N-400 interview scheduled and Divorce pending

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

10 minutes ago, TexasIndependence said:

Hi! No it's the section of the code for . "Married persons and employees of certain nonprofit organizations". If you look at manual, marital union is waived completely for battered spouses. No requirement at all. 

 

"A person subjected to battery or extreme cruelty by his or her U.S. citizen spouse is exempt from the following naturalization requirements:[18]

 

Married to the U.S. citizen spouse at the time of filing the naturalization application;

 

Living in marital union with the citizen spouse for at least 3 years at the time of filing the naturalization application; and

 

Applicant’s spouse has U.S. citizenship from the time of filing until the time the applicant takes the Oath of Allegiance.[19]

 

The spouse must meet all other eligibility requirements for naturalization.[20]"

 

 

Here is the thread from VJ that discusses this:

 

https://www.visajourney.com/forums/topic/687542-new-policy-marriage-and-living-in-marital-union-requirements-for-naturalization/page/2/

USCIS itself states the regulations from one source and the other are conflicting. 

Advising an applicant to favor an inconsistent least stringent update is pretty risky.

 

And why did you say hi if we've been arguing for over an hour? 😂

 

[TexasIndependence 3]

8 minutes ago, Allaboutwaiting said:

USCIS itself states the regulations from one source and the other are conflicting. 

Advising an applicant to favor an inconsistent least stringent update is pretty risky.

 

And why did you say hi if we've been arguing for over an hour? 😂

 

Hi! Because, no matter the situation, why not say Hi and be polite. None of us is advising here unless we are lawyers. I am not a lawyer, ergo I am not advising. Just chiming in but ultimately it's up to the OP to retain a lawyer and double check.

 

USCIS does say regulations are conflicting. But it also says that USCIS itself chooses the language of the INA in requiring marital union up to filing.

 

The original VJ post explains it very well, and it was contributed to by some highly rated contributors. One of them being geowrian.

 

However, again, I am not a lawyer and, if I were in the OP's shoes I would consult with one if she decides to go to the interview. Also immigration officers are not lawyers and make mistakes from time to time. That's why it is, imho, always a great idea to have a highly rated one in attendance.

Edited January 29, 2022 by TexasIndependence

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

3 minutes ago, TexasIndependence said:

Hi! Because, no matter the situation, why not say Hi and be polite. None of us is advising here unless we are lawyers. I am not a lawyer, ergo I am not advising. Just chiming in but ultimately it's up to the OP to retain a lawyer and double check.

 

USCIS does say regulations are conflicting. But it also says that USCIS itself chooses the language of the INA in requiring marital union up to filing.

 

The original VJ post explains it very well, and it was contributed to by some highly rated contributors. One of them being geowrian.

 

However, again, I am not a lawyer and, if I were in the OP's shoes I would consult with one if she decides to go to the interview. Also immigration officers are not lawyers and make mistakes from time to time. That's why it is, imho, always a great idea to have a highly rated one in trendance.

Let's agree to disagree. 

[TexasIndependence 3]

Just now, Allaboutwaiting said:

Let's agree to disagree. 

It is, indeed, a good resolution. I enjoyed this conversation. Have a good weekend!

 

For the OP: consult a good lawyer if you decided to attend and discuss your situation with them. Good luck! This is just a forum, and, doesn't substitute the knowledge a lawyer has of immigration law .

[Allaboutwaiting 2,503]

1 minute ago, TexasIndependence said:

It is, indeed, a good resolution. I enjoyed this conversation. Have a good weekend!

Thanks. Same to you. 

[TexasIndependence 3]

Just now, Allaboutwaiting said:

Thanks. Same to you. 

Thanks and good luck on your journey!

[Tanish 197]

On 1/28/2022 at 7:05 PM, TexasIndependence said:

Hi! You are NOT required to live in martial union after you file. https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-2

 

USCIS changed their policy in 10/2018. Marital union is ONLY required 3 years prior to filing.

 

https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-g-chapter-3

 

The existence of a legally valid marriage is the requirement between filing and oath. Hope this helps. This is their own manual and they MUST abide by it.

 

Most people and lawyers don't know this but it's their official policy. Look up "living in marital union update" on Google and it will clearly tell you how the policy changed.

 

Check with a GOOD lawyer who knows this part of the law. If they don't know it, highlight these policies to them.

From the link you provided:

 

D. Marital Union and Living in Marital Union

1. Married and Living in Marital Union

In general, all naturalization applicants filing on the basis of marriage to a U.S. citizen must continue to be the spouse of a U.S. citizen from the time of filing the naturalization application until the applicant takes the Oath of Allegiance. In addition, some spousal naturalization provisions require that the applicant “live in marital union” with his or her citizen spouse for at least 3 years immediately preceding the date of filing the naturalization application. ^[19] USCIS considers an applicant to “live in marital union” with his or her citizen spouse if the applicant and the citizen actually reside together.

An applicant does not meet the married and “living in marital union” requirements if:

• The applicant is not residing with his or her U.S. citizen spouse at the time of filing or during the time in which the applicant is required to be living in marital union with the U.S. citizen spouse; or

• The marital relationship is terminated at any time prior to taking the Oath of Allegiance.

If the applicant ceases to reside with his or her U.S. citizen spouse between the time of filing and the time at which the applicant takes the Oath of Allegiance, the officer should consider whether the applicant met the living in marital union requirement at the time of filing.

There are limited circumstances where an applicant may be able to establish that he or she is living in marital union with his or her citizen spouse even though the applicant does not actually reside with the citizen spouse. ^[20] 

In all cases where it is applicable, the burden is on the applicant to establish that he or she has lived in marital union with his or her U.S. citizen spouse for the required period of time. ^[21] 

[Vengatore 53]

LOL this topic got really weird. So much passive aggressiveness in the air 🤣🤣🤣

[Tanish 197]

13 hours ago, Vengatore said:

LOL this topic got really weird. So much passive aggressiveness in the air 🤣🤣🤣

It's not passive aggressive. It's the matter of the fact and most importantly helping OP.

[Vengatore 53]

15 hours ago, Tanish said:

It's not passive aggressive. It's the matter of the fact and most importantly helping OP.

 

Yeah whatever lol

[SoExhausted 7]

On 2/2/2022 at 11:14 PM, Tanish said:

It's not passive aggressive. It's the matter of the fact and most importantly helping OP.

Anyways loved the exchanges between you all. I learned a lot, if this was in person we’d possibly all be friends. Lol good luck on your journey.