White House Staffers Meet With Citizens Who Say They Were Victims of Marriage Fraud

[RLA 323]

8 minutes ago, E & J 2018 said:

I know you must marry within 90 days...… I'm just saying that you should have a little more time to make the decision to go forward with the marriage. [...] Read the boards and there are many examples..... 

I don't remember any example where an extension from 90 days to 6 months would have helped.  People marry much sooner anyway.  If anything you'd need to introduce a mandatory waiting time.  However, that would require a complete overhaul of the K1 and subsequent AoS process. 

[E & J 2018 132]

2 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

If the petitioner can't find the time to go visit then maybe he should just try to find someone closer to home. Just saying. 

It isn't that they can't find time..... It's what their employer allows.... I am going to Brazil on Friday and it will be my third trip this year. I can afford to go more often, but I don't have more than 3 weeks vacation per year. I see that a lot of people are concerned about being able to support their fiancée  and some even need a co-sponsor.  They surely would not be able to travel to see their fiancée more often.   I think you are losing focus on the original post and the time limit to get married once they arrive. Also, if there is a scam involved it complicates matters even more...

 

 

[Unidentified 2,930]

1 minute ago, RLA said:

I don't remember any example where an extension from 90 days to 6 months would have helped.  People marry much sooner anyway.  If anything you'd need to introduce a mandatory waiting time.  However, that would require a complete overhaul of the K1 and subsequent AoS process. 

Maybe that's what we need though? Maybe they need to sit down and look at how can the entire process be changed so that they can prevent scams, people coming over and getting divorced within months etc. Would not be fun for the people who gets into the process efter us but maybe it's something USCIS needs to do. 

[Unidentified 2,930]

1 minute ago, E & J 2018 said:

It isn't that they can't find time..... It's what their employer allows.... I am going to Brazil on Friday and it will be my third trip this year. I can afford to go more often, but I don't have more than 3 weeks vacation per year. I see that a lot of people are concerned about being able to support their fiancée  and some even need a co-sponsor.  They surely would not be able to travel to see their fiancée more often.   I think you are losing focus on the original post and the time limit to get married once they arrive. Also, if there is a scam involved it complicates matters even more...

 

 

But again: if the petitioner can't go visit he/she should find someone closer to home. He doesn't HAVE TO find someone abroad, that's a choice. USC's have roughly 162.85 million options at home. (Numbers based on a quick google search of the US population from 2017 and then dividing it in half, does not take in consideration that women/men does not make up 50/50 of population, for small children and the elderly etc.)

 

You're saying 90 days isn't long enough to set up a wedding? 

[E & J 2018 132]

3 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

But again: if the petitioner can't go visit he/she should find someone closer to home. He doesn't HAVE TO find someone abroad, that's a choice. USC's have roughly 162.85 million options at home. (Numbers based on a quick google search of the US population from 2017 and then dividing it in half, does not take in consideration that women/men does not make up 50/50 of population, for small children and the elderly etc.)

 

You're saying 90 days isn't long enough to set up a wedding? 

No,  180 days of living with someone will tell you a lot..... Living with someone is a lot different than vacationing with someone.

 

Based on your analogy, why even have a K1 visa???

[Unidentified 2,930]

2 minutes ago, E & J 2018 said:

No,  180 days of living with someone will tell you a lot..... Living with someone is a lot different than vacationing with someone.

 

Based on your analogy, why even have a K1 visa???

K1 is not for everyone. If both of you have the ability to travel it is perfect. If only one of you can travel it gets tougher and if you have barely any time to take off might not be a good option at all. 

 

I agree that it is different to live with someone than to vacation. That is why, after a visit or two you stay with your partner instead of a hotel room and live like a couple. The k1 is not a "get to know your future spouse" visa. It's a "come over and get married" visa. 

[C&AH 104]

I wonder if this will further slow down tbe process.  

[RLA 323]

13 minutes ago, E & J 2018 said:

I respectfully disagree.....  The petitioner has a much higher risk.....  We live in the USA.... most people have two weeks vacation per year. How can you possibly know what it will be like to live with someone, outside of a vacation scenario.  

The potential immigrant has the same risk. 

 

16 minutes ago, E & J 2018 said:

If you are scammed and they run off with someone after a few months or a year,  the petitioner can be held liable for financial support for ten years!!!

Yes, the petitioner does carry some financial risk.  But so does the immigrant.  A K1+AoS immigrant is required to give up their home and career.  This will set them back for years if the petitioner decides to run off with someone else.  

 

19 minutes ago, E & J 2018 said:

I think the risk is much greater for the petitioner......

I respectfully disagree.  The risk for the petitioner is merely financial and maybe emotional.  The potential immigrant carries those same risks, plus the risk to find themselves in a dependent or even abusive relationship that they're unable to leave because of lack of money, language skills, and a local support network. 

