What can be done about stalled multi-year I-130s?

[Katelyn_Wray 34]

On 1/19/2021 at 7:56 PM, vtstang66 said:

Hear me out, this is a serious question.  As my wife and I go into our third year of this process with no end in sight, it seems there must be a point when enough is enough.  We finally got through NVC stage after 19 months from filing, only to be stonewalled by a covid-closed consulate for almost a year so far with no opening in sight.

 

The solution is simple, let my wife immigrate on a conditional basis until the offices can open and the government can start processing again.  We would be more than happy to go anywhere at any time later for the proper interview.  CR-1s have to do this anyway and it's not a problem.  Give every I-130 spouse who's cleared NVC CR-1 status until they can process us properly.

 

So who do I need to talk to?  My Representative?  My Senators?  Surely we're not alone in this situation nor in the belief that it's completely ridiculous.  We're trying to do the right thing here, going about it the legal way, but we're in our prime years and have to spend them apart because of a situation that could very easily be remedied with no loss to anybody.  We've been patient but nobody should have to put up with this.  Who's with me?  How do we participate in democracy and make the government work for us?

I reached out to my senator, wrote a letter, and proposed exactly this, among other solutions. You're right in everything you've said, and there needs to be limits on how long this process can take. No couple should be falling through the cracks of immigration backlogs because of untimely processing. Please let us know if you learn of any meaningful actions we can take to advocate for reasonable and achievable solutions.

 

The staffer in my senator's office that I talked to acknowledged that they are aware of the problem at a systemic level. They know COVID has exacerbated everything, and they're "working on" solutions to fix it. She subtly alluded to changes potentially being made by the new administration coming in, within the state department. She was also realistic with me, and reminded me that the issue is complicated by those advocating for national security. It wasn't really a productive conversation, but it felt good that she at least sympathized with the problem and indicated their office was also advocating for change system-wide, instead of just the typical solution of inquiring for one case at one single embassy. With the amount of knowledge she had on the subject, it was clear that her office had been doing real work advocating for a better system.

[JFH 12,190]

On 1/20/2021 at 6:10 PM, vtstang66 said:

The arbitrary interview to grant the visa can happen just as well after the Consulate opens, and we could be together in the meantime.  It could be done over Zoom for that matter.  If the argument is about safety due to Covid, it's much less safe to travel back and forth 20 times on a plane than to hold one interview.

 

The interview cannot be held by Zoom. The law states that each applicant is interviewed and fingerprinted in person. By Zoom they have no way of knowing that the person on camera is the actual applicant. Also, the consular officers are trained to read body language to see if people are being dishonest and that’s very difficult by Zoom. There is also the data protection/security risk. 
 

Flying is actually very safe. More safe than an in-person interview. 
 

FWIW I completely understand your point. It’s morally wrong that people should be kept apart like this. But since when has the government cared about morals? There are many laws I disagree with or that conflict with my way of thinking. But all we can do is accept them until they are changed. 

[vtstang66 65]

Update:  

I wrote a letter and sent it to the White House, both my senators, and two representatives (I'm in the middle of a move).  I laid out the case, and I said that it's pretty absurd that spouses who are trying to do the right thing are facing the prospect of being kept apart for years waiting for a short interview that could happen at any time, in person or remotely, or not at all.  I sent physical copies to everyone's offices, and I'll follow up with emails, which is what they seem to prefer.

I think if more of us wrote these types of letters it could only help.  The more of our voices they hear the more aware they will be that it's not just the headline grabbers who are hurting.

 

How to find contact info for senators/representatives/president:  https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

 

I'll keep working on this and updating this thread with what I find.  If anyone has any questions or wants me to make up a form letter, let me know.

 

Edited January 30, 2021 by vtstang66
clarification

[Ryan H 3,812]

Moved from Process & Procedures to Progress Reports.

[darth vader 133]

On 1/19/2021 at 11:14 PM, Jorgedig said:

No one has forced us to make the choices we've made to be in relationships with people overseas.  Even pre-COVID, many couples could, for a variety of reasons, only manage minimal visits/time together.  Lots of us had extended wait times to be together as well.

