USA Today: President Donald Trump orders crackdown on 'visa overstays' in latest push against illegal immigration

[millefleur 5,047]

15 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Local offices can barely keep up with the backlog of cases they have now. Not enough staff or funding. No way they're going to follow up with overstayers. The majority of overstayers are those who come on the VWP supposedly. And the fact is though we sit there and say ''don't do naughty immigration things while on the VWP'' we continue to allow those to adjust from the VWP because you can't prove intent no matter how long they overstay.

We should switch our government fund away from military misadventures abroad and more towards taking care of illegal immigration at home. Then there would be plenty of funding to go round... 

 

I'm not even sure the vast majority knows that they shouldn't adjust on the VWP. I'm sure a ton of people come over just assuming it's OK to enter with immigrant intent, the US just projects this pro-immigration image abroad and well, not really anyone's fault given the history of the country. 

 

Businesses also need to be heavily punished for hiring illegals. That needs to be significantly stepped up. Go after illegal workers first as well as the businesses who hire them. 

[Crazy Cat 41,985]

Just now, davidvs said:

Yes. And we now have a 2 year old child and no ability to adjust status in the US. We will need a 601a waiver and she needs to do her interview in Bangkok.

 

It happens very often.

I don't understand.  Who needs the waiver?

1 minute ago, millefleur said:

We should switch our government fund away from military misadventures abroad and more towards taking care of illegal immigration at home. Then there would be plenty of funding to go round... 

 

I'm not even sure the vast majority knows that they shouldn't adjust on the VWP. I'm sure a ton of people come over just assuming it's OK to enter with immigrant intent, the US just projects this pro-immigration image abroad and well, not really anyone's fault given the history of the country. 

 

Businesses also need to be heavily punished for hiring illegals. That needs to be significantly stepped up. Go after illegal workers first as well as the businesses who hire them. 

Agree 100%......on all points.

[Boiler 45,752]

1 minute ago, davidvs said:

Yes. And we now have a 2 year old child and no ability to adjust status in the US. We will need a 601a waiver and she needs to do her interview in Bangkok.

 

It happens very often.

Sounds like a C/D.

[davidvs 354]

1 minute ago, missileman said:

I don't understand.  Who needs the waiver?

She had a C1/d visa... She completed her contract, signed off the ship and had 29 days to exit the country. She stayed. Because crewmembers can't do AOS, she will need to do a consulate interview in Thailand and will be subject to the 10 year bar upon leaving the US. So she will need an I-601a waiver.

 

We intend to argue that she was a "C1" in transit and not a crewman, as she had completed her contract, and try to adjust status, but that will likely fail... 

6 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Sounds like a C/D.

Exactly.

[Ash.1101 1,756]

19 minutes ago, millefleur said:

We should switch our government fund away from military misadventures abroad and more towards taking care of illegal immigration at home. Then there would be plenty of funding to go round... 

 

I'm not even sure the vast majority knows that they shouldn't adjust on the VWP. I'm sure a ton of people come over just assuming it's OK to enter with immigrant intent, the US just projects this pro-immigration image abroad and well, not really anyone's fault given the history of the country. 

 

Businesses also need to be heavily punished for hiring illegals. That needs to be significantly stepped up. Go after illegal workers first as well as the businesses who hire them. 

This. Agree'd.

I have a friend at work who's daughters fiance is from Austrailia and just plans on coming here and getting married and staying. Their logic is "Well if intent is determined at the border, then we're golden". There's no punishment to it what so ever, all you have to do is know what to say in some cases with VWP and... bam you're in the US pursuing a GC.

So I mean you could even know and do it anyways, the chances of being penalized is so small it's almost always worth the risk to some.

[Boiler 45,752]

1 minute ago, Ash.1101 said:

This. Agree'd.

I have a friend at work who's daughters fiance is from Austrailia and just plans on coming here and getting married and staying. Their logic is "Well if intent is determined at the border, then we're golden". There's no punishment to it what so ever, all you have to do is know what to say in some cases with VWP and... bam you're in the US pursuing a GC.

