Adjusting via B2 visa....should the law be changed?

[yuna628 9,663]

Honest opinion here... because I talk about it a lot with my husband actually:

 

I don't believe that people should be allowed to adjust from the VWP or B2 (we actually know someone that willfully did this after we told them not to.. it makes him so angry!). Of course, we know what the USCIS and the CBP says on the subject, and then of course the reality. That the real policy is you cannot prove intent. And sure, that's fine you can't prove intent. Marriage is in the domain of the state, and in that regard I really wish that the CBP would stop scaring folks by telling them that they can't marry while stateside, when they absolutely can. That is evidence of a government entity directly lying to it's citizens openly. If the avenue of adjustment were closed we wouldn't have to become mired down with intent. They can marry but then they need to return and file. This may actually give the ability for people to visit here without undue suspicion or difficulty easier. But we all know the reality of the system, and in none of any of the bills put forth so far, are these loopholes ever addressed.

 

If it was addressed, would there be a real need for a K1? I don't know. We used a K1 because a) we couldn't marry in his country (and to those who think I could just pick up and go live there with him this is an impossibility for me and thousands of others), and b) because every time he came to visit me the CBP warned us not to marry.. we felt that by using a K1 we were truly being honest and doing the right thing. And the process is fine.. it worked for us. But the AOS period is the thing that really infuriated us both. It seems so unnecessary and a redundant waste of paper and wait time. We're now prepping our ROC paperwork, and I see the looming wait times ahead. More endless infuriation that seems unnecessary again. This process could be a lot more efficient. I'm not saying I know how to fix it, but it needs help... badly.

 

There are so many wonderful couples here on both marriage and fiancé visas that were successful and are totally devoted to each other... but then there are so many others that are a trainwreck and were also successfully approved.. it boggles my mind...

[spookyturtle 9,465]

7 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   As I said I'm not opposed to looking at changes to prevent abuse. That doesn't mean everyone who gets marries on a B2 needs to go home. I don't see what it accomplishes in the long run, I don't see a reason for a blanket change in policy there, and I don't see the reason to eliminate adjustment on a B2.

 

   It always seems to come back to this as if it is a real fix for something. It's like bailing a sinking ship with a teaspoon. I see plenty of real immigration issues to work on. I'm just not into eye candy.

 

   

 

  

I think there is plenty of abuse with the B2. I also  think that coming here on a B2, staying for 6 months, going home and coming back in a short time for another  6 months is really stretching the definition of a tourist. 

 

 

[-Trinity- 513]

3 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   

 

  I think everyone who marries a foreign spouse should live in the foreign country for 2 years to prove they are not just being used for a visa. If it works out after two years, then they can come back.  Shouldn't spouses be required to get in line with everyone else? Why does it matter where you met them? Why should foreign spouses jump ahead of other immigrant categories who have been in line for years?

 

  

I don't agree with that, what about jobs, study, and most importantly possible children from previous relationship's.

 

If I look at our personal situation it means that my husband had to leave his young child, not so great for maintaining a bond. We would love to live in the Netherlands for awhile, but it's just not doable when you have kids and a job.

 

I do think they should look more into the AOS while on VWP and perhaps the B2 as well. I guess, but that's my personal opinion not based on facts, that's were the most fraudulent can be found.

Edited March 26, 2018 by -Trinity-

[Steeleballz 7,550]

3 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

I think there is plenty of abuse with the B2. I also  think that coming here on a B2, staying for 6 months, going home and coming back in a short time for another  6 months is really stretching the definition of a tourist. 

 

 

 

  Perhaps, although I have no issue with retired people spending 6 months here then 6 months back home. Younger people I would be more suspicious. Anyone coming back shortly after a 6 month stay should be subject to extra scrutiny. None of that is really an issue with the law itself, more of an issue with the execution of existing law.

 

  

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 minute ago, -Trinity- said:

I don't agree with that, what about jobs, study, and most importantly possible children from previous relationship's.

 

If I look at our personal situation it means that my husband had to leave his young child, not so great for maintaining a bond. We would love to live in the Netherlands for awhile, but it's just not doable when you have kids and a job.

