Entered illegally, Applying for Green Card or Citizenship

[SusnOwen 162]

2 hours ago, Demise said:

There's a few (unusual) options which allow someone to adjust in US after an entry without inspection:

Asylum

Cancellation of removal

VAWA

T/U Visa

SIJ

Some other special immigrant categories that include too few people to bother listing them individually

Basically all immigrant categories if covered under 245(i)

Section 7 of Central Intelligence Act

Registry (living in US since Jan 1st, 1972)

 

Like, in this case, if the friend was born in US (or is otherwise a USC or LPR) Cancellation of Removal would be available if extremely difficult, Asylum similarly could be available if there's been a significant change (for the worse) in conditions in their country of origin. Like you'd need to tell me more about the plan and what the lawyer in question called it for me to give you more details as to how you do the particular avenue of relief.

 

I definitely disagree with the users who perpetuate the "you can't do s**t after EWI" meme, you generally can't or have to get an I-601A waiver to do consular processing but options if unusual and generally not applicable do exist.

245(1) would only be available to them if a petition had been filed before 2001, unless they revise the law.

[Mike E 11,742]

19 hours ago, MaryLoves said:

Can someone who entered the US illegally by crossing the U.S. border and have remained in the U.S. for over a few decades apply for a green card or citizenship, being inside the U.S.?

 

What does a “few decades” mean? Does it mean before January 1, 1972?

[Boiler 46,317]

Dems are seeking yo move Registry forward to 2011

[Mike E 11,742]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

Dems are seeking yo move Registry forward to 2011

Sure and the senate parliamentarian isn’t going to do it. I believe she’d go as far 1986.  Anyway back to the less hypothetical.  

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

If I had a dollar for every time someone posted on here what a politician or party said they wanted to do immigration wise and it never happened ….

 

 

 

Edited October 14, 2021 by SusieQQQ

[aaron2020 11,651]

Here's the bottom line.  Given what OP has stated, there is ZERO chances of the parents being able to adjust status or qualify for a waiver.  

[Sandra G. 5,079]

20 hours ago, MaryLoves said:

Thank you everyone for answering so quickly!

 

Let me give you guys more details of what my friend told me.

My friend is not a USC, as she was brought to the U.S. by her parents when she was a baby. She has been on DACA.

She has younger siblings, who were all born here in the US, and hence are USC. 

 

This "attorney" told the parents that they can apply for green card/citizenship being in the US (never having to leave America) by having their son petition them.

The son is a USC, over 21, with no criminal background. The parents never want to leave this country because they don't want to go through the 10-year ban, and I think that's the part the attorney is trying to lie about and where she is trying to take advantage of the parents.

 

Also, none of their family members has been in military service. Nor has the son, who the attorney claims can petition the parents.

His son can petition for his parents but the parents must file the waiver I-601A.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-of-us-citizens/provisional-unlawful-presence-waivers

 

"Since March 4, 2013, certain immigrant visa applicants who are immediate relatives (spouses, children and parents) of U.S. citizens can apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers  before they leave the United States for their consular interview.  On August 29, 2016, the provisional unlawful presence waiver process was expanded to all individuals statutorily eligible for an immigrant visa and a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence in the United States. Aliens who are not eligible to adjust their status in the United States must travel abroad and obtain an immigrant visa. Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility to overcome the unlawful presence bars under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act before they can return. Typically, these aliens cannot apply for a waiver until after they have appeared for their immigrant visa interview abroad, and a Department of State (DOS) consular officer has determined that they are inadmissible to the United States."

 

That being said, they will travel to their home Country to attend the interview, the U.S Consulate will ask them to  to file the I-601A waiver, they must wait the waiver decision abroad.USCIS will take 12/14 months to adjudicate the waiver.

[Sandra G. 5,079]

20 hours ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

He can as he's a USC, but they simply cannot get residence without leaving for 10 years. 

Your information is wrong, they can file abroad the I-601A waiver to overcome the  10-year bar.

https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-of-us-citizens/provisional-unlawful-presence-waivers

[HRQX 4,145]

14 minutes ago, sandranj said:

but the parents must file the waiver I-601A.

Do the parents even have a "Qualifying Relative" for the 212(a)(9)(B)(v) waiver? https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/forms/i-601ainstr.pdf "You must show that you have a U.S. citizen or LPR spouse or parent (qualifying relative)"

 

See INA 212(a)(9)(B)(v)

9 minutes ago, sandranj said:

Your information is wrong, they can file abroad the I-601A waiver to overcome the  10-year bar.