Bravo! let the man grieve for the love of god. He may be venting but a least he is not cursing or abusive etc. I know lots of us have extended wait times, but (3) year wait time easily puts him in a very high percentile. As a member of this forum, I say he has a perfect right to vent as long as he is not breaking any TOS. Mods - can we create a sub for venting during these extraordinarily crappy times, please? Some of these venting posts to me seems like need community and a sympathetic shoulder, not a pragmatic lecture - a venting sub may be great idea where mods can move such posts to. Just my suggestion ....

 

Edited February 5, 2021 by darth vader

[darth vader 133]

On 1/22/2021 at 1:58 PM, JFH said:

The interview cannot be held by Zoom. The law states that each applicant is interviewed and fingerprinted in person. By Zoom they have no way of knowing that the person on camera is the actual applicant. Also, the consular officers are trained to read body language to see if people are being dishonest and that’s very difficult by Zoom. There is also the data protection/security risk. 
 

Flying is actually very safe. More safe than an in-person interview. 
 

FWIW I completely understand your point. It’s morally wrong that people should be kept apart like this. But since when has the government cared about morals? There are many laws I disagree with or that conflict with my way of thinking. But all we can do is accept them until they are changed. 

I have seen this argument and frankly, it is tiring. You do realize that just because it is LAW doesn't mean it is word of GOD, and ineffective laws can actually be changed? Being gay was a crime not so long ago. I can think of a million ways the law you mentioned can be made better. For one, just like interviews are waived for tourist visas on a case by case basis, so can be done for immigrant visas. If someone is 40, has been married for 10 years, has no crime record, has travelled to U.S. numerous times etc. - clearly is not a security risk and their interview can be waived rather than having them interview as well and hog up the interview queue. I will not even comment on the "COnSULar OFFiceRS Can REad ThE BoDY LangAUgE" - it has very high rate of false positives - EXTREMELY HIGH. If it weren't for the fact that U.S. immigration laws provide exceptional degree of freedom to executive branch, such a practice would be barred immediately in a domestic context, even for non-citizens, and there is tonnes of precedent for this. Another food for thought for you - why doesn't U.S. release consular notes if U.S. consular officers are so flawless - Canada for example does this. Unless it is matter of national security, why such secrecy? Consular officer thought there was huge age difference and that was a red flag? Sure let the U.S. citizen obtain consular notes, so they can mitigate/address that concern. But sdly too many people have drunk the kool-aid that government has thought everything through and can do no wrong and is only trying to protect us.

The legal immigration system, specially the family-based immigration is in dire need of reform and COVID has made the systemic problems even worse.

Edited February 5, 2021 by darth vader

[darth vader 133]

On 1/30/2021 at 4:31 PM, vtstang66 said:

Update:  

I wrote a letter and sent it to the White House, both my senators, and two representatives (I'm in the middle of a move).  I laid out the case, and I said that it's pretty absurd that spouses who are trying to do the right thing are facing the prospect of being kept apart for years waiting for a short interview that could happen at any time, in person or remotely, or not at all.  I sent physical copies to everyone's offices, and I'll follow up with emails, which is what they seem to prefer.

I think if more of us wrote these types of letters it could only help.  The more of our voices they hear the more aware they will be that it's not just the headline grabbers who are hurting.

 

How to find contact info for senators/representatives/president:  https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials

 

I'll keep working on this and updating this thread with what I find.  If anyone has any questions or wants me to make up a form letter, let me know.

 

Please start a petition on change.org and let us start getting signatures, if we can reach a few thousand signatures, elected representatives will start taking us somewhat seriously.

[vtstang66 65]

Thank you darth vader.  To be clear, the purpose of this post isn't to "vent," it's to gather together and enact some change.  3-4 years is an absurd amount of time to languish in a system that is supposed to be the alternative to breaking the law, but it's even more insane that half of it is spent waiting for a 30-minute appointment.  I can't understand how anyone could think that's okay.

