to get a ban from US-entry. The rules may differ if the user was under 18 at the time of use, I can't be sure.

The second test was likely done to make sure that he was in fact telling the truth -- that he had used it four years ago and not smoked up the night before with his friends or is a habitual smoker.

The difference is that if he lied about and the second test, in fact, came back positive, he'd probably be hit with misrepresentation instead of a one year ban on entry.

This is what I'm thinking happened. Tested at interview, negative but admitted to using weed four years ago. Probably questioned at the embassy about prior drug use and tested again to confirm that he was saying the truth. Probably negative again but banned due to admission of drug use in the past.

Of course, we could just wait for an answer from the Embassy instead of speculating.

[KittyPollitt 284]

OP should swing by the Jamaica forum, where this is a common issue that comes up often. She could probably get some great advice there.

[CamiandAmr 0]

I'm very sorry. I am sure you are very devastated. I hope everything turns out for the best.

Edited October 1, 2011 by CamiandAmr

[D. Ahmad 0]

I know that in pakistan if they give you a sealed envelope it means you passed your medical exam, if you fail it, they dont give you anything

[momof1 205]

You should know that drugs don't have to be found in their system to be found inadmissible under this part of the INA. Merely admitting to drug use in the past year will cause this ban. In theory, If he did drugs 11 months ago he would only be inadmissible for one month because they need to be clean for the previous year. In practice though, they are giving people a one year ban no matter how long ago the drug use was. Until very recently the ban was three years. Did your fiancé admit to doing drugs of any kind?

[habibi83 12]

I would think that if the first was negative then they would NOT do a follow-up test. You do follow-ups if the first is positive.

Agree with you...it sounds to me like the guy got a second chance but twice he was positive...