Trump: Reconsider fiancé visas

[crazyworld 54]

I think this is what you're referring to:

http://cis.org/marriagefraud

While I agree that the fiance visa is more open to abuse than spouse visas (because the US citizen can be in on the fraud and then claim that "she never showed up at the airport" or whatever just to give visas to anyone who wants to cross that border not caring about getting or maintaining legal status), I don't think that elimination of it is the answer (or likely). A big reason is that not all people are able to get married abroad (same sex couples, mixed religions, divorced people etc), and the fiance visa is the only way for certain couples to get immigration benefits.

I do think, however, that they must have a *significantly* higher burden than they do now. Meeting once in the past two years is such a ridiculously low burden that it's embarrassing, frankly, for us as a couple to be associated with it (that and the 90 Day Fiance show that has nothing but trainwrecks). I wouldn't have minded getting married abroad first (in fact, in many ways I'd have preferred it) but at this stage in the game, the NVC backlog is so out of control that even being stuck in the hellhole that was TSC we still saved a good 6 months over spouse visas. It was just a matter of timing, and not wanting to pay for 2 houses in 2 countries and fly back and forth any longer than necessary.

If you increase the requirements significantly, you'll get rid of a lot of the fraudsters, or at least catch them easier (fewer folks willing to actually marry for fraud and/or the fraudsters having a much harder time meeting the burden). I have no idea how you'd have caught this woman, though. If fiance visas didn't exist, they'd have just done a spouse visa (it sounds like they were already religiously married abroad and were going fiance visa for speed.... remember she DID successfully AOS so they didn't catch her then, either... by AOS, both types of visa beneficiaries have had the same processing).

You bring up a lot of good points!

I can see how fraud can happen on either or both parts (parishioner / beneficiary). Its sad how a few rotten apples can spoil it for everyone else but we all know that if some one want to get in to the US bad enough for what ever reason they would find a way.

For my fiance and i, we wanted to make sure we were doing the right thing so this is why she came here 4 times on a tourist visa (3 months at a time)so we had a lot of time to really get to know each other although we both knew at the beginning of her second trip that we wanted to spend the rest of our lives together.

[smilesammich 10,727]

That's hypocrisy to a high level

trump is the perfect candidate for impatient reactionary types. building massive walls & monitoring mosques & doing away with k1 visas..he'll say whatever to make his base feel like 'something' is being done. even if what is being done has the opposite of the intended affect, long-term/big picture.

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

trump is the perfect candidate for impatient reactionary types. building massive walls & monitoring mosques & doing away with k1 visas..he'll say whatever to make his base feel like 'something' is being done. even if what is being done has the opposite of the intended affect, long-term/big picture.

effect, not affect

[smilesammich 10,727]

effect, not affect

same difference.

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

same difference.

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Affect_vs_Effect

[Pennycat 880]

You bring up a lot of good points!

I can see how fraud can happen on either or both parts (parishioner / beneficiary). Its sad how a few rotten apples can spoil it for everyone else but we all know that if some one want to get in to the US bad enough for what ever reason they would find a way.

For my fiance and i, we wanted to make sure we were doing the right thing so this is why she came here 4 times on a tourist visa (3 months at a time)so we had a lot of time to really get to know each other although we both knew at the beginning of her second trip that we wanted to spend the rest of our lives together.

That is not an option for many many people. You're lucky enough that she's from a visa waiver program country (pretty much just Western Europe, Australia, Japan and Korea). Everyone else has to apply for a B2 visa in advance (yes, even just for a visit, or Disneyworld, or to go to a wedding or whatever) which involves, among other things, an interview at the US embassy in their country (yes, even if the closest one is a flight away). By law, all B2 applicants are considered to be "intending immigrants" and therefore ineligible for a B2 visa until they can prove otherwise. That's owning property, a business, having a ton of money, or a very serious job etc (and, generally, having very strong ties like this wouldn't let you go on vacation for months at a time). Having a US citizen boyfriend/girlfriend is a huge liability in that process because generally, a romantic tie in the US is going to trump "practical" ties abroad. Many many many people have to choose to do K1 or CR1 without ever having seen the US.

Now, I'm the one who did all the traveling. I went 9 times over the course of 2 years, for up to 2 weeks at a time. I wish it could have been more but I just don't have that kind of vacation time. He could have traveled here for months at a time due to the nature of his job (working for his step-dad's family company) but that wasn't nearly a serious enough job or a close enough tie to overcome the suspicion of intending immigration. It's rough.

[smilesammich 10,727]

http://www.diffen.com/difference/Affect_vs_Effect

yeah i know there is an actual difference. what i meant by that was..ykwim.

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

I think this is what you're referring to:

http://cis.org/marriagefraud

While I agree that the fiance visa is more open to abuse than spouse visas (because the US citizen can be in on the fraud and then claim that "she never showed up at the airport" or whatever just to give visas to anyone who wants to cross that border not caring about getting or maintaining legal status), I don't think that elimination of it is the answer (or likely). A big reason is that not all people are able to get married abroad (same sex couples, mixed religions, divorced people etc), and the fiance visa is the only way for certain couples to get immigration benefits.

I do beleive that was the article! Thanks for finding it.

I agree they probably will not get rid of K-1s for exactly what you said: Sometimes it is the only option open due to some other countries cultures or laws... They could restrict them to only those cases where there is no other option but I don't see them doing even that though with the current political environment I don't count out anything.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Imagine the can of worms had she have been a. Aos from b2