 

So I started a change.org petition.  Before I publish it, I wanted to throw it out here and get some feedback on the text, to make sure I'm not saying anything boneheaded that's going to detract from the message.  I think it makes a solid argument for our case and proposes reasonable solutions.  Text below in italics:

 

The consular-based family immigration process to the U.S. (IR1/CR1 visas) has two parts: 

The first part takes place in the U.S., at the USCIS and NVC.  These agencies receive paperwork and fees and generate the visa for the immigrant.  This part of the process can take a year or more.

The second and final part takes place at the consulate in the immigrant's home country.  This consists of an appointment during which the consular officer interviews the immigrant and decides whether or not to issue the visa.  It usually takes a very short time, half an hour or less.  In most cases it is almost a formality.  The appointment also involves collection of biometrics and review of original documents.

The problem is that currently, the wait time for these appointments can and does reach multiple years.  This means that spouses, children, or other relatives are kept apart for years awaiting a short appointment.  Before COVID, the wait at Ciudad Juarez, the only consulate in Mexico that processes immigrant visas, was a year or more.  Since COVID hit, the consulate stopped processing visas altogether for almost a year and has since resumed in a very limited capacity.  Some families, including my wife and myself, are facing 2+ year waits for this appointment alone, in addition to the 1+ years for the domestic processing.  This is time that we cannot have together, starting a family, sharing a household, and building a life.

The solution is very simple.  This interview could easily be done remotely, as is seemingly everything else in these times.  Or it could be postponed for a better time and place, as is the case with CR1 visa immigrants who already must attend a second interview two years after their entry into the U.S.  At the very least, these options should be available to some applicants, such as those with clean backgrounds and financial qualifications.  Even this conditional consideration would relieve a huge portion of the backlog.  As to the biometrics and collection of original documents, these could be handled at any time during the process, before, during, or after entry.

We are not asking for a shortcut or special treatment.  We are not trying to get around the system because we are lazy or impatient.  We are simply asking that the deeply-flawed process be remedied for the benefit of everyone.  We have been doing everything the right way, paying thousands of dollars and waiting years (so far), watching our case slip through the cracks while the headlines scream about "immigration reform" that doesn't mention us citizens and our families who are stuck in the legal process.  This entry interview situation was an unfortunate bottleneck before COVID, has become absurd since, and is a needless problem with such an easy solution.  Please alleviate this hardship so that families can be together, as they belong.

 

Please have a read and tell me if I'm missing something.  If your feedback is to tell me that we should just patiently settle for this nonsense until the gods of immigration decide to bless us, please keep that to yourself.  I'll publish it soon.

Edited February 5, 2021 by vtstang66

[HRQX 4,145]

4 minutes ago, vtstang66 said:

Or it could be postponed for a better time and place, as is the case with CR1 visa immigrants who already must attend a second interview two years after their entry into the U.S.

Saying "postponed" and then mentioning that CR1 do a "second interview" is contradictory since the latter indirectly alludes to the the fact that CR1 must interview at a consular post for the first interview.

[vtstang66 65]

3 minutes ago, HRQX said:

Saying "postponed" and then mentioning that CR1 do a "second interview" is contradictory since the latter indirectly alludes to the the fact that CR1 must interview at a consular post for the first interview.

Thank you.  The point I'm trying to make is that if they can trust the CR1 to come back for the second interview, they should be able to trust them to simply do the first interview at a later time.  Maybe this isn't logically sound.  Do you have any suggestions of how I might better make this argument?

Edited February 5, 2021 by vtstang66
clarity

[darth vader 133]

19 minutes ago, vtstang66 said:

Thank you.  The point I'm trying to make is that if they can trust the CR1 to come back for the second interview, they should be able to trust them to simply do the first interview at a later time.  Maybe this isn't logically sound.  Do you have any suggestions of how I might better make this argument?

