Interesting article about a subject which comes up here

[Orangesapples 1,954]

13 minutes ago, Cyberfx1024 said:

I think they should just go ahead and ban AOS from a tourist Visa all together. There is a way to do things and that way circumvents the proper procedures on how to things.

There is a way to do things? You realize that this way can change? It's just red tape that benefits no one. Why do you want to force couples to live apart when it's much easier to let them AOS if they're OK with not being able to work right away? It looks to me like the people on here who waited feel bitter about others not having to wait. This is misplaced and irrational. I'm all for making other people's lives easier. 

 

Also, it doesn't make sense to me that a student visa doesn't allow for immigration intent. Isn't it in the best interest of the US to keep the graduates who received their education here and will be much better adjusted to American lifestyle and American values and are also apparently highly educated (especially if they graduated from a prestigious school with a high GPA) than to have random people with no special skills from the diversity visa lottary come here? 

[Unlockable 7,314]

21 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

I don't understand why everyone here is so bothered by AOS on a non immigrant visa. What's the problem with it? People who AOS without overstating become legal immigrants. I think the US should just change the rules and make it OK to enter on a non immigrant visa with the intent to AOS just like Canada. Then families won't need to be separated for a year or more because of red tape. Authorities should be more concerned about people who overstay and don't AOS because they become illegal immigrants. Just leave the others alone. 

The problem with this idea is that it would directly undercut immigrant visa routes.

 

It would also require US immigrantion to change who gets a B2. It would becom 10 times more strict than it is now. Remember, the number one reason for visitor visa denials is the CO thinks they will stay.

 

Basically, that idea would just make the B2 only available to an even smaller percentage of applicants.

 

Also, Canada is a much smaller country (population wise) and they actually have other restrictions of immigration that the US doesn't. 

 

 

[Crazy Cat 41,904]

Getting back to the article..........This attorney seems to say (if I am reading it correctly) that intent can be questioned at AOS...

[Zzyzx 106]

27 minutes ago, missileman said:

Getting back to the article..........This attorney seems to say (if I am reading it correctly) that intent can be questioned at AOS...

This has always been the case.  However we now live in a society where everyone has to be given the shadow of a doubt, no matter what their situation is or how obvious their intent is.  If not its considered discrimination and you'll swiftly be walked out the door.          

[Dutchster 1,107]

That's kind of clashing as they always say that intent is established at the border. 

[Nemeseax 36]

22 minutes ago, Dutchster said:

That's kind of clashing as they always say that intent is established at the border. 

I guess that people who are AOS ing from B2 without previous intent to stay in USA have good evidence to proove if asked. That couldn't be a problem.

And no, not all have planned to take this way of obtain Green Card. No one of us know others stories; reasons and circumstances so nothig is " 100%" .

[NikLR 13,227]

Please take the time to read the entire article before making the assumption that this lawyer is doing anything but looking for clients.  He even states in his article that you cannot be denied for intent alone and that the 30/60/90 "rules" are part of the DOS handbook and are only cited in the USCIS one.  He also states it's just a "tool" adjudicators can use and is not actually a "rule."  

[NikLR 13,227]

Also AOS will NEVER be banned by the USCIS.  It is their cash cow.  They are self funded.  It would be like Burger King getting rid of the Whopper.  Just stupid business wise.  

Should it have ever been allowed without extenuating circumstances? Imho no.  But it was and you cant change it now. 

Edited June 3, 2018 by NikLR

[NikLR 13,227]

Ice now catches all sorts of illegals at interview now too! People who have ignored deportation orders and who really couldn't AOS to begin with. 

[Crazy Cat 41,904]

1 hour ago, Dutchster said:

That's kind of clashing as they always say that intent is established at the border. 

That's how I read the attorney's article, and that is why I initially posted it.  It seems to me that he is saying that suspected per-conceived intent along with abuse of the visa system (misuse of the intended purpose) could be adjudicated well after the person enters the US.......as in the AOS interview. 

[geowrian 22,337]

1 hour ago, missileman said:

Getting back to the article..........This attorney seems to say (if I am reading it correctly) that intent can be questioned at AOS...

Which has always been the case, although intent alone cannot be the reason for denial as an IR of a USC (noted further down in the article).

They would also need to show that fraud actually did occur, not the AOS applicant showing that it did not occur. It's one of the (few) circumstances where the IO needs to prove something in order for it to hold, not the applicant. As a result, unless there is overwhelming evidence that the applicant abused their visa status or made a material misrepresentation to an IO or CO about their reason for coming to the US, they don't pursue the issue since it's such a high bar for them to prove it. they sometimes still ask, though.

 

If an applicant were to tell an IO during the AOS interview "I told the CBP officer that I was only visiting then going home, but I was actually intending to stay the whole time", expect appropriate consequences for lying to an immigration official.

 

There are, IMHO, legitimate reasons to AOS from various visa categories. Sometimes circumstances do change. Sometimes a student or tourist or whatever falls in love, and possibly has a child, has medical issues, etc.

Abolishing the requirement to have non-immigrant intent opens a massive can of worms that I won't even start to go into here on the resulting consequences of that kind of change.

[Crazy Cat 41,904]

2 minutes ago, geowrian said:

There are, IMHO, legitimate reasons to AOS from various visa categories. Sometimes circumstances do change. Sometimes a student or tourist or whatever falls in love, and possibly has a child, has medical issues, etc.

I agree.  I think that it would be a very extraordinary circumstance that would make remaining in the US during a visit even possible for most visitors...but I think there are valid cases.

[issea 43]

Is this ONLY about AOS, or is it also about consular processing, as I saw in the article it mentioned “consular or immigration officer“. Earlier today I saw a thread discussing AOS from F1, and I was wondering what if that OP opted for consular processing instead of AOS. Would it clear the suspicion of so called preconceived intent? In that scenario, she uses F1 to study and will return to home country to apply for the spousal visa. She didn’t use the student visa to stay permanently, not like the way of doing AOS. That topic was closed so I ask the question here due to curiosity. Another thing is the processing time of AOS is taking longer and longer, while the consular processing is much faster. So I think it’s more appealing to do CO other than AOS from non K1, especially for students who can schedule interviews during summer or winter/spring break. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

3 hours ago, missileman said:

Getting back to the article..........This attorney seems to say (if I am reading it correctly) that intent can be questioned at AOS...

We've all seen on here lawyers saying things that are not true. Why would you believe this unofficial source? It's just this lawyer trying to scare people into paying him. 

[Orangesapples 1,954]

3 hours ago, NuestraUnion said:

The problem with this idea is that it would directly undercut immigrant visa routes.

 

It would also require US immigrantion to change who gets a B2. It would becom 10 times more strict than it is now. Remember, the number one reason for visitor visa denials is the CO thinks they will stay.

 

Basically, that idea would just make the B2 only available to an even smaller percentage of applicants.

 

Also, Canada is a much smaller country (population wise) and they actually have other restrictions of immigration that the US doesn't. 

 

 

What's wrong with processing fewer immigrant visas? Immigrant visas still have their advantages. 

 

Most tourist visas applicants have no way to AOS.