In theory......

[TimsDaisy 0]

TimsDaisy...it's good that YOU have no problem with it..practially or morally..but this person asked what are the pros and cons. In short, my list? Pros...NONE in this particular case and CONS...only one that matters. You would, yes, indeed be breaking the law by committing fraud. You might be ok with him breaking the law...but I doubt the USCIS will be if they find out. If he had been here on a visit and thought...hey...I wanna get married...well, ok..whatever. Take your chances....no intent. (I feel like I'm going in a circle here since this has been mentioned SO many times already....) since this person has intent to immigrate, there really is no "theoretical"about itand we all realize that a question "Can I do this and get away with it" basically...is being asked here(not..I'm gonna..but...can I?)...so the short answer is yes, you can do it, crapshoot if you get away with it or not. Most people don't want to risk their relationships on a crapshoot is all.

It would be premeditated **in this particular instance**, therefore it would be ILLEGAL. It doesn't matter one whit if any of us are "cool" with it or not..it's illegal!

Not picking at you, btw...at least not meaning to....but this kind of answer is always going to get the response of...only if you wanna risk it! Most people don't have any problem...but in this case, they could hardly answer honestly and have it work (did you intend to immigrate, etc.) so it all comes down to morals/ethics in the end I guess. M.

As was quoted above: QUOTE(TimsDaisy @ Mar 15 2007, 11:48 AM)

I'm saying you should be prepared to answer those questions which could be asked. Do I think it is a problem - either practically or morally - no, not in the slightest. I'm fine with it. But again, whatever I'm fine with isn't something anyone should base a decision on.

THAT was my point. That whatever *I* felt about the process is immaterial to the legalities and requirements. I made those comments in response to a poster that said I was talking crazy and using scare tactics to disuade someone from entering on the VWP and then adjusting status.

As for entitlements - I have a lot less trouble with people expressing a sense of entitlement over THIS than I do over artificially low tuition payments at state schools, not having to pay taxes, the right to a $1.50 gallon of gas, etc. . .

The right to marry is recognized as constitutionally guaranteed (let's leave out the creativity with which it has been interpreted with regards to same-sex couples or a variety of other areas - no really, leave it out!). I absolutely feel entitled to a speedy process here. I extra absolutely feel entitled to a process similarly speedy to that enjoyed by our North-Easter brothers and sisters who file through VT.

LisaD is correct that no one is "forced" to break a law, ever. That said, there are numerous instances in all areas of law in which violations are excused or justified based on circumstances. But that's besides the point here. Bottom line: it is possible to enter on the VWP and adjust status. The potential consequences and benefits have been discussed at length.

What the OP does with all the information is between him, his conscience, and, if he's lucky/unlucky, the United States Government. There's not much any of us here can do about it.

Unlike other hot-topic threads - should he enter and adjust, it doesn't have any bearing on my petition or situation. Not even from a P.R. standpoint.

[TimsDaisy 0]

Eek - computer spazzed.

I tried to finish by saying -

He's still going to comply with the laws here. He won't be stealing American jobs. Doesn't sound like he's moving here for the welfare benefits. He won't be an undocumented worker or illegal alien. Sounds like victimless crime to me.

Again, like I said, my opinion. Which has nothing to do with the laws or anyone's need to follow them.

[Fandango 1,439]

PLEASE TRY TO MAKE A DESTINATION BETWEEN PEOPLE WITH INTENT ENTERING ON A VWP AND PEOPLE WHO ENTERED ON A VWP WITH NO INTENT..... THERE IS A VERY BIG DIFFERENCE... FOR 1 IT IS OK TO DO AOS FOR THE OTHER IT IS NOT.....

Kez

I think that's clear in this thread...how many more times must we all type the word 'intent'?

[Teddy406 0]

Eek - computer spazzed.

I tried to finish by saying -

He's still going to comply with the laws here. He won't be stealing American jobs. Doesn't sound like he's moving here for the welfare benefits. He won't be an undocumented worker or illegal alien. Sounds like victimless crime to me.