So I mean you could even know and do it anyways, the chances of being penalized is so small it's almost always worth the risk to some.

Did you tell them it is against the VJ ToS?

[Ash.1101 1,756]

6 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Did you tell them it is against the VJ ToS?

No but I have told them to join VJ so they can start researching it all but they seem very reluctant too.

I believe they are trying to avoid having ANY proof that they know better, so they're not joining any site or forum. If I took a guess, if they did join it'll be once he's crossed the border. 


But as for this topic, I'd imagine there are a fair number of people doing what they're doing, regardless if it's not recommended or not. 

Edited April 23, 2019 by Ash.1101

[Boiler 45,752]

Knowing better or not does not really matter, well if they join VJ they would need to abide by the ToS.

Edited April 23, 2019 by Boiler

[Crazy Cat 41,985]

4 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

No but I have told them to join VJ so they can start researching it all but they seem very reluctant too.

I believe they are trying to avoid having ANY proof that they know better, so they're not joining any site or forum.

Show them this attorney's opinion..

https://www.soundimmigration.com/can-i-enter-on-a-visitors-visa-b-2-and-then-adjust-status-to-permanent-resident/

 

"Even if the person gets into the U.S. they still cannot adjust status to permanent resident.

Let’s say our Chinese wife gets into the United States on her B-2 visitor’s visa. Remember that all along she was planning to apply for residency, so after entry her husband files and I-130 Petition for Alien Relative and she files an I-485 Application to Adjust Status to Permanent Resident. She’s already in the country, and their marriage is legitimate, so is she home free? No.

An I-485 application for permanent residency is considered an application for admission to the U.S. This is a counter-intuitive concept that many struggle with. Even though the applicant is already in the country, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) treats the person as though they are outside the U.S. and seeking entry. Why does that matter? Because the person is screened for all grounds of inadmissibility.

What are the grounds of inadmissibility? The immigration statute has a long list of rules about whether a person is admissible to the U.S. A person is considered inadmissible if she has certain diseases, has committed certain crimes, is a security threat, etc. But a person is also inadmissible if she has committed immigration fraud. Under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i).."

 

 

Edited April 23, 2019 by missileman

[millefleur 5,047]

9 minutes ago, Ash.1101 said:

I have a friend at work who's daughters fiance is from Austrailia and just plans on coming here and getting married and staying. Their logic is "Well if intent is determined at the border, then we're golden". There's no punishment to it what so ever, all you have to do is know what to say in some cases with VWP and... bam you're in the US pursuing a GC.

So I mean you could even know and do it anyways, the chances of being penalized is so small it's almost always worth the risk to some.

I think people are influenced by the bad deeds of others, they hear stories of people they know or read online about how people used the VWP or B visas to sneak in and then adjust, even with overstays, so they assume: "Hey if they did it, why can't we? Otherwise that's unfair and I don't want to wait that long" so the rule breakers create a huge bad influence over others, thus perpetuating the problem....plus there is basically no punishment for doing so, so no deterrence in place at all to make them second guess their plans, except for CBP's discretion, which obviously doesn't always catch people who intend to adjust.

 

And yes, VJ ToS should be enforced always here and I wish also in the real world, if only!! Lol. 

[Boiler 45,752]

Begs the question would you have a better chance with a CR1 or an AoS, my view would be AoS, at least you get to appear in front of an IJ if refused.

[Boiler 45,752]

2 minutes ago, millefleur said:

I think people are influenced by the bad deeds of others, they hear stories of people they know or read online about how people used the VWP or B visas to sneak in and then adjust, even with overstays, so they assume: "Hey if they did it, why can't we? Otherwise that's unfair and I don't want to wait that long" so the rule breakers create a huge bad influence over others, thus perpetuating the problem....plus there is basically no punishment for doing so, so no deterrence in place at all to make them second guess their plans, except for CBP's discretion, which obviously doesn't always catch people who intend to adjust.

 

And yes, VJ ToS should be enforced always here and I wish also in the real world, if only!! Lol. 

