immigration debate - family rejected for tourist visa

[OKflyboy 35]

Seemed the norm in London.

I guess if they just sent a letter saying no people would also complain.

Letter denying the visa based on the application only? Maybe some would.

But not those for whom it saved a pointless trip of hundreds of miles.

[Boiler 46,124]

The application is what counts.

[Noel194 53]

Perhaps we could fit all people visiting with GPS ankle bracelets like probationers. It would be at there expense and if they do not leave we know exactly where they are at all times and can pick them up and deport them more easily. That is a joke but it is no more far fetched than suggesting that because you have a USC vouching for you you will somehow not abuse the system.

[Boiler 46,124]

Colorado does that with convicts.

The problem is that they take them off.

[Harsh_77 718]

Fingerprints and photos are pointless, if they' re going to reject based on the apllication anyway.

Finger print works in in multiple ways, for ppl who are granted visa they could be verified when they enter US.

In lot of these countries when ppl are rejected for couple times, they come back with complete fresh passport - yep possible, but with finger prints these applicants could be caught.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

I have read on here that in Nigeria, for instance, it is typical to have five or so passports all with slightly different spellings of your name. Then you can use different ones for different things and live a generally sneaky life. That's why documenting who actually applied by "biometrics" is important, I think. And we wonder why name checks take so long...

[Noel194 53]

Well perhaps we could use the exploding anklets like the exploding collars in The Running Man with Arnold Schartzeneggar. If you tamper with it or try to remove it it explodes

[OKflyboy 35]

Finger print works in in multiple ways, for ppl who are granted visa they could be verified when they enter US.

In lot of these countries when ppl are rejected for couple times, they come back with complete fresh passport - yep possible, but with finger prints these applicants could be caught.

My family's passports did not get stamped, so no reason for a fresh one. And previous denial does not affect future applications anyway, or is not supposed to at least. That's what the Consulate says *insert sarcasm here*

[Rwlaird 18]

If anyone feels that the application process has been so meticulously refined and continually managed to ensure quality control that it is flawless and allows no possibility for mistakes then maybe they need to better understand the embassy’s actual practices and more closely examine the recommendations of the IG’s report.

http://oig.state.gov/documents/organization/126337.pdf

Embassy staff cited factors which create a profile that some people in Ukraine, including my in-laws, fit into (fairly low-income jobs, no travel outside of Ukraine, and all children and grandchildren permanently living in the U.S.) and state that such factors make it difficult for them to overcome the presumption of intending immigration. Does difficulty have to necessarily lead to what the Inspector General described as “absurd results?” How can such factors lead to an automatic conclusion regarding the intent of the applicants (especially when the IG report states that “Experience has demonstrated that individuals who do not meet a particular finite standard might, nonetheless, be qualified, legitimate travelers. This judgment was reflected in comments from the field. One line officer observed, "not all wealthy people intend to return and not all low-income applicants intend to immi­grate. You have to get a feel for how tied to their job, community, etc. they are.")?

The IG report pointed out that consular section chiefs opposed codification of the series of indicia or factors the consular officer (CO) should use in his/her assessment of an applicant's entitlement to the visa category and cautioned against establishing "bright line" evidentiary require­ments. By the same token, wouldn’t it be imprudent for COs to too heavily rely a "bright line" of disqualifying factors to summarily deny applications and risk allowing the COs to become irresponsible or lazy in the accuracy of their decisions by failing to perform the required due diligence and failing to “rely on the interview… to get a feel for how tied to their job, community, etc. they are.” If “setting up such standards is an open invitation to fraud" then could reliance on a "bright line" of disqualifying factors be an open invitation to mistakes and abuse on the part of irresponsible COs?

I realize that it is “impossible for consular officers to conduct lengthy and relaxed interviews” as embassy staff has stated. However, in the case of my in-laws a 2.5 minute interview with relevant questions could have been better than a 2 minute interview with irrelevant questions to “get a feel for how tied to their job, community, etc. they are." It is inconceivable that the interview conducted was adequate for the CO to “get a feel for how tied …” It is also unimaginable what my mother- or father-in-law could have said to give the CO and impression that they may not be strongly tied to Ukraine and intent on abandoning their employment and property in Ukraine to live illegally in the U.S. Maybe they were tired after taking an overnight train from their city to Kyiv and/or a little nervous since they don’t have experience with attending interviews at the embassy of a foreign nation and were not as charming as they should have been.

