Reuters:Denials of U.S. immigrant visas skyrocket after little-heralded rule change

[Apple Bee 272]

WaSHINGTON/SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - When Arturo Balbino, a Texas construction worker, walked into his visa interview at the American consulate in the northern Mexican border town of Ciudad Juarez in March, he wasn't nervous. He felt good.

Balbino, a 33-year-old Mexican national who had entered the United States illegally 14 years ago, thought he had a strong case for a spousal visa: a wife and children who are U.S. citizens, a father-in-law who had pledged in an affidavit to financially support him if necessary, and a letter from his employer guaranteeing him an $18-per-hour job upon his return.

When he went for the interview, he was at the final step of legalizing his status, which would, he hoped, pave the way for a more stable life for himself and his family.

 

Instead, the consular officer denied his application on the grounds that he could become a drain on U.S. taxpayers by requiring government financial assistance, according to documents reviewed by Reuters.

That decision stranded Balbino in Mexico indefinitely and upended his family’s life.

More and more aspiring immigrants – especially Mexicans – are being denied visas based on determinations by the U.S. State Department that they might become "public charges," dependent on the government for support, according to official data and interviews with attorneys, immigrants and their family members.

Lawyers for some immigrants say consular officers are denying visas even when applicants fulfill legal requirements to prove they will be financially independent.

The refusals, capping an often complex and lengthy application process, can trap people for months or longer outside the United States, separated from American spouses and children, as they renew their efforts to legally return. Some may never be able to go back.

One reason for the rise in refusals are little-known changes last year in the State Department's foreign affairs manual that gave diplomats wider discretion in deciding visa denials on public-charge grounds.

 

You can read the rest of the article here

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1RR0UX

 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Apple Bee

[Boiler 45,499]

Quote

Balbino's children's use of the Medicaid program for low-income households and food stamps was an issue that came up in his visa interview.

 

No mention of his wife's income? Difficult to tell without a full picture, but certainly is true that people who may have skated by are being asked to provide more compelling evidence, first time I have seen this out of Mexico. I can see it becoming more relevant for Parents immigrating, seen too many cases where costs have not been considered.

[Apple Bee 272]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

 

No mention of his wife's income? Difficult to tell without a full picture, but certainly is true that people who may have skated by are being asked to provide more compelling evidence, first time I have seen this out of Mexico. I can see it becoming more relevant for Parents immigrating, seen too many cases where costs have not been considered.

It seemed to only state that his wife was struggling here without him. His father in law (who makes $90k/year) signed the affidavit of support but it seems that wasn't sufficient for Ciudad Juarez. It also mentioned the family's past use of govt benefits also being an issue at the interview. 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Apple Bee

[Ben&Zian 4,398]

More fear mongering, sob stories without full details, just meant to stir up sadness and dismay and worry.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Ben&Zian

[Boiler 45,499]

3 minutes ago, Apple Bee said:

It seemed to only state that his wife was struggling here without him. His father in law (who makes $90k/year) signed the affidavit of support but it seems that wasn't sufficient for Ciudad Juarez. It also mentioned the family's past use of govt benefits also being an issue at the interview. 

Well and I tend to be deeply suspicious of such stories as there tend to be a lot missing or distorted.

 

So there are 5 children I think and the spouse so she would need to be earning c$50k.

 

$18 an hour well if it was him sponsoring her that would not be enough. His possible income is not taken into account.

 

So we are left with the Joint and know nothing about him, well FIL and $90k but he could for example have a large family or approaching retirement.Now if somebody posted this on VJ we could do some digging and find out but here we are stuck.

[treppenwitz 78]

10 minutes ago, Ben&Zian said:

He probably got denied and needed a waver but doesn't want to disclose that, since said he entered illegally previously.

Denial was public-charge based. Immigrant had an approved waiver for the above issue:

Quote

Public-charge denials can be particularly devastating for people like Balbino, who entered the United States illegally, built lives and have an opportunity to legalize their status through marriage.

