N400 Traffic Tickets

[Going through 5,671]

47 minutes ago, dudeinTriBeCa said:

I shouldn’t be the one to educate you, that’s what USCIS’s website and policy manuals are there for. Besides, the application instructions clearly states only certain traffic tickets/fines up to a dollar amount need to be disclosed. So telling OP to declare all citations however “minor” is blatantly false by the standards of USCIS policies. 

It doesn't say that.  It says that certain tickets/fines up to a dollar amount don't need to have evidence/documentation submitted along with the disclosure....not that they don't have to be disclosed at all.  

 

Directly from the instructions page:

 

You do not need to submit documentation for traffic fines or incidents that did not involve an arrest or did not involve drugs or alcohol, if the only penalty was a fine of less than $500 or points on your driving record.

 

This is different than whether or not one has to disclose the incident.  For that, the question on the application is quite literal in "Have you EVER been cited/detained/etc"...not "Have you EVER depending on a certain dollar amount."

 

He needs to disclose the incident to remain truthful on the application, and it won't affect his N400 in any way by disclosing it--- he just doesn't need to provide any documentation on it.

Edited July 20, 2019 by Going through

[Paatay Khan 16]

So all the people in the past and present who've not mentioned their traffic violations (mostly suggested by attorneys), even if they didn't involve any injuries/arrest/drugs, have misrepresented themselves and are going to be in trouble even after they got naturalized? For instance, if someone had a traffic violation(s) (that they remember from memory)outside of the statutory period but there is not record of it at the dmv being from distant past. How will they be able to mention/provide documentation for that since there is no record of it because I have heard you can only go back certain years when pulling records from dmv? If someone had several(10+)petty traffic violations inside or outside the statutory period that were dismissed/paid, will they still be held liable for not mentioning that on the app?

 

P.S. Didn't you need to prove good moral character within the statutory period of either 3 or 5 years. And how do petty traffic violations affect your 'good moral character'? So if the forms say, 'have you EVER been in so and so situation, do they mean the statutory period or your whole lifetime (grey area) because if its the latter, then a lot of people have misrepresented themselves in that particular context. Just curious.

[Paatay Khan 16]

13 minutes ago, Sam Mirza said:

P.S. Didn't you need to prove good moral character within the statutory period of either 3 or 5 years. And how do petty traffic violations affect your 'good moral character'? So if the forms say, 'have you EVER been in so and so situation, do they mean the statutory period or your whole lifetime (grey area) because if its the latter, then a lot of people have misrepresented themselves in that particular context. Just curious.

Edit to add: P.S. Didn't you need to prove good moral character within the statutory period of either 3 or 5 years. And how do petty traffic violations affect your 'good moral character'? So if the forms say, 'have you EVER been in so and so situation, do they mean the statutory period or your whole lifetime (grey area), or the 'EVER' means since when one became an LPR? because if it means a lifetime,meaning from the day of entry in to the U.S. to overstaying your visa to adjusting your status to LPR and then going on to becoming a citizen, then haven't lot of people misrepresented themselves in that particular context? Just curious

[afrocraft 313]

3 hours ago, Paatay Khan said:

So all the people in the past and present who've not mentioned their traffic violations (mostly suggested by attorneys), even if they didn't involve any injuries/arrest/drugs, have misrepresented themselves and are going to be in trouble even after they got naturalized? 

 

2 hours ago, Paatay Khan said:

Edit to add: P.S. Didn't you need to prove good moral character within the statutory period of either 3 or 5 years. And how do petty traffic violations affect your 'good moral character'? So if the forms say, 'have you EVER been in so and so situation, do they mean the statutory period or your whole lifetime ...

Lots of questions in there:

 

1. Is not disclosing minor traffic violations a misrepresentation? Yes, since the question on the N-400 application requires disclosure (but not documentation) of every violation, however minor. As if to drive home the point, another question asks for any violation one may have committed but was not even cited for. So if you grabbed 'em by the p**** and got away with it... 

 

2. What is the "statute of limitations" on the disclosure requirement? There is none; the question clearly asks for any violation EVER cited for.

 

3. What are the repercussions of such misrepresentation? In practice, hard to say. Most will likely get away with it: We all commit violations of law that go unpunished because they are not noticed or enforced. It also depends when it's caught. If before naturalization, and the incidents of misrep are repeated and egregious, one could be denied on good moral character grounds (not for the traffic violations per se, but for lying under oath to a federal officer during the interview). If after naturalization, the bar for denaturalization is so high that it is unlikely to happen, as the government must prove the misrep was willful, that it was material to the naturalization decision, and/or that revocation of citizenship is in the public interest. Tall order, but why tempt Uncle Sam?

