Must US Spouse Attend Interview at US Consulate

[zyggy 9]

< googling specious>

chuckle... me and my big words...

specious... apparently good or right though lacking real merit; superficially pleasing or plausible:

[CutienPurg 0]

[meauxna 15]

I understood that the interview was to validate the documents as well as the legitimacy of the relationship. How could they do that without the U.S. spouse there?

No, the immigrant must qualify for the visa on his/her own merits. There is no legal requirement for the USC to attend a visa interview.

I think you would have a lot more luck focusing on the company's leave policy and showing that your request was equivilant to a funeral etc. A very important family event where emotional support is common, but not required by law. Make sense?

[bowflex 0]

I really hope you don't live in Michigan or a state like it, as unless you're in a Union, it's at will employment, and they can fire you for whatever reason they find fit. I know a USC isn't required to be at the interview, but I definitely feel it's my responsibility and honor to be there just like you did. I wish you nothing but good luck getting your job back, or at least some money for your troubles.

[ASPCA Fan 0]

I am attempting to fight this wrongful termination - but I cannot find in the law where it says whether the U.S. spouse or fiance of a Canadian citizen immigrating to the U.S. based on marriage to a U.S. citizen is required to attend the interview for the "green card". It seems like they would have to, as we were asked questions about how we met, etc.

While I agree with the other posters that it is not required for the USC to attend the interivew in Montreal or Vancouver, it seems to me that you are also asking about the greencard/AOS interview? Are you indeed asking about this because yes, the USC does have to attend that interview and I'm sure we can find documentation on that.

Mo

Yes, I am talking about the greencard/AOS interview. I couldn't imagine that the USC was not required to attend this interview, or the entire immigration process would have been completed without anyone from Homeland Security, Immigration, or the Consulates ever meeting with the USC.

Edited April 3, 2007 by ASPCA Fan

[Flames9_RN 358]

Whats with the red?? I'm a bit confused, you stated you just attended the interview in Montreal, that would NOT be for AOS. Either a K3, cr-1 or Ir-1! and YES one can be a permanent resident without the American citizen ever being interviewed face to face!! I have my 10 yr greencard and my USA spouse has never been face to face interviewed. They may ask of proof that you HAD to attend and I just checked my papers and makes NO mention of that.

As others have stated, ur best avenue of attack is going to be that you talked to someone that you thought had the power to give you the time off!! And to contact a lawyer, I'm sure they wil have one!! Hope it works out well for you.

[meauxna 15]

Yes, I am talking about the greencard/AOS interview. I couldn't imagine that the USC was not required to attend this interview, or the entire immigration process would have been completed without anyone from Homeland Security, Immigration, or the Consulates ever meeting with the USC.

One, no, you are not talking about an AOS/greencard interview--not that you attended. That was an immigrant visa interview, by the sounds of it.

It is entirely possible for an immigrant to go straight to a Green Card--heck, naturalization, without ever having the USC sponsor spouse meet a DHS employee in person.

[devblt 0]

Hi, we went through this entire process, and I attended my Canadian husband's interview in Montreal, Quebec. I took several days off of work (requested a leave of absence) to attend the interview. I had to pick my husband up in Ontario, we had to pick up his criminal history report and medical records, drive to Montreal the day before (so we could be there early in the morning), then drive back to Ontario to get his belongings before we returned to the U.S. He's here now, has a social security card, and things are going great.

HOWEVER ...

My employer allows employees to attend legal matters including jury duty, being a witness, being subpoenaed to a hearing or trial, etc.

I felt that my employer should allow me to take time off to attend this immigration hearing.

The staffing coordinator approved the time off, but I was then fired for not getting an official approval for a "leave of absence" from the big boss. I had no idea that I had to do so, and I only took 4 days off of work (unpaid).

I am attempting to fight this wrongful termination - but I cannot find in the law where it says whether the U.S. spouse or fiance of a Canadian citizen immigrating to the U.S. based on marriage to a U.S. citizen is required to attend the interview for the "green card". It seems like they would have to, as we were asked questions about how we met, etc.

Does anyone know the answer to this question, and, if so, where the law/rule/regulation is so I can print it out and bring it to my appeal?

Thanks so much!

Fired

Do you have any documentary evidence from the staffing coordinator that you had been approved for time off? It seems to me that this is the key. If you were approved, then you were approved. If there was no instructions on getting additional sign-off from the BIG BOSS MAN.. that is not your fault.

[ASPCA Fan 0]

The interview in Montreal was for a Permanent Resident Visa (Green Card) based on my husband's marriage to me, a U.S. citizen.

Wow. If immigration is as worried about bogus marriages for the purpose of U.S. residency & eventual citizenship as I thought they were, it is hard to believe that they would never require a meeting with the foreign spouse, U.S. spouse, and both spouses together.

I'm going to call an immigration lawyer and ask about it, just in case it is hidden somewhere in federal law/immigration law. As you know, the U.S. government frequently violates it's own laws (including the Constitution) and tends to pick and choose which laws they wish to follow and/or enforce - so there may very well be some requirement written somewhere. I hope so.

