I-751 December 2017 Filers [merged threads]

[Amhara 460]

1 hour ago, DoraS said:

I have a question everyone, I believe all of you have heard about the new proposal about public charges.Trump Administration announced a proposed rule to make changes to “public charge” policies that govern how the use of public benefits such as (Medicaid, SNAP etc.) may affect individuals’ ability to enter the U.S. or adjust to legal permanent resident (LPR) status (i.e., obtain a “green card”).

Would these proposed changes affect on us, since we already filed our I-751 almost a year ago. Or by any chance affect on our nautralization process, which is almost here. Are these changes going to be retroactive? 

I mean do you think we have to submit some additional forms before we finally get our Permanent Green Card?

Lots of questions I know, however I want this to be over, the waiting is painful enough I guess :).

 

https://www.kff.org/disparities-policy/fact-sheet/proposed-changes-to-public-charge-policies-for-immigrants-implications-for-health-coverage/

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/18_0921_USCIS_Proposed-Rule-Public-Charge.pdf 

 

 

4

Yes and no. 

 

YES - Technically, this policy has always applied to you/us.  The USC spouse needs to submit an affidavit promising to not allow the foreign spouse to become a public charge.

 

NO - This policy is specifically for non-resident aliens.  Residents, those with green cards, are exempt from this.  This means that if green card holders have a child that received state medical coverage, that coverage would not affect applying for citizenship.

 

I say that, but the situation may be if someone was a non-resident alien and had a USC child, then received benefits for the child, then applied for a green card.  If that is the case for any of us here, this policy could cause a problem in applying for that green card.

 

I had actually found where this info was posted on the USCIS site on my phone, now I can't seem to find the info on their site to share it!

 

In reality, this policy will not have much effect.  Most non-residents do not qualify for governmental benefits.  This will affect those immigrants that are living in the US illegally and have USC family members (children) who are eligible for governmental benefits.  Then when those non-residents apply for resident status, they will face this issue.  The other group that could be affected is HB1 visa holders, but again, they may not be in a position to receive benefits.

 

I will share the link when I find it.  It explicitly excludes residents.  The draft that you shared uses the term "aliens".  No one on this thread is an alien, we are all residents.

[Amhara 460]

I found this interesting: The USCIS goal to process N-400's is 5 months. There was a congressional inquiry and the USCIS said that because they received 13% more naturalization applications than expected, they just cannot keep up with the caseload.  The link goes to the USCIS' response in August 2018.  I wonder if they will be able to reduce that processing time by the time we are all eligible...maybe by December 2018?  Here is another one from local officials that shows Dallas with a backlog of some 38,000 cases.

 

OKAY!  I finally found it! Here is the link!

"The proposed rule would apply to individuals seeking admission to the United States from abroad on immigrant or nonimmigrants visas, individuals seeking to adjust their status to that of lawful permanent residents from within the United States, and individuals within the United States who hold a temporary visa and seek to either extend their stay in the same nonimmigrant classification or to change their status to a different nonimmigrant classification."

 

The rule specifically exempts groups, such as asylees and refugees.

 

Also, check under the fourth question's drop-down menu: "While some lawful permanent residents can be subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility because specific circumstances dictate that they be considered applicants for admission, most lawful permanent residents are not subject to inadmissibility determinations, including public charge inadmissibility. Therefore, lawful permanent residents who subsequently apply for naturalization would not be subject to inadmissibility determinations, including a public charge inadmissibility determination."

 

I hope this helps!

[Amhara 460]

If the 5-month rule would be true (doubtful it will be), and I compare the VJ processing timeframes, I see that I would be getting citizenship at the same time.  The VJ timeline suggests the wait time is about a year and 4 months.  If I add that to my ROC filing date, that would be in April 2019.  If I apply 5 months to when we plan to file the citizenship, then that would be in May 2019.  Interesting.

[DoraS 9]

17 minutes ago, Amhara said:

I found this interesting: The USCIS goal to process N-400's is 5 months. There was a congressional inquiry and the USCIS said that because they received 13% more naturalization applications than expected, they just cannot keep up with the caseload.  The link goes to the USCIS' response in August 2018.  I wonder if they will be able to reduce that processing time by the time we are all eligible...maybe by December 2018?  Here is another one from local officials that shows Dallas with a backlog of some 38,000 cases.

 

OKAY!  I finally found it! Here is the link!

"The proposed rule would apply to individuals seeking admission to the United States from abroad on immigrant or nonimmigrants visas, individuals seeking to adjust their status to that of lawful permanent residents from within the United States, and individuals within the United States who hold a temporary visa and seek to either extend their stay in the same nonimmigrant classification or to change their status to a different nonimmigrant classification."

 

The rule specifically exempts groups, such as asylees and refugees.

 

Also, check under the fourth question's drop-down menu: "While some lawful permanent residents can be subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility because specific circumstances dictate that they be considered applicants for admission, most lawful permanent residents are not subject to inadmissibility determinations, including public charge inadmissibility. Therefore, lawful permanent residents who subsequently apply for naturalization would not be subject to inadmissibility determinations, including a public charge inadmissibility determination."

 

I hope this helps!

Absolutely helpful, thanks so much. So basically nothing to worry about in our cases I guess. 

[DoraS 9]

14 minutes ago, Amhara said:

If the 5-month rule would be true (doubtful it will be), and I compare the VJ processing timeframes, I see that I would be getting citizenship at the same time.  The VJ timeline suggests the wait time is about a year and 4 months.  If I add that to my ROC filing date, that would be in April 2019.  If I apply 5 months to when we plan to file the citizenship, then that would be in May 2019.  Interesting.

Mine would be the same either way.   Let's hope they will be able to reduce the processing time for the N400.