I will read you entire comment later since I am at work now, but I will tell you this - "second interview" is waiving of conditions once already in he country, comparing it to consular interview will not get much sympathy. I guess the way to make this argument is to suggest that a non-immigrant visa be issued to the the beneficiary to arrive in the U.S. on a conditional basis - just like CR1 is "conditional" but have them go through "immigrant interview/removal of conditions" just like CR1 folks at a later date. Such a non-immigrant visa exists for green card holders who sponsor their spouses, since they have to wait for their priority dates to be current. I cant remember the name for the visa - but it was in Biden's immigration agenda. We do have K-3 but it is rarely approved, they should bring this back, given regular processing is so delayed. What we can also do though is make a case that if some tourist visa interviews are waived, so can be the immigrant visa interviews where CO sees no red flags etc. which in turn reduces the long lines for interview.

 

 

[HRQX 4,145]

27 minutes ago, darth vader said:

Such a non-immigrant visa exists for green card holders who sponsor their spouses, since they have to wait for their priority dates to be current. I cant remember the name for the visa

Although the V visa is technically part of current immigration law it hasn't been issued since 2007: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/FY09AnnualReport_TableXVI_B.pdf The law specifically says that the I-130 must have been filed on or "before December 21, 2000" in order to be eligible. https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-of-green-card-holders-permanent-residents/v-nonimmigrant-visas

 

DOS also makes that clear: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/immigrate/family-immigration/nonimmigrant--visa-for-spouse-and-children-of-a-lawful-permanent-resident.html

Important Notice:

While U.S. immigration law still includes a provision for the V visa category for qualified spouses and children (under age 21) of U.S. lawful permanent residents (LPRs), we do not foresee that any V visas will be issued, since potential applicants will not meet the criteria explained below.

Edited February 5, 2021 by HRQX

[darth vader 133]

3 hours ago, HRQX said:

Although the V visa is technically part of current immigration law it hasn't been issued since 2007: https://travel.state.gov/content/dam/visas/Statistics/FY09AnnualReport_TableXVI_B.pdf The law specifically says that the I-130 must have been filed on or "before December 21, 2000" in order to be eligible. https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-of-green-card-holders-permanent-residents/v-nonimmigrant-visas

 

DOS also makes that clear: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/immigrate/family-immigration/nonimmigrant--visa-for-spouse-and-children-of-a-lawful-permanent-resident.html

Important Notice:

While U.S. immigration law still includes a provision for the V visa category for qualified spouses and children (under age 21) of U.S. lawful permanent residents (LPRs), we do not foresee that any V visas will be issued, since potential applicants will not meet the criteria explained below.

Biden is considering bringing this back in his proposed immigration law - not sure if republicans will push too hard against it. If not, this is a done deal, even thought there most certainly will be compromises elsewhere on the proposed bill. BTW thank you for mentioning the name of the visa. Anyway, the precedence is there for a similar provision to be made for CR1/IR1 cases.

[darth vader 133]

4 hours ago, vtstang66 said:

This entry interview situation was an unfortunate bottleneck before COVID, has become absurd since, and is a needless problem with such an easy solution.  Please alleviate this hardship so that families can be together, as they belong.

 

 

Please have a read and tell me if I'm missing something.  If your feedback is to tell me that we should just patiently settle for this nonsense until the gods of immigration decide to bless us, please keep that to yourself.  I'll publish it soon.

Well written, will provide a detailed response later when I have more time. However, if I can provide some constructive criticism, it appears your terminologies are off compared to the legal terminology used by immigration laws of the U.S/DOS/DHS etc. For example, there is no such thing as "entry interview", there is a "consular interview" for those who apply from abroad (called "consular filing/processing"). Those who apply from within U.S. have to file for something called "adjustment of status", I believe that is also an interview, though not sure what it is called. My experience has been that with immigration legal terms matter a lot. You would find that senior members of the forum will really call you out if your terms are off, since the clearer you are on your usage of correct terms, the better other forum members can assist us. I would encourage you to read all the guides available here on VJ to familiarize yourself better with these terms. Sorry I cant provide a full review just yet, but this is really great. Thank you so much!

Edited February 5, 2021 by darth vader

[Boiler 45,467]

Let us call it the V visa for simplicity, I would expect that to be of greater interest to hose waiting for a Priority Date. The numbers applying will be in the millions.