Anyway, I had an employee handbook that stated that you were allowed to take a leave of absence (using earned time and/or time off) if you asked for it in advance - and there was no specific limitation to the reason - only to the length. So I submitted a request to the Staffing Coordinator, who approved it. Later, after I had already returned to work, they claimed it was an "unscheduled" and "unexcused" absence because I had not followed the "Leave of Absence" policy, which was a completely separate policy that I was not provided with until AFTER I had already come and gone to Canada for the immigration interview.

I am filing a wrongful termination suit against them for various reasons (that included), and was hoping to locate supporting evidence - although my position as it stands seems reasonable to me - and I also believe that attending an immigration interview/hearing with your foreign spouse is as important and legitimate as any other reason to take a short leave of absence from your job (4 days, I think it was).

But, if anyone hears anything about attendance being recommended or required, either by law or by an immigration attorney or immigration employee, please let me know!

Thanks!

Edited April 3, 2007 by ASPCA Fan

[meauxna 15]

The interview in Montreal was for a Permanent Resident Visa (Green Card) based on my husband's marriage to me, a U.S. citizen.

Wow. If immigration is as worried about bogus marriages for the purpose of U.S. residency & eventual citizenship as I thought they were, it is hard to believe that they would never require a meeting with the foreign spouse, U.S. spouse, and both spouses together.

I'm going to call an immigration lawyer and ask about it, just in case it is hidden somewhere in federal law/immigration law. As you know, the U.S. government frequently violates it's own laws (including the Constitution) and tends to pick and choose which laws they wish to follow and/or enforce - so there may very well be some requirement written somewhere. I hope so.

I'm really not trying to argue with you, but helping you set your terminology straight so that you DO have credibility when you go on to fight this.

The interview is for an Immigrant Visa.

The fact that your husband used it, became a Permanent Resident and received a Green Card, does not change the nature of the official business. As you've probably learned, a lot of immigration-speak is hair splitting (and important nonetheless).

If you need examples of people who go through the entire process legally without a USC ever attending an interview, I can help you out with that. But it is hard to prove a negative--you won't find it in the law becasue it is not there.

Example: A USC lives in London. Married to a UKC, they decide to move to the US. She mails a petition I-130 to the USCIS Field Office, which is approved. He goes to an IV interview at the US Embassy London, gets his visa and buys tickets. They fly to the US, he goes thru the same steps as your husband at the POE and gets his Green Card. Say they were married for four years at the time--he is not a conditional resident, and decides to naturalize asap. three years after arriving, he applies and 6 months later is sworn in as a USC himself.

The Missus has never once appeared in front of a CIS officer in relation to this immigration--everything is done in paper.

The other part of your case is so much stronger---they changed the rules on you mid-game.

I hope you get satisfaction!

[ASPCA Fan 0]

Thanks for the clarification.

It's the adjustment of status interview that we both must attend, and not the initial interview for permanent residence visa?

I still find this odd considering Bush's campaign against "terrorism" and all that has come with it (Patriot Act, etc.)

I do understand it from a perspective of those immigrating from overseas, or from a distance that makes it impossible for the USC to attend the interview. However, I live 8 hours from my husband's former home in Ontario and 8 hours from Montreal - so it made perfect sense to me to attend the interview.

I still wish I could find something in official documents that at least recommended that the USC attend the interview if possible. I know that on many immigration attorney sites it is recommended.

Anyway, I'm going to go with the fact that it is an important life event (on par with marriage, funerals, births, family reunions, etc) and that I followed what I thought was the appropriate procedure and was not given further instruction by the staffing office to do anything other or more than what I'd done.

I hope everyone out there contacts their political representatives to support the Employee Free Choice Act, perhaps the most important working class/labor legislation in decades! If you haven't yet, contact your representatives and let them know you want workers to have more freedom and less retaliation from employers in forming unions (that would have prevented my firing in this case)!

[meauxna 15]

Thanks for the clarification.

It's the adjustment of status interview that we both must attend, and not the initial interview for permanent residence visa?

There are two paths to Permanent Resident status (for our discussion here):

1-Immigrant Visa

2-Adjustment of Status

If traveling path #1, it goes as described above, and what your husband did. He is now a PR, and should read the links in my signature to see what his new status is, what it allows, and what it restricts.

Path #2 (just to be clear) does not apply to you/your husband. He is already a PR, and does not need to Adjust Status. That is for people in the US on some type of non-immigrant status (K-1, K-3, VWP or other visitor type, J, H etc).

That the USC spouse must appear for the AOS interview, while not needing to ever appear for the IV process is, well, somewhat of a mystery, it's true!

(rather, I'm sure it's explained somewhere, but I haven't fallen over it before & won't go looking)

[Yodrak 7]

ASPCA Fan,

The end result of entering the USA using an immigrant visa is Permanent Residence status, status being obtained at the POE not at the consulate, but I think you are creating a false impression in your own mind by referring to the immigrant visa as "permanent residence visa".

Call the visa by the proper name and the subtle but important diffference might help you to understand better.

Yodrak

Thanks for the clarification.

It's the adjustment of status interview that we both must attend, and not the initial interview for permanent residence visa?

.....

Edited April 4, 2007 by Yodrak