Edited July 20, 2019 by afrocraft

[Paatay Khan 16]

Well, according a couple of attorney that I'm familiar with, their experienced interpretation of the word 'EVER' means statutory period, i.e. when one was admitted as an LPR, anything before that BY LAW, they cannot question/scrutinize/deny you for. Immigration language can be quite tricky for laymen like most of us on here since we didn't write any immigration manuals. 

I recall someone asking an IO at their interview about disclosing minor traffic violations on the app and they were told the same thing, that as long they didn't involve DWI/Injury/Arrest, we don't care. 

I'm sure before scheduling the interview, they look up and find out each and every detail about the applicant going back to day one. So if the applicant, knowingly or unknowingly didn't disclose any minor traffic violations, won't they be scrutinized by the IOs for not doing so and hence getting denied?

 

Again, if there's a minor traffic violation that one was cited for, outside the statutory period that cannot be found in dmv records due to being way old, that the applicant vaguely remembers(date/time/exact location)about, not disclosing it would also be considered misrep? 

 

 

[Paatay Khan 16]

Edit to add: 

I'm sure none would want to tempt uncle Sam but why unnecessarily fear such things when you don't have to is beyond me. If someone's good moral character is questioned by their 'not disclosing' minor traffic violations, then the only people who are innocent would be pedestrians.

[afrocraft 313]

4 hours ago, Paatay Khan said:

Edit to add: 

I'm sure none would want to tempt uncle Sam but why unnecessarily fear such things when you don't have to is beyond me. If someone's good moral character is questioned by their 'not disclosing' minor traffic violations, then the only people who are innocent would be pedestrians.

I'm not so sure what's so hard about disclosing minor violations. I did; just say yes, provide brief details about the incident, and move on. No documentation is required, after all. You make it sound like it's a 30-day exorcism in the wilderness.

 

5 hours ago, Paatay Khan said:

1) Well, according a couple of attorney that I'm familiar with, their experienced interpretation of the word 'EVER' means statutory period...

2) I'm sure before scheduling the interview, they look up and find out each and every detail about the applicant going back to day one. So if the applicant, knowingly or unknowingly didn't disclose any minor traffic violations, won't they be scrutinized by the IOs for not doing so and hence getting denied?

3) Again, if there's a minor traffic violation that one was cited for, outside the statutory period that cannot be found in dmv records due to being way old, that the applicant vaguely remembers(date/time/exact location)about, not disclosing it would also be considered misrep? 

 Wrong on all counts:

 

1. Be careful with these "attorneys." So if one commits genocide a year before the statutory period, extending their argument, that shouldn't count in assessing good moral character (GMC)? Before you accuse me of fear-mongering, see the quote below for what the regulations say about evaluating GMC.

2. You would think so, but turns out you're wrong. They use the FBI background check, which does not capture all infractions. I did a FOIA request on my FBI record, and it didn't have my traffic violation.

3. DMV records vary by state, I think, but my driving record still had a $20 violation from 2005. Go figure.

 

Quote

 

§316.10   Good moral character.

(a) Requirement of good moral character during the statutory period. (1) An applicant for naturalization bears the burden of demonstrating that, during the statutorily prescribed period, he or she has been and continues to be a person of good moral character. This includes the period between the examination and the administration of the oath of allegiance.

(2) In accordance with section 101(f) of the Act, the Service shall evaluate claims of good moral character on a case-by-case basis ... The Service is not limited to reviewing the applicant's conduct during the five years immediately preceding the filing of the application, but may take into consideration, as a basis for its determination, the applicant's conduct and acts at any time prior to that period, if the conduct of the applicant during the statutory period does not reflect that there has been reform of character from an earlier period or if the earlier conduct and acts appear relevant to a determination of the applicant's present moral character.
 

(b) Finding of a lack of good moral character. (1) An applicant shall be found to lack good moral character, if the applicant...

(vi) Has given false testimony to obtain any benefit from the Act, if the testimony was made under oath or affirmation and with an intent to obtain an immigration benefit; this prohibition applies regardless of whether the information provided in the false testimony was material, in the sense that if given truthfully it would have rendered ineligible for benefits either the applicant or the person on whose behalf the applicant sought the benefit;

 

 

I'm done arguing. You know the facts; you can make your own decision.

[Paatay Khan 16]

On 7/14/2019 at 8:45 AM, afrocraft said:

1. Yes. Don't even think about hiding them -- even if you get through the interview and oath ceremony, you can be denaturalized later if the traffic stops are material to the decision.