Also the provisional waiver must be filed before they leave the US. I.e. the provisional waiver cannot be filed from "abroad."

Edited October 14, 2021 by HRQX

[HRQX 4,145]

21 hours ago, MaryLoves said:

The son is a USC, over 21, with no criminal background.

Would he be willing to enlist in the US Armed Forces?

[SusieQQQ 11,587]

1 hour ago, sandranj said:

His son can petition for his parents but the parents must file the waiver I-601A.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/family/family-of-us-citizens/provisional-unlawful-presence-waivers

 

"Since March 4, 2013, certain immigrant visa applicants who are immediate relatives (spouses, children and parents) of U.S. citizens can apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers  before they leave the United States for their consular interview.  On August 29, 2016, the provisional unlawful presence waiver process was expanded to all individuals statutorily eligible for an immigrant visa and a waiver of inadmissibility for unlawful presence in the United States. Aliens who are not eligible to adjust their status in the United States must travel abroad and obtain an immigrant visa. Individuals who have accrued more than 180 days of unlawful presence while in the United States must obtain a waiver of inadmissibility to overcome the unlawful presence bars under section 212(a)(9)(B) of the Immigration and Nationality Act before they can return. Typically, these aliens cannot apply for a waiver until after they have appeared for their immigrant visa interview abroad, and a Department of State (DOS) consular officer has determined that they are inadmissible to the United States."

 

That being said, they will travel to their home Country to attend the interview, the U.S Consulate will ask them to  to file the I-601A waiver, they must wait the waiver decision abroad.USCIS will take 12/14 months to adjudicate the waiver.

Question, uscis says the above can take place if 

 

Believe you are or will be inadmissible only because of a period of unlawful presence in the United States that was:

- More than 180 days, but less than 1 year, during a single stay (INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I)); or

- 1 year or more during a single stay (INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II)).

 

Is the EWI not a separate inadmissibility from the unlawful presence? (edit: i think this is the 212 waiver that is also needed then?)

Edited October 14, 2021 by SusieQQQ

[HRQX 4,145]

9 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

Is the EWI not a separate inadmissibility

Just 1 EWI is not an issue. What becomes its own issue is 2 or more EWIs:

 

9 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

(edit: i think this is the 212 waiver that is also needed then?)

No. Form I-212 would not be needed.

Edited October 14, 2021 by HRQX

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

22 minutes ago, SusieQQQ said:

Question, uscis says the above can take place if 

 

Believe you are or will be inadmissible only because of a period of unlawful presence in the United States that was:

- More than 180 days, but less than 1 year, during a single stay (INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I)); or

- 1 year or more during a single stay (INA section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II)).

 

Is the EWI not a separate inadmissibility from the unlawful presence?

9 FAM 302.9-2  (U) Present Without Admission or Parole - INA 212(a)(6)(A)

9 FAM 302.9-2(A)  (U) Grounds

(CT:VISA-1358;   09-10-2021)

(U) INA 212(a)(6)(A) provides that an individual who is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, or who arrives in the United States at an undesignated time or place is ineligible.

[HRQX 4,145]

5 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

9 FAM 302.9-2  (U) Present Without Admission or Parole - INA 212(a)(6)(A)

9 FAM 302.9-2(A)  (U) Grounds

(CT:VISA-1358;   09-10-2021)

(U) INA 212(a)(6)(A) provides that an individual who is present in the United States without being admitted or paroled, or who arrives in the United States at an undesignated time or place is ineligible.

...
9 FAM 302.9-2(B)  (U) Application

(CT:VISA-1358;   09-10-2021)

(U) INA 212(a)(6)(A)(i) does not apply at the time of visa application because it applies only to individuals who are either present or arriving in the United States.

 

https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030209.html @SusieQQQ

Edited October 14, 2021 by HRQX

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

4 minutes ago, HRQX said:

...
9 FAM 302.9-2(B)  (U) Application

(CT:VISA-1358;   09-10-2021)

(U) INA 212(a)(6)(A)(i) does not apply at the time of visa application because it applies only to individuals who are either present or arriving in the United States.

 

https://fam.state.gov/fam/09FAM/09FAM030209.html @SusieQQQ

Now, in reality, related to OP's case, what does this mean?