Again, like I said, my opinion. Which has nothing to do with the laws or anyone's need to follow them.

True, it's up to people on a person to person basis. Im the type of person that does things "properly" and "legit".

I know people who WOULD literally do something which i would deem "crazy" but not me. Just dont turn up with the Tux in your suitcase though!

The other flip side is you might not think things are fair, but it's the US government, if they say you cant have your ball back, you arent getting back any time soon.

Just my $0.02

[Dan+Nikki 0]

As for entitlements - I have a lot less trouble with people expressing a sense of entitlement over THIS than I do over artificially low tuition payments at state schools, not having to pay taxes, the right to a $1.50 gallon of gas, etc. . .

The right to marry is recognized as constitutionally guaranteed (let's leave out the creativity with which it has been interpreted with regards to same-sex couples or a variety of other areas - no really, leave it out!). I absolutely feel entitled to a speedy process here. I extra absolutely feel entitled to a process similarly speedy to that enjoyed by our North-Easter brothers and sisters who file through VT.

He's still going to comply with the laws here. He won't be stealing American jobs. Doesn't sound like he's moving here for the welfare benefits. He won't be an undocumented worker or illegal alien. Sounds like victimless crime to me.

Again, like I said, my opinion. Which has nothing to do with the laws or anyone's need to follow them.

Thank You for saving me the time to type that out.

The OP is asking a reasonable question. I assumed you should be able to go about immigrating this way. The OP would be coming into the country legally, and the Govt would have his fingerprints and he could AOS as normal. I dont think this is a sense of entitlement. They would be marrying a US citizen to AOS. I dont find that morally bad in any way. Anyone can come to america and not leave. Regardless if they wait 6 monthes or more for a K-1 visa. I made the personal desicion to use the K-1 visa route. I like to play things safe. I think that "My sense of Entitlement" as someone has said is completely normal and how I think the government should be working for us as citizens.

The constitution was written for the people. I think everyone should read it and understand WHY it was written. I could use a refresher myself.

( This post is 100 percent my Opinion and if I offend... Well no harm intended. )

[Fandango 1,439]

As for entitlements - I have a lot less trouble with people expressing a sense of entitlement over THIS than I do over artificially low tuition payments at state schools, not having to pay taxes, the right to a $1.50 gallon of gas, etc. . .

The right to marry is recognized as constitutionally guaranteed (let's leave out the creativity with which it has been interpreted with regards to same-sex couples or a variety of other areas - no really, leave it out!). I absolutely feel entitled to a speedy process here. I extra absolutely feel entitled to a process similarly speedy to that enjoyed by our North-Easter brothers and sisters who file through VT.

He's still going to comply with the laws here. He won't be stealing American jobs. Doesn't sound like he's moving here for the welfare benefits. He won't be an undocumented worker or illegal alien. Sounds like victimless crime to me.

Again, like I said, my opinion. Which has nothing to do with the laws or anyone's need to follow them.

Thank You for saving me the time to type that out.

The OP is asking a reasonable question. I assumed you should be able to go about immigrating this way. The OP would be coming into the country legally, and the Govt would have his fingerprints and he could AOS as normal. I dont think this is a sense of entitlement. They would be marrying a US citizen to AOS. I dont find that morally bad in any way. Anyone can come to america and not leave. Regardless if they wait 6 monthes or more for a K-1 visa. I made the personal desicion to use the K-1 visa route. I like to play things safe. I think that "My sense of Entitlement" as someone has said is completely normal and how I think the government should be working for us as citizens.

The constitution was written for the people. I think everyone should read it and understand WHY it was written. I could use a refresher myself.

( This post is 100 percent my Opinion and if I offend... Well no harm intended. )

The words 'efficiency' and 'government' rarely go together.

And as I said before, I understand the frustration of being apart...but using gov't red tape to justify 'pushing people to break the law'...well I find that to be a bunch of nonsense & blamestorming for lack of personal responsibility. That's what I meant by entitlement.

