Should the law be amended to specifically prohibit adjusting status from a tourist visa and/or the VWP?

[issha2lynden 77]

I'm not trying to make it personal, sorry if it read that way. However, what you seem to be saying is that since certain countries are lucky and can just get on a plane and come over whenever they want, they should also be allowed to just bypass the entire system and just adjust status. Why should they be allowed to do that and us other people must go the long way?

Life itself is not fair! I voted NO because I believe and trust in the bureaucratic process..Under heaven there is reason and time for everything. I don't know much why other countries are more favored and others are put in so much scrutiny but I agree these has something to do with fraud issues committed by those some trying to get in the US by their crooked ways..maybe political..maybe not.

In all of these, the waiting game put our relationship into test, over all it gives us time to prepare and not be overwhelmed by so much difference in culture,language,climate,food,etc. We have to persist and we need right attitude all through out and reach the finish line.

[AmyWrites 593]

I don't see how eliminated AOS from B2 visas makes getting a B2 visa easier. It's about fraud within the country the applicant came from. The fact that Nigerians can't AOS now doesn't mean they'll be getting tourist visas. It's just not related.

[AmyWrites 593]

And IMO, to me the solution would be to eliminate the VWP or lower the cost of the tourist visa application. $200 for MAYBE getting a visa is ridiculous, considering the interview takes less than 15 minutes.

[milimelo 4,548]

And IMO, to me the solution would be to eliminate the VWP or lower the cost of the tourist visa application. $200 for MAYBE getting a visa is ridiculous, considering the interview takes less than 15 minutes.

It's $150, not $200.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

If you were to change the law specifically prohibiting Adjustment of Status from VWP/B1/B2; you would have to go further than that. It is possible to adjust status if you are here illegally as long as you marry an American. It would require a broad change in policy meaning unless you were here on specific visas(student, work), you would be forced to go back to your home country and then apply no matter what the circumstances. I think the problem is there are enough situations where it is reasonable and humane to allow the non-citizen to adjust status within the US; situations where USC kids or other hardships are involved. The problem is the present system is unfair to some. Changing the law just makes it unfair to others. It wouldn't really solve the issue.

I also think it would just increase the number of people here illegally with no avenue to legal status. I am not sure that is in anyone's best interests.

And I was lucky, I was able to apply DCF so I spent zero time away from wife while doing everything as the system was intended. I recognize the time apart stinks.

That's not accurate. Illegal entrants cannot adjust their status via marriage to a US citizen.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I don't understand, why even have K-1 visas if people are allowed to just adjust status from tourist visa or VWP? That's what I'd like to know...

Because not every country is a VWP country. Because not every citizen from every non-VWP nation qualifies for a US tourist visa. Because not every country in the world makes it easy for someone from another country to marry their "locals".

You might be surprised to learn that a US citizen cannot just enter Great Britain and marry a British citizen.

[Boiler 46,013]

Actually they can, they changed the law back.

A UKC can not just simply fly to the US, the only ones I know that can do that are most Canadians.

[sachinky 465]

- I don't know any statistics but I'm sure the percentage of people who actually use the VWP and stay is tiny, other wise the government would do something about it.

I would imagine this were true.

[sachinky 465]

Ideally, what I'd like to see happen is that CR-1/K-1 visas being scrapped. Instead, you interview at the IV unit, present evidence of a bona-fide relationship (just as we all did), clear a medical exam, complete biometrics and you'd be given a visa to enter the U.S. similar to the tourist visa. Let's call it a SO (significant other) visa for $250-$300. Those who do not have enough proof of a legitimate relationship will be denied the visa. Those who have to undergo AP due to background checks will be subjected to extra scrutiny. Nothing really changes.

If you are unmarried, then you have 90 days to enter the US, get married to your USC partner and file for AOS for the prevailing ffees. If you are already married to your USC spouse, then you too will have to file for AOS within those same 90 days.

This way, you'd still have the stringent rules in place (to prevent fraud) but you'd cut out the 8-9 month average waiting time apart when lives are just put on hold.

Edited November 20, 2011 by sachinky

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

Actually they can, they changed the law back.

A UKC can not just simply fly to the US, the only ones I know that can do that are most Canadians.

Not as far as I am aware.

[sachinky 465]

Re: the topic at hand, I'm not sure how scrapping the AOS off VWP/B2 would help applicants in other high-fraud countries receive B2?

I don't think the law should be scrapped completely but it should be made more stringent. I'd be okay with people AOS-ing off a B2/VWP if there were extreme circumstances in play such as deteriorating health of a USC or if a pregnancy is involved, just as an example.

I too am very skeptical of these spontaneous proposals and sudden mind changes. It's almost as if all the ties to their home country dissipated the moment they stepped out of the airport. What happened to their apartments, jobs, pets, cars? Were they carrying their birth certificate with them "just in case?"

I too think it's not fair that some favored entrants are able to bypass the lengthy and legal process to become a LPR and would oppose it just as a matter of principle, sour grapes or not before RJ accuses me of being bitter. I can understand they are entitled to special rights as a visitor (since they don't come from high-risk countries) but I am not in favor of extending those same courtesy just because you changed your mind and now want to stay.

Edited November 20, 2011 by sachinky

[sciencenerd 56]

This is based on the logic that tourist visas are hard to get because of the ability to adjust status - that just isn't true. People come over on tourist visas and stay here without ever adjusting status. Getting rid of the path to obtaining legal residency does nothing to reduce the chance that someone is going to come over here and stay. Maybe those few cases where someone uses the tourist visa/VWP specifically to marry and adjust status, but those people are not why it's hard to get a tourist visa. It's making the assumption that nobody stays in this country without status, which we obviously know is not true. I personally think the current system is messed up and it's really ridiculous to try to make life miserable for other people just because it was for you. Some people really do make a spur of the moment decision to get married - if you don't believe that, take immigration out of the picture and think of all the American/American couples eloping. It's not so uncommon that you should automatically assume fraud.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I too think it's not fair that some favored entrants are able to bypass the lengthy and legal process to become a LPR and would oppose it just as a matter of principle, sour grapes or not before RJ accuses me of being bitter. I can understand they are entitled to special rights as a visitor (since they don't come from high-risk countries) but I am not in favor of extending those same courtesy just because you changed your mind and now want to stay.

This topic has always amused me because I do feel that most people who oppose adjustment sans consular processing are the people who didn't have it available to them. Insofar as bringing my own perception of peoples "bitterness" into it, I don't mind if you wish to make it "personal". My husband is from a "special country" but we chose to go through the visa process. If that's the place where we all come to a level playing field, then my experience/opinions/etc are just as valid as yours.

If you want to get right down to the bottom line (in my opinion) everybody needs to grow up and get over whatever kind of hell they think the Service put them through. There are rules to get into countries. Being in love doesn't exempt you from the rules. Staying pi$$ed off because you perceive someone had an easier time of it than you did is just silly. Husband and wife is husband and wife and if people are finally happy together, then we should all be happy for them. It's not like their cookie is any different than yours once they've all been baked.

[Casprd 167]

I guess since it doesn't bother me if people want to come to this country and stay, I don't see any reason to make it harder to do so.

but allowing people to AOS from a tourist visa is doing just that. Making it harder for people to come to the US to visit.

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

but allowing people to AOS from a tourist visa is doing just that. Making it harder for people to come to the US to visit.

No that's not what makes it harder for people to come to the US to visit. That's been explained already.