 

I do think they should look more into the AOS while on VWP. 

   

   It wasn't a serious suggestion, but the point is anyone can come up with any reason why a category should be changed. Anyone suggesting these types of changes should be cautious. Ask 10 people on the street if they even know the difference between a K1 and a B2 and you'll likely get 10 blank stares. More goes into determining immigration law than considering the fairness of somebody "cutting in line" by adjusting from a B2. I don't think for a minute that the current anti immigrant sentiment in this country can't reach as far as the K1.

 

   My question is what does it accomplish sending someone married on a B2 back home. Is it motivated by vindictiveness or something else? Does it change anything?  Does it stop people from doing it? Is immigration policy better because of it? Everyone probably has opinions about that but I'm not sure anyone actually has the answers.

[-Trinity- 513]

38 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

   

   It wasn't a serious suggestion, but the point is anyone can come up with any reason why a category should be changed. Anyone suggesting these types of changes should be cautious. Ask 10 people on the street if they even know the difference between a K1 and a B2 and you'll likely get 10 blank stares. More goes into determining immigration law than considering the fairness of somebody "cutting in line" by adjusting from a B2. I don't think for a minute that the current anti immigrant sentiment in this country can't reach as far as the K1.

 

   My question is what does it accomplish sending someone married on a B2 back home. Is it motivated by vindictiveness or something else? Does it change anything?  Does it stop people from doing it? Is immigration policy better because of it? Everyone probably has opinions about that but I'm not sure anyone actually has the answers.

Lol, I was shocked that you would suggest that..no i'm kidding.

 

I do feel hesitant to say that they should look into VWP and B2, because at the same time I'm thinking to myself: who am I ( adjusted from a F1 visa) to determine whether someone should be able to adjust from VWP or B2. Bottom line is, at this time its a possibility and its a legal one, as long as the person didn't come to the country with the intent to adjust.

 

No one can look in the heads of the people who do that, and knowing what their intentions are. But I can see where people who do the K1 or CR1 feel that they are negatively affected by those who 'take a shortcut".  I dunno, after more then a year we are still waiting for my oldest interview, maybe that's the result of the ones who take a shortcut. I don't loose any sleep over it.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, yuna628 said:

Honest opinion here... because I talk about it a lot with my husband actually:

 

I don't believe that people should be allowed to adjust from the VWP or B2 (we actually know someone that willfully did this after we told them not to.. it makes him so angry!). Of course, we know what the USCIS and the CBP says on the subject, and then of course the reality. That the real policy is you cannot prove intent. And sure, that's fine you can't prove intent. Marriage is in the domain of the state, and in that regard I really wish that the CBP would stop scaring folks by telling them that they can't marry while stateside, when they absolutely can. That is evidence of a government entity directly lying to it's citizens openly. If the avenue of adjustment were closed we wouldn't have to become mired down with intent. They can marry but then they need to return and file. This may actually give the ability for people to visit here without undue suspicion or difficulty easier. But we all know the reality of the system, and in none of any of the bills put forth so far, are these loopholes ever addressed.

 

If it was addressed, would there be a real need for a K1? I don't know. We used a K1 because a) we couldn't marry in his country (and to those who think I could just pick up and go live there with him this is an impossibility for me and thousands of others), and b) because every time he came to visit me the CBP warned us not to marry.. we felt that by using a K1 we were truly being honest and doing the right thing. And the process is fine.. it worked for us. But the AOS period is the thing that really infuriated us both. It seems so unnecessary and a redundant waste of paper and wait time. We're now prepping our ROC paperwork, and I see the looming wait times ahead. More endless infuriation that seems unnecessary again. This process could be a lot more efficient. I'm not saying I know how to fix it, but it needs help... badly.

 

There are so many wonderful couples here on both marriage and fiancé visas that were successful and are totally devoted to each other... but then there are so many others that are a trainwreck and were also successfully approved.. it boggles my mind...

Out of curiosity, and I don't remember if this has come up before so if it has sorry -

 

Why couldn't you marry in his country? It's UK judging by your tag. I married in the UK.

