I-212

[Joy&Fred 4]

My senator received a letter today from the US Embassy in El Salvador who are denying my  husband's visa per the migratory report they received from him. How do I file the I 212, and how long does it take to get an answer if anyone knows?

[NikLR 13,231]

~~moved to AP and waivers from IR1/CR1 process and procedures~~

[BenevolentSith 6]

My I-212 was approved in about 110 days, but I filed it directly at the border instead of consulate. According to the CBP website, the US Consulate which made findings of inadmissibility should advice you on how to proceed.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/forms/direct-filing-addresses-form-i-212-application-permission-reapply-admission-united-states-after-deportation-or-removal

 

What was the ground for his admissbility? Was it overstay or removal?

[Joy&Fred 4]

I don't know why because he was never deported, has a waiver for illegal entry . All we can think it that my husband wrote the wrong date of entry and the migratory report said another. 

[BenevolentSith 6]

I-212 is for grounds of inadmissibility related to removal (order of removal, actual physical removal, abandoning pending removal proceedings, unlawful stay after removal, illegal entry after removal, etc).

 

If your husband was never removed (or involved in any other removal related violations), I'm not sure why you thought he would need I-212? Did the consulate specifically tell him to apply for I-212 after denial? The waiver for illegal entry, I'm assuming, is I-601. I'm assuming he already got this approved?

 

Can you share your timeline so we have a better idea of what's going on?

Edited July 28, 2018 by BenevolentSith

[Joy&Fred 4]

The consulate stated in the letter they sent to the senator's office that due to the migratory record that my husband submitted he needed a 1`212. My husband has never been deported or in deportation removal proceedings.

[Lisa83TX93 2]

On 7/27/2018 at 5:07 PM, BenevolentSith said:

My I-212 was approved in about 110 days, but I filed it directly at the border instead of consulate. According to the CBP website, the US Consulate which made findings of inadmissibility should advice you on how to proceed.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/forms/direct-filing-addresses-form-i-212-application-permission-reapply-admission-united-states-after-deportation-or-removal

 

What was the ground for his admissbility? Was it overstay or removal?

My husband also needs a I-212 but still waiting on the I-130 approval. How were you able to file with CBP instead of NSC which is where my attorney is saying will be adjudicated? 

[BenevolentSith 6]

10 hours ago, Lisa83TX93 said:

My husband also needs a I-212 but still waiting on the I-130 approval. How were you able to file with CBP instead of NSC which is where my attorney is saying will be adjudicated?  

I'm Canadian, and Canadians can apply for non immigrant waivers and I-212 directly at the border.

 

Your husband is an applicant for an immigrant visa, so he likely has to deal with the consulate (depending on whether he needs I-601).

 

https://www.uscis.gov/forms/direct-filing-addresses-form-i-212-application-permission-reapply-admission-united-states-after-deportation-or-removal

 

 

[Joy&Fred 4]

This is why this is so weird. Our 1-130 was approved way before he went to El Salvador. They are alleging that he came in more than one time, due to a date discrepancy, no proof whatsoever. he does not even qualify for the I 212. More proof that this administration is trying to do whatever possible to keep people from immigrating to the US from Central America.

[BenevolentSith 6]

From what you're describing, it looks to me that your husband might have been inadmissible due to 212(a)(9)(C)(i)(I).

 

Basically, he was unlwafully present for over a year, and then re-entered the country. He was never removed, but his previous unlawful presence + subsequent uninspected entry made him inadmissible for life (and 10 years before he can even file I-212).

 

Unfortunately, there is really not much that we can do at this point (you can try fighting it, but I doubt it would be fruitful), especially with the current political climate.

[Joy&Fred 4]

I hear what you are saying, but that is just not the facts in this case, and they have no facts to support their case.

[2018JNJ 141]

13 hours ago, Joy&Fred said:

This is why this is so weird. Our 1-130 was approved way before he went to El Salvador. They are alleging that he came in more than one time, due to a date discrepancy, no proof whatsoever. he does not even qualify for the I 212. More proof that this administration is trying to do whatever possible to keep people from immigrating to the US from Central America.

So he came to the US illegally.  Then left.  Then wrote wrong date of entry.  And somehow it's the Presidents fault?

If someone broke into your house..and stayed for some time using your resources without asking first..then left..then applied to stay in your house..would you let them?

That's what kinda what happened here.

 

jj

[Joy&Fred 4]

The only time "he left" is when he returned to El Salvador to "come in legally" as it was termed by your Vice President. Your President speaks out of both sides of his mouth, which is not how someone leads a country.  I guess you don't care what happens to your fellow Americans unless they support your president, but this is democracy still last I checked, and my husband is important to us regardless of your opinion.

[2018JNJ 141]

4 minutes ago, Joy&Fred said:

The only time "he left" is when he returned to El Salvador to "come in legally" as it was termed by your Vice President. Your President speaks out of both sides of his mouth, which is not how someone leads a country.  I guess you don't care what happens to your fellow Americans unless they support your president, but this is democracy still last I checked, and my husband is important to us regardless of your opinion.

The USA is a Representative Democracy...not a true Democracy.

Every life is important and precious.  However, the conduct and decisions a person makes has many consequences..can be good..ie following the rules set forth...or bad..not following the rules set forth.  I have made many bad decisions in my life and suffered consequences for such.  But I don't blame anyone but myself for those.  I have made good decisions in my life and have heaped many rewards for such.  But I don't give praise to anyone but myself for those.  So what I do or don't do is a choice I make.  Everyone has the same choice. 

 

If I understand correctly, your husband came to USA without authorization to do so.  You, USC, got married.  Then filed I130 which was approved.  Then he left USA.  He was denied reentry due to an error in dates and/or USA suspecting more than one entry.  Which leads you to become upset because there seems to be no recourse.  

 

While I understand your plight...I also know(n) many unauthorized people here in USA...not abiding by the rules does carry some risk.  I almost always go over the speed limit.  If I get pulled over for going 1mph over the posted speed, I'm not going to raise a fuss because it's a risk I take.  Your husband took a risk coming over without authorization.  In the past, some rules were overlooked.  However, some of the rules that weren't enforced prior are now being enforced. 

So if I get pulled over today for going 56 in a 55, I'm not going to blame the police officer or the sign or the government..I sped.  I will pay the fine.  If the rule continues to be enforced that anything over 55 will result in a ticket then I will drive 55 or below, continue to speed and pay the tickets, and/or work to get the speed limit increased.

 

It's not that anyone is heartless or doesn't care about people.  It's about following the rules set forth so those that don't follow the rules do not have an advantage over those that did.  It is unfair I drive faster than someone under 55 mph and I do get an advantage of getting to my destination faster.  Thus if the rule was enforced and I received a ticket, it is the price I pay for the risk/advantage.

 

Of course, larger risks might lead to larger rewards or, in this case, larger penalties.

 

I hope this helps you see a differing point of view.

 

jj

[Joy&Fred 4]

I do not agree with you. But, since it is a Democracy, that's just fine.