[Dee tee 4]

I have a quick question. Please how long does it take before uscis request for evidence ( like a final divorce decree) , if the initial application was sent without a final decree? 

[Fer00 7]

11 hours ago, Dee tee said:

I have a quick question. Please how long does it take before uscis request for evidence ( like a final divorce decree) , if the initial application was sent without a final decree? 

If I were you, I would send it to be added to the case .. don’t wait to be asked if you already have it with you. I got divorced too ‘cause unfortunately we were a mess a a couple so by the time i had to submit the ROC  I already had the divorce decree 

Edited October 4, 2018 by Fer00

[Dee tee 4]

1 hour ago, Fer00 said:

If I were you, I would send it to be added to the case .. don’t wait to be asked if you already have it with you. I got divorced too ‘cause unfortunately we were a mess a a couple so by the time i had to submit the ROC  I already had the divorce decree 

I already sent it to USCIS together with my receipt and a letter however , I didn’t hear back from USCIS so I don’t know if they got it or not . 

[Yina88 3]

On 10/2/2018 at 8:40 PM, DoraS said:

Mine would be the same either way.   Let's hope they will be able to reduce the processing time for the N400.

So, based on this we can file for naturalization 90 days before our green card issuance date (3 years of residency) even though we still don’t have the Permanent Residence?

 

Thanks! 

 

[implife 318]

On 10/2/2018 at 9:16 PM, Amhara said:

I found this interesting: The USCIS goal to process N-400's is 5 months. 

USCIS response is ridiculous. We need a new government. Now. Don't forget to vote in November.

[Amhara 460]

4 hours ago, Y & B said:

So, based on this we can file for naturalization 90 days before our green card issuance date (3 years of residency) even though we still don’t have the Permanent Residence?

That’s correct!  Some people prefer to wait, but I don’t understand that decision with these wait times! 

[DoraS 9]

On 10/2/2018 at 9:35 PM, DoraS said:

Absolutely helpful, thanks so much. So basically nothing to worry about in our cases I guess. 

 

On 10/2/2018 at 9:16 PM, Amhara said:

I found this interesting: The USCIS goal to process N-400's is 5 months. There was a congressional inquiry and the USCIS said that because they received 13% more naturalization applications than expected, they just cannot keep up with the caseload.  The link goes to the USCIS' response in August 2018.  I wonder if they will be able to reduce that processing time by the time we are all eligible...maybe by December 2018?  Here is another one from local officials that shows Dallas with a backlog of some 38,000 cases.

 

OKAY!  I finally found it! Here is the link!

"The proposed rule would apply to individuals seeking admission to the United States from abroad on immigrant or nonimmigrants visas, individuals seeking to adjust their status to that of lawful permanent residents from within the United States, and individuals within the United States who hold a temporary visa and seek to either extend their stay in the same nonimmigrant classification or to change their status to a different nonimmigrant classification."

 

The rule specifically exempts groups, such as asylees and refugees.

 

Also, check under the fourth question's drop-down menu: "While some lawful permanent residents can be subject to the public charge ground of inadmissibility because specific circumstances dictate that they be considered applicants for admission, most lawful permanent residents are not subject to inadmissibility determinations, including public charge inadmissibility. Therefore, lawful permanent residents who subsequently apply for naturalization would not be subject to inadmissibility determinations, including a public charge inadmissibility determination."

 

I hope this helps!

I have one more question Amhara, so the new ruling cannot be retroactive rigtht? So all Lawful permanent residents should be wary of applying for or using the specific benefits being targeted after (or from the date) the new ruling goes into effect.

[Amhara 460]

5 minutes ago, DoraS said:

 

I have one more question Amhara, so the new ruling cannot be retroactive rigtht? So all Lawful permanent residents should be wary of applying for or using the specific benefits being targeted after (or from the date) the new ruling goes into effect.

I definitely think all LPR's should be wary of public benefits for themselves.  For those that were sponsored by a family member, then the government can always go after that family member for reimbursement.  That is administratively difficult to do, but that is the rule.

 

But this ruling doesn't apply to LPR's.  This applies to temporary visitors or persons residing in the US without legal status, so LPR's don't need to worry about this.

 

This really feels like a bunch of political rhetoric to me.  I can see it's purpose, but it really catches a small amount of people.  Illegal immigrants don't qualify for these benefits nor do those here on temporary visas, like HB1 or student visas.  It does help say, "You came to this country, received financial benefits, why should you stay?" but it almost says "We want to scare people".  I don't disagree with it, but it almost targets a small amount of people that makes it nearly pointless.  Then you have people freaking out and the media trying to paint this as a human travesty!

[DoraS 9]

5 minutes ago, Amhara said:

I definitely think all LPR's should be wary of public benefits for themselves.  For those that were sponsored by a family member, then the government can always go after that family member for reimbursement.  That is administratively difficult to do, but that is the rule.

 

But this ruling doesn't apply to LPR's.  This applies to temporary visitors or persons residing in the US without legal status, so LPR's don't need to worry about this.

 

This really feels like a bunch of political rhetoric to me.  I can see it's purpose, but it really catches a small amount of people.  Illegal immigrants don't qualify for these benefits nor do those here on temporary visas, like HB1 or student visas.  It does help say, "You came to this country, received financial benefits, why should you stay?" but it almost says "We want to scare people".  I don't disagree with it, but it almost targets a small amount of people that makes it nearly pointless.  Then you have people freaking out and the media trying to paint this as a human travesty!

Thanks for your promt reply. So basically as a green card holder, I just simply apply for citizenship? Is there any specific part of the N400 form, where they can question you about receiving public benefit at all? Or Uscis has access to all this information, if you received public benefits?  

[brien0512 61]

We cant vote yet...