Also, your foreign spouse does not have a RIGHT to be here...we have RIGHTS as citizens to petition for their visa, but that doesn't mean we're hiring USCIS to 'work for us' to process things so *we're* happy. You can't request a visa and a side of fries. Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that.

ETA: Who knows what's going on with the different service centers and why some are faster. One would assume they have either fewer petitions or more people, or who knows what. So if the other centers are lacking, then more funding needs to be in place to bring them up to optimal speed. OH NO, I'M NOT PAYING HIGHER FEES!

I have a plaque over my desk in my office. It says 'I want it all and I want it delivered'.....

Edited March 16, 2007 by LisaD

[Dan+Nikki 0]

I forgot to address the OP at the end of my post. lol

Anyways if its something you want to do. Just take a "holiday" from work. Come over. After your here buy a ticket to Vegas with your fiance'. Dont plan ahead. You wouldnt want to come into the country on a legal VWP and have to lie if they ask you if your getting married. If nothing is set in stone, then nothings 100 percent planned until you do it. Its not something I would risk. Once you piss off the government your SOL.

and yes LisaD my fiancee does have the right to be here under the VWP. Your also right I dont like waiting. I dont think we should have to when anyone can come to the country legally or not. I think its punishing people who play by the rules, like us. I dont expect everyone to see it like me. I dont expect the government to be effiecient. ( I can dream can't I) I was just commenting on what you said in referance to me. Just wanted to explain myself and where I was coming from.

Edited March 16, 2007 by Dan+Nikki

[Fandango 1,439]

and yes LisaD my fiancee does have the right to be here under the VWP. Your also right I dont like waiting. I dont think we should have to when anyone can come to the country legally or not. I think its punishing people who play by the rules, like us. I dont expect everyone to see it like me. I dont expect the government to be effiecient. ( I can dream can't I) I was just commenting on what you said in referance to me. Just wanted to explain myself and where I was coming from.

Her coming here is a privilege, not a right. She could be denied at any time. It is up to Immigration whether or not she is denied entry.

Not exactly probable, but being pedantic to prove a point.

But thank you for your response. I may not agree with you, but I appreciate the effort in replying.

[Fandango 1,439]

Adding: illegal immigration chaps my hide prolly just as much as it chaps yours. But I'm not going to sit here and be all 'hey they did it so what's the big deal'.

Two wrongs and all that jazz.

[Dan+Nikki 0]

and yes LisaD my fiancee does have the right to be here under the VWP. Your also right I dont like waiting. I dont think we should have to when anyone can come to the country legally or not. I think its punishing people who play by the rules, like us. I dont expect everyone to see it like me. I dont expect the government to be effiecient. ( I can dream can't I) I was just commenting on what you said in referance to me. Just wanted to explain myself and where I was coming from.

Her coming here is a privilege, not a right. She could be denied at any time. It is up to Immigration whether or not she is denied entry.

Not exactly probable, but being pedantic to prove a point.

But thank you for your response. I may not agree with you, but I appreciate the effort in replying.

He he, we can agree to disagree.

I believe a the VWP is a right because as long as you met the qualifying conditions and bring what is needed to prove it, your golden. People just dont come prepared if a officer is suspicious you dont met the VWP or have some other issue. Unfortunetly you get those people behind the counter who are pricks and can find a reason to deny anyone. Who could carry all that proof on them at anytime. We all just hope we dont get that person when we get in line.

Edited March 17, 2007 by Dan+Nikki

[TimsDaisy 0]

Amen to that Dan+Nikki.

My problem is that with family-based immigration - no, check that - with spouse and fiance based immigration, the difference between entering on B2 or VWP and the K1 is really just a matter of semantics. People who come in on the VWP and marry and then adjust status are documented every bit as fast as if they came in on a K1!

Enter on a waiver: you have 90 days to be here legally.

Enter on a K1: you have - look out! - 90 days to be here legally.

At the end of the 90 day period, regardless of HOW you entered, you better have done something to square yourself with the US government - either you leave the country and go home; ask for an extention; or file to adjust status.

So the difference is?. . . .