[Unidentified 2,930]

1 minute ago, C&AH said:

I wonder if this will further slow down tbe process.  

I think that when it comes to immigration there's a lot of talk but little action. I mean Trump has been talking about how he wants to limit chain migration but so far we haven't seen any indication of that happening any time soon. So if something will happen to the K1 it will take some time. 

[debbiedoo 2,339]

9 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

K1 is not for everyone. If both of you have the ability to travel it is perfect. If only one of you can travel it gets tougher and if you have barely any time to take off might not be a good option at all. 

 

I agree that it is different to live with someone than to vacation. That is why, after a visit or two you stay with your partner instead of a hotel room and live like a couple. The k1 is not a "get to know your future spouse" visa. It's a "come over and get married" visa. 

 

Paul and I are both lucky we have jobs where we CAN take off whenever we want. The financial sacrifice of those times is worth it to us, to be together in person. I don't think either of us has ever had a job (and certainly not since we started dating) where it WASNT possible.

 

Having a long distance and especially international relationship, takes sacrifice of a lot. and if you cant sacrifice it, or have the freedom to do what you want, basically, then its probably a better idea to NOT consider the immigration or even cr1 process. we purposely met quickly after meeting, because we needed to know if there was attraction and compatibility in person, and not just on the screen. If there hadnt been ... well.... we were only out a couple of months of time and one visit (at that point), and it could be worse.

Edited July 11, 2018 by debbiedoo

[NoProblem 69]

46 minutes ago, E & J 2018 said:

I respectfully disagree.....  The petitioner has a much higher risk.....  We live in the USA.... most people have two weeks vacation per year. How can you possibly know what it will be like to live with someone, outside of a vacation scenario.  If you are scammed and they run off with someone after a few months or a year,  the petitioner can be held liable for financial support for ten years!!! I think the risk is much greater for the petitioner......

I agree the petitioner has a much higher risk esp. if he is a high net worth person. 
I have two kids after my wife passed away, she had a home based business, I have rentals and full-time job, also my younger has some level of autism.  How possibly I could go live with my fiance overseas many times just so that I know her better.  The protection in the law in not there for the petitioner and esp. if he is male.  I seriously considered moving overseas just because of the law being discriminatory against us.

[Mina90 134]

I really wish people would take the "learn from others' mistakes" to heart. 

It would save so many people from "marriage fraud", broken homes, "used for immigration", etc. 

Unfortunately, too many people think, "well, bad things or those things can't happen to me. I am different; I am invincible."  Wish that thinking would stop and start thinking rationally and realistically.

[NoProblem 69]

43 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

USC's have roughly 162.85 million options at home

Find out how many of those are single and available in your area in your age group based on your mutual criteria etc.  Add in religious and cultural differences.  I think there can only be a few.  Who you want to marry or end up becoming a good satisfied couple is a lot more complicated.  I think chances of hitting the right person is as good as being hit by lightening in NYC.

Edited July 11, 2018 by NoProblem

[Orangesapples 1,954]

2 minutes ago, NoProblem said:

I agree the petitioner has a much higher risk esp. if he is a high net worth person. 
I have two kids after my wife passed away, she had a home based business, I have rentals and full-time job, also my younger has some level of autism.  How possibly I could go live with my fiance overseas many times just so that I know her better.  The protection in the law in not there for the petitioner and esp. if he is male.  I seriously considered moving overseas just because of the law being discriminatory against us.

Nope. The affidavit of support is almost never enforced, so it's not a real risk. The beneficiary has to completely uproot their life to come live in the US, quit a job, leave family behind, etc. Gender also has nothing to do with anything. 

 

Your assets before you got married are your own no matter what. Only marry someone from a foreign country because you love them and they happen to be from another country. If you specifically look for a foreign bride then something is not right. 

[RLA 323]

26 minutes ago, Unidentified said:

[an overhaul of the K1+AoS process] Maybe that's what we need though? Maybe they need to sit down and look at how can the entire process be changed so that they can prevent scams, people coming over and getting divorced within months etc.  

I don't think there's a way to prevent scams as long as some petitioners are almost willfully oblivious.  

 

A get-to-know-each-other-before-you-marry phase inside the US would help some people, but I don't think you could mandate that.  And anyway, I think such a phase would benefit immigrants more than petitioners, as the immigrants would be able to get to know the place where they're going to live.  

 

One way to introduce such a phase might be to extend the K1 validity to 6 or 12 months, make it multiple-entry, and make it possible to travel during AoS.  That way both the petitioner and the immigrant could take their time to get to know each other in the US.  If you do that then it'd be fait to require the immigrants to leave if they get divorced before RoC.