The ToS is my Bible, but not all are believers.

[Crazy Cat 41,985]

2 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Begs the question would you have a better chance with a CR1 or an AoS, my view would be AoS, at least you get to appear in front of an IJ if refused.

Exactly.........makes the playing field even more uneven......imho.

[Boiler 45,752]

Just now, missileman said:

Exactly.........makes the playing field even more uneven......imho.

More of a mountain range than a playing field, where do we start?

[Ash.1101 1,756]

9 minutes ago, millefleur said:

I think people are influenced by the bad deeds of others, they hear stories of people they know or read online about how people used the VWP or B visas to sneak in and then adjust, even with overstays, so they assume: "Hey if they did it, why can't we? Otherwise that's unfair and I don't want to wait that long" so the rule breakers create a huge bad influence over others, thus perpetuating the problem....plus there is basically no punishment for doing so, so no deterrence in place at all to make them second guess their plans, except for CBP's discretion, which obviously doesn't always catch people who intend to adjust.

 

And yes, VJ ToS should be enforced always here and I wish also in the real world, if only!! Lol. 

 

16 minutes ago, missileman said:

Show them this attorney's opinion..

https://www.soundimmigration.com/can-i-enter-on-a-visitors-visa-b-2-and-then-adjust-status-to-permanent-resident/

 

"Even if the person gets into the U.S. they still cannot adjust status to permanent resident.

Let’s say our Chinese wife gets into the United States on her B-2 visitor’s visa. Remember that all along she was planning to apply for residency, so after entry her husband files and I-130 Petition for Alien Relative and she files an I-485 Application to Adjust Status to Permanent Resident. She’s already in the country, and their marriage is legitimate, so is she home free? No.

An I-485 application for permanent residency is considered an application for admission to the U.S. This is a counter-intuitive concept that many struggle with. Even though the applicant is already in the country, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) treats the person as though they are outside the U.S. and seeking entry. Why does that matter? Because the person is screened for all grounds of inadmissibility.

What are the grounds of inadmissibility? The immigration statute has a long list of rules about whether a person is admissible to the U.S. A person is considered inadmissible if she has certain diseases, has committed certain crimes, is a security threat, etc. But a person is also inadmissible if she has committed immigration fraud. Under INA 212(a)(6)(C)(i).."

 

 

1. The second post is good read.

BUT

2. EXACTLY. The problem is, I will go ahead and pass that article on to my friend in hopes she'll give it to her daughter, but I'm about 99% sure they will go through it anyways because of what they have experienced. The fiance has visited the US multiple times, with no grilling or real interview at CBP past "What's your business here?" "Visiting my girlfriend" and "How long are you going to be here" "About 3 months". The daughters dad is planning on sponsoring him and he makes over 200k so he'll be fine on the sponsorship side of things.

It's just the fact that they've seen it done, and see it currently being done, and there is no punishment to those successfully getting through, and at this rate it's becoming fairly rare for someone to do this and be denied unless they don't have a strong case. I've tried talking to her about it and making sure she understands this isn't the way it should be done, but they find it to be the easiest route. I guess the daughter wants him here -now-.

It's much like how the government CAN sue for money back based on the I-864, but when's the last time we've seen that happen. If they only enforce something 2% of the time, why would anyone believe it's actually even being enforced until it happens to them, and then still, all those see it happens once, they look at the 98% of the times it didn't happen and still find it worth it.



Just my two cents since I'm watching someone actively go after this, and I understand why they're being so nonchalant about the whole thing. They feel there isn't a threat because USCIS doesn't deem itself as threatening in this case.

5 minutes ago, missileman said:

Exactly.........makes the playing field even more uneven......imho.

Yep!

It gives you more time to prepare and potentially more time with your loved one. Have a good case and you're fine, now you're here in the US versus being stuck in some other country.




Please note, I very much support crackdowns on overstays but I am also seeing WHY people are doing and how they are getting away with it and speaking to that. 

Edited April 23, 2019 by Ash.1101