 

It’s a complex process, but one many immigrants like Balbino are willing to complete. U.S. law requires people who have been present in the United States illegally for longer than six months to leave and remain abroad for several years before attempting to re-enter.

 

But visa applicants can ask for waivers that allow them to return more quickly. Balbino obtained such a waiver in 2017.

 

[Boiler 45,499]

4 minutes ago, treppenwitz said:

Denial was public-charge based. Immigrant had an approved waiver for the above issue:

 

I assume that was noted which is why the original post was edited.

[Ben&Zian 4,398]

Exactly.  Still too many missing details, only one side of the story given, and ultimate decision comes from the CO. Where's the stories about how the US admits more than any other country by far, so of course they can find one or two sob stories to share to make everyone 'panic'.

Edited April 15, 2019 by Ben&Zian

[Apple Bee 272]

3 minutes ago, Boiler said:

I assume that was noted which is why the original post was edited.

 

2 minutes ago, Ben&Zian said:

Exactly. 

Hey, I didn't edit anything out, if that's what is being implied here. All I did was bold and underline the sentence that stated people were being denied even if they fulfilled the financial requirement (as we have seen members here state has happened to them as well) Also I didn't copy and paste the whole article because it very long, which is why I posted the link to the full article at the end. 

Edited April 15, 2019 by Apple Bee

[Boiler 45,499]

Just now, Apple Bee said:

 

Hey, I didn't edit anything out, if that's what is being implied here. All I did was bold and underline the sentence that stated people were being denied even if they fulfilled the financial requirement. Also I didn't copy and paste the whole article because it very long, which is why I posted the link to the full article at the end. 

I was just explaining, and we do not know the details, and nobody to ask.

 

The I 864 has guidelines, people seem to forget the guidelines bit. The totality of the case is what matters.

 

 

 

[treppenwitz 78]

5 minutes ago, Ben&Zian said:

Where's the stories about how the US admits more than any other country by far, so of course they can find one or two sob stories to share to make everyone 'panic'.

I agree with the recent DOS guidelines. Either way, immigration is a privilege not a right. Odds are the family was going to be a public charge issue.

[Ben&Zian 4,398]

CO's do make "smoke-screen" reasons for denials also. For example, in high fraud countries, the CO might not come straight out and say "I don't believe your relationship is legit because of your 30 year age gap"... they may just say "Not enough relationship evidence" or even sometimes have read on here about them using the affidavit of support as a reason where the person did meet the requirements(maybe barely mind you) but they gave that reason for a denial, yet there were so many other red flags it was laughable. So just saying, doesn't always have to be black and white when it comes to the reason for denial sometimes.

[Apple Bee 272]

49 minutes ago, Ben&Zian said:

Exactly.  Still too many missing details, only one side of the story given, and ultimate decision comes from the CO. Where's the stories about how the US admits more than any other country by far, so of course they can find one or two sob stories to share to make everyone 'panic'.

I'm sorry but who's "they"? I didn't go looking for this story. Google suggests articles to me based on my browser history and I just posted the article here as it pertains to immigration. You all don't need to underhandedly attack people just for posting articles, it's not that serious. 

[Boiler 45,499]

2 minutes ago, Apple Bee said:

I'm sorry but who's "they"? I didn't go looking for this story. Google suggests articles to me based on my browser history and I just posted the article here as it pertains to immigration. You all don't need to underhandedly attack people just for posting articles, it's not that serious. 

I would have posted it if I had seen it.

 

Just a heads up that so many times I have seen stories that were shall we say misleading, there was for example the Swedish Woman who was hailed as being a woke hero for stopping a plane that was deporting a failed asylum seeker.

 

Turned out he was being deported having served years for crimes including rape. And was happy to go!

[cyclone27 710]

Actually the financial requirements are too low in my honest opinion. 

 

I would eliminate co sponsors and you need to realistically be able to support who you sponsor.