This is frustrating!

[Michael&Karen 46]

12 hours ago, zochu said:

I don’t know where to submit this so move if in wrong forum or delete if not allowed but am frustrated! 
 

This whole visa waiting game is hard but it has to happen ... 

 

But what makes us (husband and I) frustrated is people who want to enter the US on a tourist visa and just stay because it’s quick and easy. 
it’s the people who don’t do it the “proper” way - the way we are doing it.... via consular processing etc if that’s even the proper way - who knows 🤷‍♀️ 

 

Ive told the same person on FB 1 million times that “wife cannot enter USA on tourist visa with intent to immigrate” ... but they just want a quick, easy way for a “green card” - like don’t we all? Don’t we all want to be with our spouse? 
 

if all due respect to others I really find it hard to also believe that someone went on JUST a holiday and then “circumstances changed” and they just stayed 🧐 no furniture to sell? No rental to cease? No car to sell? I don’t know, resign? Do the right thing and give your 2 weeks notice? Get all your belongings? End your life in your home country before you make a new life? 

 

this is really frustrating to see. It’s a really lonely process that is just full of the “unknown”. 
 

it is the path we picked - consular processing because (a) don’t wanna commit visa fraud 😆 especially if I want to be an attorney and (b) because it’s the right way? Correct me if I’m wrong. 
 

single parenthood while we wait is hard. Lonely and hard and yes a consequence of our actions still lonely nonetheless. 
 

 

😞

 

 

 

 

Oh my GOD!!! I feel you. And I also feel frustrated for all of those people who entered ilegally in the States and they can easily do AOS and nothing happens, they don't get punished or anything, they are nicely waiting with their spouses or families, having fun and going out while all of us are waiting years to get there on THE LEGAL WAY, is messed up and irritates me so much but well what can we do? I'm just hoping that immigration open their eyes and do something good for us who are doing the right thing is just not fair.

[Montrealy 73]

OP: your frustrations are valid but ultimately misplaced. The answer to AOS “unfairness” is not fewer and longer AOS, but fewer and shorter consular processing.

 

This country today is hyper focused on “rights”. Everyone is entitled to every “right” imaginable, except for that of a US citizen to marry and live here with his/her spouse in a timely and inexpensive manner.
 

As others have pointed out, many countries recognize the need for temporary legal status after marriage to keep families together. The notion that US law obligates the vast majority of foreign spouses to live apart for months or years while multiple layers of lazy bureaucracy take their sweet time is frankly obscene. If a spouse is denied, there’s no appeal-what about the right of a USC to live with his/her spouse? That can’t overcome a decision passed down from on high, from a random embassy official who has ultimate power over your life? AP can take months or years, and it can destroy a family, but you know it won’t affect at all? The people who made that decision and are responsible for it taking 6 months to read a piece of paper.
 

So, you are right, the system is crazy unfair, but the solution is to unite families, not tear them apart further. There should be a legal path to AOS for everyone and consular processing should be limited and shortened.

Edited February 21, 2020 by Montrealy

[beloved_dingo 1,976]

17 minutes ago, Montrealy said:

OP: your frustrations are valid but ultimately misplaced. The answer to AOS “unfairness” is not fewer and longer AOS, but fewer and shorter consular processing.

 

This country today is hyper focused on “rights”. Everyone is entitled to every “right” imaginable, except for that of a US citizen to marry and live here with his/her spouse in a timely and inexpensive manner.
 

As others have pointed out, many countries recognize the need for temporary legal status after marriage to keep families together. The notion that US law obligates the vast majority of foreign spouses to live apart for months or years while multiple layers of lazy bureaucracy take their sweet time is frankly obscene. If a spouse is denied, there’s no appeal-what about the right of a USC to live with his/her spouse? That can’t overcome a decision passed down from on high, from a random embassy official who has ultimate power over your life? AP can take months or years, and it can destroy a family, but you know it won’t affect at all? The people who made that decision and are responsible for it taking 6 months to read a piece of paper.
 

So, you are right, the system is crazy unfair, but the solution is to unite families, not tear them apart further. There should be a legal path to AOS for everyone and consular processing should be limited and shortened.

I was with you until the bolded part. I'm all for keeping families together, but there absolutely shouldn't be a "legal path to AOS for everyone".

[Lemonslice 4,836]

1 minute ago, beloved_dingo said:

I was with you until the bolded part. I'm all for keeping families together, but there absolutely shouldn't be a "legal path to AOS for everyone".

Why not? Other countries are able to manage it.

[Montrealy 73]

2 minutes ago, beloved_dingo said:

I was with you until the bolded part. I'm all for keeping families together, but there absolutely shouldn't be a "legal path to AOS for everyone".

Everyone as in all spouses. Lots of countries do it, it works just fine, and it makes sense.

[beloved_dingo 1,976]

3 minutes ago, Lemonslice said:

Why not? Other countries are able to manage it.

Plenty of countries are way more strict about a lot of immigration categories than the U.S., including spousal/partner visas. Just look up the income requirements and costs for an Australian to bring a spouse over.

1 minute ago, Montrealy said:

Everyone as in all spouses. Lots of countries do it, it works just fine, and it makes sense.

"Spouses" is a lot more specific than "everyone". And even then, some spouses simply do not meet the criteria/can't get a waiver (such as for criminal history) so no, not "everyone" should have a legal path to AOS. Just because a USC loves someone doesn't automatically mean their foreign spouse is eligible move here and get a green card. 