 

Just curious.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

15 minutes ago, -Trinity- said:

Lol, I was shocked that you would suggest that..no i'm kidding.

 

I do feel hesitant to say that they should look into VWP and B2, because at the same time I'm thinking to myself: who am I ( adjusted from a F1 visa) to determine whether someone should be able to adjust from VWP or B2. Bottom line is, at this time its a possibility and its a legal one, as long as the person didn't come to the country with the intent to adjust.

 

No one can look in the heads of the people who do that, and knowing what their intentions are. But I can see where people who do the K1 or CR1 feel that they are negatively affected by those who 'take a shortcut".  I dunno, after more then a year we are still waiting for my oldest interview, maybe that's the result of the ones who take a shortcut. I don't loose any sleep over it.

 

    My wife has been here 19 years. I have helped people with this process before VJ even existed. Nowadays if anyone asks I send them here and usually that's all that people need. I have come across many people who don't know what the heck they are doing, but very rarely have I come across someone who I thought was trying to intentionally to do something wrong.

 

   I no longer get caught up in worrying over someone taking 2 months longer or someone else 2 months faster or people saying this way or that way is more legal than the other. I don't begrudge anyone from being with their loved ones as long as they are doing it legally, and I don't get worked up about what others are doing. I would suggest anyone getting overly emotional try to get rid of the negative and focus on the positive that is ahead. Life is too short to do other wise. In our own lives and in the world in general, there are bigger fish to fry.

[Crazy Cat 41,587]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

That doesn't mean everyone who gets marries on a B2 needs to go home. I don't see what it accomplishes in the long run, I don't see a reason for a blanket change in policy there, and I don't see the reason to eliminate adjustment on a B2.

For one thing, it levels the playing field.  We all know just how easy it is to exploit the current law. The TOS of this site prevent me from elaborating.  Adjusting from a B2 or ESTA is unfair to those who have properly gone through the K-1 and CR-1/iR-1 processes, imo.  And as a practical matter, if someone comes to the US on the basis of a visit, it should be no problem return to his/her home country as Originally planned to wait in line. with all the other CR-1/K-1 applicants.

[yuna628 9,663]

1 minute ago, bcking said:

Out of curiosity, and I don't remember if this has come up before so if it has sorry -

 

Why couldn't you marry in his country? It's UK judging by your tag. I married in the UK.

 

Just curious.

It has, we talked about this before.  If you married in the UK then you went through the legal process there first and your spouse had the amount of financial burden required to pass.

Many individuals don't have the ability to do that, even though they work hard, and have enough to support themselves and any potential spouse. If we had the choice of living in the UK, we'd be there.

 

He just had a friend's daughter at work go through the process in the UK. In this case they had enough to meet the burden and were still denied. I recommended an attorney and the HO's decision was overturned.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

   

   It wasn't a serious suggestion, but the point is anyone can come up with any reason why a category should be changed. Anyone suggesting these types of changes should be cautious. Ask 10 people on the street if they even know the difference between a K1 and a B2 and you'll likely get 10 blank stares. More goes into determining immigration law than considering the fairness of somebody "cutting in line" by adjusting from a B2. I don't think for a minute that the current anti immigrant sentiment in this country can't reach as far as the K1.

 

   My question is what does it accomplish sending someone married on a B2 back home. Is it motivated by vindictiveness or something else? Does it change anything?  Does it stop people from doing it? Is immigration policy better because of it? Everyone probably has opinions about that but I'm not sure anyone actually has the answers.

It is important because we have laws. when you allow people to circumvent the law, and get rewarded in the process, you have a problem. That is why the illegal alien problem is so far gone, there may be no coming back

[NikLR 13,227]

22 minutes ago, missileman said:

For one thing, it levels the playing field.  We all know just how easy it is to exploit the current law. The TOS of this site prevent me from elaborating.  Adjusting from a B2 or ESTA is unfair to those who have properly gone through the K-1 and CR-1/iR-1 processes, imo.  And as a practical matter, if someone comes to the US on the basis of a visit, it should be no problem return to his/her home country as Originally planned to wait in line. with all the other CR-1/K-1 applicants.