 

I'm not in anyway suggesting to anybody to conceal facts about themselves pertaining to mentioning traffic violations. And I wasn't the one who accused you of fear mongering but your rubric stated above depicts nothing else.

Competent attorneys are charging a lot of money for a reason. To explain any technicalities/terms in immigration language, not talking about roadside solicitors. And if immigration began going strictly by the book then an immense number of people are going to lose their citizenship for falling short of GMC requirements.

Your state dmv had the record of a $20 traffic violation back from 2005? I feel sorry for such a state.

If you did mention all your lifetimes traffic violations on the app, I'm okay with that but I would suggest not using such a harsh rhetoric again, when trying to help answer someone's concerns/queries on this forum. Thanks

[Going through 5,671]

14 hours ago, Paatay Khan said:

Well, according a couple of attorney that I'm familiar with, their experienced interpretation of the word 'EVER' means statutory period, i.e. when one was admitted as an LPR, anything before that BY LAW, they cannot question/scrutinize/deny you for. 

I think that's where people complicate things more (not you specifically, talking in general).  Instead of "interpreting" the instructions to best suit one's needs/track of thought...just take the instructions literally.  Take the questions on the application literally.  Makes it more simple then.  EVER means EVER...not "EVER, except under these circumstances..." by one's own "interpretation" of the question.

 

And, yes, they can question/scrutinize/deny for something outside of the statutory period.  If that weren't the case, there wouldn't be denials of N400s for GCs not correctly approved years before.  My own criminal incidents took place outside of the US more than 23 years ago, and a good 10 years BEFORE I became a LPR.  The IO questioned me on it, in fact it was the first thing she started with immediately after swearing me in before my butt even touched the chair, and wanted updated documentation on it to look at.

 

Traffic tickets are not a barrier to becoming Naturalized....traffic violations are a minor issue compared to others, so people shouldn't become nervous about disclosing it on the forms.  If something isn't disclosed on the form and it comes to light, then it can become a HUGE issue only because it can lead the IO to wonder what else was not disclosed, and lead them to further scrutinize the applicant on everything else.  It's safer to disclose it, it's honest to disclose it, it won't lead to a denial for disclosing it.  OP should be thankful all he has are traffic tickets  

[Paatay Khan 16]

The issue was about disclosing/not disclosing minor traffic violations not just any traffic violations but hundreds and thousands of people have not taken the word EVER literally as suggested and haven't mentioned them because they were told they'll be alright. 

 

2 hours ago, Going through said:

My own criminal incidents took place outside of the US more than 23 years ago, and a good 10 years BEFORE I became a LPR.  The IO questioned me on it, in fact it was the first thing she started with immediately after swearing me in before my butt even touched the chair, and wanted updated documentation on it to look at.

 

CIMT are a completely different thing from that because they involve arrest/charge/conviction. The charges/convictions would follow the offender to the grave. We cannot compare apples to oranges. But someone getting denied or denaturalized just because they failed to mention a minor traffic violation(s) just does not make any sense. There are bigger fish to fry.

Edited July 21, 2019 by Paatay Khan

[Going through 5,671]

8 hours ago, Paatay Khan said:

But someone getting denied or denaturalized just because they failed to mention a minor traffic violation(s) just does not make any sense. There are bigger fish to fry.

Oh I agree...it likely wouldn't lead to a denial (although, I have heard of one instance on another forum I visit where the applicant was denied for multiple speeding tickets---I think 4 or 5 if I remember correctly----officer noted it as a failure to meet the Good Moral Character requirement.  In the end that person appealed the decision and won).

 

My point is that not disclosing it and it comes up later would probably leave the IO to question what else was "left out" on the application....why play with fire when one doesn't have to?

Edited July 22, 2019 by Going through

[Paatay Khan 16]

Speeding tickets are sort of borderline but they aren't minor traffic violations, depends how fast over the speed limit one was going. But if one has gotten multiple speeding tickets then that means the person could be a 'habitual speeder'. I too, would be alarmed to see that many tickets if I were the IO and would likely question the GMC of the applicant. 

[algamal 0]

This topic is over discussed already everywhere, a little bit of research will tell you what you need to do:

 

1. Mention that you have speeding tickets in your application and list them and provide evidence that those are all minor violation which are all paid and settled already.

 

2. Dont mention anything in application but mention this to interview officer that they are all minor violations.

 

If you have reckless or other more severe citations like class A misdemeanors, you definitely need to list them out.

 

if still in doubt, you should really get an attorney to fill this stuff for you.