[Montrealy 73]

10 minutes ago, beloved_dingo said:

Plenty of countries are way more strict about a lot of immigration categories than the U.S., including spousal/partner visas. Just look up the income requirements and costs for an Australian to bring a spouse over.

"Spouses" is a lot more specific than "everyone". And even then, some spouses simply do not meet the criteria/can't get a waiver (such as for criminal history) so no, not "everyone" should have a legal path to AOS. Just because a USC loves someone doesn't automatically mean their foreign spouse is eligible move here and get a green card. 

Some countries are more strict, some less. Regardless, allowing couples to live together is the right thing. And as for spouses that are not eligible, they can come temporarily and be removed. Not perfect, but a lot better than keeping 95% apart for years.
(Of course, another solution would be to cap CP processing times at 3 months and/or expand DCF to make it mainstream. But that would actually make sense and would involve government working efficiently, so not going to happen.)

[PostOakGuy 13]

Stop AOS from any non immigrant visa and end automatic citizenship if born in US. That should fix a lot....I’ve written the White House about it, maybe he will listen.... LOL

[Cryssiekins 976]

32 minutes ago, PostOakGuy said:

Stop AOS from any non immigrant visa and end automatic citizenship if born in US. That should fix a lot....I’ve written the White House about it, maybe he will listen.... LOL

I would say AOS from non-immigrant should only be allowed within a very narrow scope of circumstances, but simply being LUCKY enough to be admitted in as a non-USC and then just deciding “out of the blue” to stay should be scrapped. 
 

Also, is birthright citizenship still a thing?  I thought that was gone long ago.  

[Orangesapples 1,954]

14 hours ago, zochu said:

 🧐 no furniture to sell? No rental to cease? No car to sell? I don’t know, resign? Do the right thing and give your 2 weeks notice? Get all your belongings? . 

 

 

😞

 

 

 

 

This is not exactly on topic but in other countries it's not uncommon to not buy furniture if you're renting and owning a car is not as common because many other countries are not as car centric. I never owned any furniture before moving and I never drove, so no car. Also, the two week notice is customary in the US but in many other countries people have contracts and they have to give a much longer notice, such as one month. I had to give a two month notice before I could quit or I would have breached my contract. Not that they could have done anything but that's just the situation. 

[laylalex 7,284]

54 minutes ago, PostOakGuy said:

Stop AOS from any non immigrant visa and end automatic citizenship if born in US. That should fix a lot....I’ve written the White House about it, maybe he will listen.... LOL

You do know that that would require the Constitution to be amended, correct? And how exactly would that end issues that relate to how long it takes to process a fiance or spousal visa?

21 minutes ago, Cryssiekins said:

Also, is birthright citizenship still a thing?  I thought that was gone long ago.  

Please read the Fourteenth Amendment. It is part of our Constitution.

[Nat&Amy 623]

19 minutes ago, Cryssiekins said:

Also, is birthright citizenship still a thing?  I thought that was gone long ago.

It is still a thing, and it is such a thing that the US is the world leader in "birth tourism". Yup, you heard that right. In Brazil, many wealthy couples invest an average of USD 30k to travel to the US and give birth so that their kid will have American citizenship. There are even agencies that specialize in the process and find them accommodation, hospitals, etc

[laylalex 7,284]

Just now, Nat&Amy said:

It is still a thing, and it is such a thing that the US is the world leader in "birth tourism". Yup, you heard that right. In Brazil, many wealthy couples invest an average of USD 30k to travel to the US and give birth so that their kid will have American citizenship. There are even agencies that specialize in the process and find them accommodation, hospitals, etc

It is still a "thing" as much as, you know, freedom of speech is still a "thing" in this country. 

[Nat&Amy 623]

1 minute ago, laylalex said:

It is still a "thing" as much as, you know, freedom of speech is still a "thing" in this country. 

I understand it is part of the Constitution and when it comes to the Constitution people get very edgy. Same things with guns. It's in the Constitution that people are allowed to have them. Should we allow everyone to have them, even if they are proven mentally unfit? There's the debate. Should everyone that is born in the US be given citizenship even when their parents are not PR or citizens? There's the debate. Are things going to change? Unlikely. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't.

[laylalex 7,284]

13 minutes ago, Nat&Amy said:

I understand it is part of the Constitution and when it comes to the Constitution people get very edgy. Same things with guns. It's in the Constitution that people are allowed to have them. Should we allow everyone to have them, even if they are proven mentally unfit? There's the debate. Should everyone that is born in the US be given citizenship even when their parents are not PR or citizens? There's the debate. Are things going to change? Unlikely. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't.

Genuine question: what is the benefit in changing this? How does the nation gain in withholding citizenship from people born here? I take it personally because if the Fourteenth weren't law, my dad would not have been born a citizen. His parents came from France in the early 50s; he was born not too long afterwards. I do not see how this country benefits from someone like him who had parents who were making a life here being born a French citizen. It isn't even, oh, but your grandparents did it the "right" way so your dad should be eligible.

 

I think the analogy to restrictions on gun ownership is not an apples to apples comparison, sorry, and I say that respectfully. Restricting citizenship to an infant on birth is not the same sort of commonsense restriction for public safety as preventing mentally unstable people from having access to guns.