How could the CO “get a feel for how tied… ?” They could start by using a relevant line of questioning instead of meaningless chit chat.

The following example regarding a student visa should be instructive:

For example, Japanese Student ("JS") seeks a non-immigrant F-1 visa at the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo. JS has already received her endorsed Form I-20 from her U.S. based university. She has been processed and admitted, etc. When she visits the U.S. Embassy, she is asked about her intent regarding her prospective stay in the U.S. She duly explains that she is very excited about studying biology at State University. The adjudicator asks her about her plans when her studies are complete. She explains that she intends to apply for Optional Practical Training (often called an "OPT card") at the conclusion of her bachelor's degree studies. And after that? the adjudicator asks.

What JS intends at this point is now very important, critical in fact. If she intends to apply for a green card so she can have a permanent career in biology in the States, things could go very badly for her at the interview. If she intends to return home prior to the expiration of her authorized period of stay (OPT card holding F-1 status holders are entitled to a 60-day grace period upon the expiration of the one-year work authorization), within that 60-day period, and take the knowledge she gained in the U.S. back to Japan, she will likely be in good shape.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/05/16/1209497/-Perspective-of-an-Immigration-Attorney-Part-2#

[Noel194 53]

Well every time I have been to the Embassy in Kiev there are 100 people waiting for visa interviews and 3 or 4 interviewers. They can only do what they can do. Perhaps the US government should supply 100 interviewers so every applicant can have an 8 hour interview. I am sure no one would object to the additional fiscal expenditure considering our current financial situation. You know some times people are unjustly rejected and sometimes people are rejected because there is a valid reason. I would love to hear your thoughts on all the wrongly convicted people serving jail sentences. SHould we scrap the entire Court system? Wait lets make it so hard to convict someone that everyone is found innocent. Problem solved.

[Boiler 46,124]

Fees are self supporting the visa process.

So an interview 10x longer would for example sake cost 10x as much.

Not sure what the price of a flight is but if you are prepared to pay that perhaps also such an application fee?

Edited June 29, 2013 by Boiler

[Noel194 53]

Fees are self supporting the visa process.

So an interview 10x longer would for example sake cost 10x as much.

Not sure what the price of a flight is but if you are prepared to pay that perhaps also such an application fee?

Good idea or perhaps the visa applicant could pay the FBI to fly to Kiev and do an extensive background check on them and there assets and ties and present it in triplicate form translated into Ukrainian. I mean if a $1600 visa fee is no problem whats a few more thousand for a background check. Kinda seems unfair to those who cannot afford such fees.

Edited June 29, 2013 by Noel194

[Harsh_77 718]

My family's passports did not get stamped, so no reason for a fresh one. And previous denial does not affect future applications anyway, or is not supposed to at least. That's what the Consulate says *insert sarcasm here*

They used to stamp the passport now everything is digital, they either maintian a copy of passport or passport number and what questions applicant was asked in previous interviews, what answers did they applicant provide, everything is recorded and maintained.

I am not sure how long they maintain those records but from personal experience they maintain for atleast 10 yrs or more.

Yes previous denials don't have any impact on the new application but they can compare the answers from previous interview if applicant is changing the stories.

[Harpa Timsah 13,258]

OP: So your in-laws have never ever left Ukraine, never travelled anywhere? And their daughter never travelled anywhere but met an American? Maybe they should take some holidays around Europe and then try again for a visa. They have no "track record" for returning from anywhere. How can they know they will return?

[Rwlaird 18]

Good idea or perhaps the visa applicant could pay the FBI to fly to Kiev and do an extensive background check on them and there assets and ties and present it in triplicate form translated into Ukrainian. I mean if a $1600 visa fee is no problem whats a few more thousand for a background check. Kinda seems unfair to those who cannot afford such fees.

100 interviewers... fly in the FBI... get real! Read what I already said: the officers could actually do their job and conduct an appropriate 2.5 minute interview with relevant questions instead of a 2 minute worthless interview. He could actually do his job and like the IG's report says that he should instead of taking the easy and lazy route of summarily dismissing applicants who fit a certain demographic. If the fees need to be raised to provide the appropriate service then so be it.