I agree.  BUT there must be some extenuating circumstances.  Hospitalization for instance (lets the say the beneficiary was pregnant and went into pre-term labor.  I think adjusting status ASAP would be good for those.

 

In all honesty though, the USCIS will NEVER put a stop to AOS.  It's their cash cow, plain and simple.  They make more money from B2 adjustments than they do from K1 or CR1 visas.  With fewer AOS cases they'd have to lay off a lot of people because really, the wait times rarely have been much better than 4-6 months.  

[Steeleballz 7,550]

11 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

It is important because we have laws. when you allow people to circumvent the law, and get rewarded in the process, you have a problem. That is why the illegal alien problem is so far gone, there may be no coming back

 

   We're talking about adjusting status from a B2. Your point is completely valid but not really on topic. AOS from B2 is legal.

[Crazy Cat 41,587]

7 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   We're talking about adjusting status from a B2. Your point is completely valid but not really on topic. AOS from B2 is legal.

Actually, @Nature Boy Flair made a good point.  Eliminating the ability to AOS from a B2 immediately closes the loophole.  I think the vast majority of those who currently adjust after entering on a B2 had the intent to circumvent the normal immigrant processes when they entered the country.  It would stop those who currently violate the law by entering the US via a non-immigrate route with the intent to adjust.  Eliminating the ability stops the abuse.

Edited March 26, 2018 by missileman

[yuna628 9,663]

42 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    My wife has been here 19 years. I have helped people with this process before VJ even existed. Nowadays if anyone asks I send them here and usually that's all that people need. I have come across many people who don't know what the heck they are doing, but very rarely have I come across someone who I thought was trying to intentionally to do something wrong.

 

   I no longer get caught up in worrying over someone taking 2 months longer or someone else 2 months faster or people saying this way or that way is more legal than the other. I don't begrudge anyone from being with their loved ones as long as they are doing it legally, and I don't get worked up about what others are doing. I would suggest anyone getting overly emotional try to get rid of the negative and focus on the positive that is ahead. Life is too short to do other wise. In our own lives and in the world in general, there are bigger fish to fry.

I don't begrudge anyone from being with their loved one. But adjusting from the VWP/B2 with the intent to do so, is not recommended here, because why again? You know why. We know the issue around intent, and we know how that becomes abused time and time again. Allowing it without intent (and with no very narrow or specific circumstances) and allowing it even if there was intent but cannot be proven to me is nothing but a loophole which gives people a basis to circumvent law. I believe ultimately doing it that way cheapens and weakens the current laws on the books. It makes the entire box of hoops we have to jump through to get here 'legally' downright pathetic and ridiculous. The government tells it's people that it must do steps 1 through 10, but if a person decides to skip all those steps by lying and we reward it anyway, what does this mean to a fair and lawful society? Btw I'm not referencing the DACA kids here, because I don't believe that persons brought here through no fault of their own and have lived all their lives here as Americans deserve to be treated unjustly. I'm talking about individuals that willfully came here with intent to lie their way in and decided they just didn't want to go back home because they missed the person too much. Well, it killed me for ten years, every single time I had to say goodbye to my husband and watch him go home. It cut his parents up inside to say goodbye to me when I got on the plane. But we did it. I get so much into that mindset, every time we go through the process of filing paperwork with the USCIS I go through the irrational paranoia and anxiety of what would happen if they denied us. Life is too short... but cheating your way in for love is still cheating your way in, no matter how much you love the person.

 

16 minutes ago, NikLR said:

I agree.  BUT there must be some extenuating circumstances.  Hospitalization for instance (lets the say the beneficiary was pregnant and went into pre-term labor.  I think adjusting status ASAP would be good for those.

 

In all honesty though, the USCIS will NEVER put a stop to AOS.  It's their cash cow, plain and simple.  They make more money from B2 adjustments than they do from K1 or CR1 visas.  With fewer AOS cases they'd have to lay off a lot of people because really, the wait times rarely have been much better than 4-6 months.  

Yep. There it is in a nutshell.

Edited March 26, 2018 by yuna628