And "because that's the law" is sort of the correct answer. Then again, more correctly, when it comes to the true purpose of these laws, the better question is whether the underlying public policy is being served by compliance with the letter of the law. For fiance/spouse visa petitioners, the purposes are murkier. Espcially when the end goal, or one of the main goals -the documentation of a foreign citizen's presence in the country - will be accomplished regardless of the method of entry.

The system is a badly patched together, lumbering giant, that frequently crushes the spirits of those who try to comply. I think it sucks. I know most of us do. I just like to acknowledge its suckiness.

[NealandCari 0]

My aunt was trying to convince me to do this, because that's what she did and then worked as a paralegal for an immigration attorney. She told me to have my fiance overstay his visa to make to look more legit that he didn't come here with the intent to get married. She said to get married the day after the 90 days expires and then apply for AOS. I couldn't do it though, I'm too paranoid.

[msu17 0]

Hehe I love it when people who immigrated a few years or more ago talk to you about immigration... I was at a birthday party and this lady sitting next to me heard I was marrying someone from england and then spent the next 10 min how to do it and that the K1 was completely the wrong thing to be doing Curious how different it will be in 10-20 years...

[rebeccajo 14]

Hahahahaha! I love this thread.

You know what I'm going to come right out here and say?

If I had it to do ALL OVER AGAIN - I would have married my darling on his second visit and adjusted him. To hell with the K1.

As I see it, once the K1 expires (which it does at some point before permanent residency is completed), the K1 beneficiary has no more rights in this country than any other person applying for adjustment of status based upon a family relationship.

By simply filing the I485 as a family-based petitioner, a 'blanket' is thrown over that petitioner. The CLR is full of categories of behaviors that preclude adjustment of status, followed by the caveat that these behaviors are permissable if the petitioner is married to a USC.

If you enter the country on the K1 and marry within 90 days you have fulfilled the terms of your visa. So if you file for AOS based upon that K1 entry, about all you are showing (IMO) is that you did not violate your visa.

If you adjust from the VWP, what visa are you violating by adjusting? Somebody show me, please.

I'm not advocating 'breaking laws'. I'm saying that I wonder if there is really none to be broken.

Let me end by saying I make my statements based upon our personal experience. My husband is a virtual prisoner in this country - an applicant to adjust status to a government who will not grant him a greencard because it doesn't have the infrastructure in place to complete his security clearance. I don't see that we - personally - could be in a much worse legal position if we had married on the VWP.

Edited March 17, 2007 by rebeccajo

[meauxna 15]

ETA: Who knows what's going on with the different service centers and why some are faster. One would assume they have either fewer petitions or more people, or who knows what. So if the other centers are lacking, then more funding needs to be in place to bring them up to optimal speed. OH NO, I'M NOT PAYING HIGHER FEES!

Dang. It is so tempting to get into this discussion again, mainly because I think you are all discussing it quite rationally and with some context. Maybe I can add some more.

The VSC vs everyone else puzzle has remained a mystery despite every single petitioner talking about it every day for at least the last 10 years (I'm not kidding). Apparently they have a killer system for handling I-129fs at VSC and there hasn't been a single person who has managed to migrate that system to the other SCs.

The downside to the I-129f efficiency is that VSC has been notoriously slow at everything else it handled. That seems to be improving (and does FA for couples eager to reunite).

I forgot to address the OP at the end of my post. lol

Anyways if its something you want to do. Just take a "holiday" from work. Come over. After your here buy a ticket to Vegas with your fiance'. Dont plan ahead. You wouldnt want to come into the country on a legal VWP and have to lie if they ask you if your getting married. If nothing is set in stone, then nothings 100 percent planned until you do it. Its not something I would risk. Once you piss off the government your SOL.

and yes LisaD my fiancee does have the right to be here under the VWP. Your also right I dont like waiting. I dont think we should have to when anyone can come to the country legally or not.

This kind of post is the danger of these discussions, however. If you want to know why, go to google and type "clean entry" + udall. Wear your flame retardant suit.

Nikki, you are seriously deluded about the rights of non-USCs and coming to the US tho.