Why are AOS allowed at all (in non-exceptional circumstances)?

[RoyalBlue22 0]

I previously asked a question in a thread regarding a potential strategy to propose to and marry my long-time, foreign girlfriend while she is in the US on a tourist visa, and then have her apply for an AOS to a greencard, with her having no prior knowledge of this plan--nor intent to immigrate/apply for the AOS--until her arrival in the country. I got a few comments claiming such a strategy is not permitted/could be illegal, which I appreciated (any feedback is useful, even if it's not the feedback I was hoping for), and then the thread was locked. Fair play, as the Brits say. Seems like K1/CR1 is going to be the way to go.

 

But this raised a more fundamental question for me, which I think is worth posing to the group: Why does the US allow marriage based AOS in the first place? What is the goal of this immigration pathway, as it pertains to the US national interest/our immigration policy in general?

 

The only scenario I can envision where it would seem fair/serve the US national interest for allowing marriage based AOS at all (as opposed to removing that as an option, and requiring the petitioner to return home and file for a CR1/K1), let alone expediting such cases/processing them more quickly than K1/CR1s, would be if there is some dramatic change in circumstances in a person's home country--or their circumstances in that country--meaning that they can't return home safely and apply for a KR1/CR1 there. Maybe a war broke out, a huge natural disaster struck, the Taliban took over and they worked for the old government...essentially the same circumstances that qualify people to be granted asylum/Temporary Protected Status. 

 

If the AOS applicant doesn't even to try to claim to meet that standard, why should their application take any less time than my girlfriend or wife's K1/CR1 application? In so doing, it seems to me that the system is essentially incentivizing (pressuring, really) couples to get prematurely married and adjust their status after only knowing/dating each other for.a short period of time, and meanwhile penalizing couples like me and my girlfriend who decided not to get married prematurely and instead take years of long-distance and in person (as much as possible) courting to get to know each other and our families better.

 

More power to the couples who take the leap quickly and manage to get an AOS processed successfully (sometimes I wish I was one of them), but research shows that longer courting time correlates to higher marital satisfaction and lower divorce rates (https://www.thecut.com/2018/06/do-marriages-last-longer-if-the-couple-dated-longer-first.html), so you'd think those would be outcomes we'd want to promote in our immigration policy. 

 

I'll close with a final question: If AOS were banned except in emergency circumstances (or at least de-prioritized from its current priority over K1/CR1 petitions), might USCIS be able to shift some of those resources to K1/CR1 applications, and shorten those times? 

Edited December 14, 2022 by RoyalBlue22
Clarifying title to better reflect thrust of discussion

[Yorkie62 53]

I for example, came to the US on a student visa (later a work visa) and met my now wife whilst living here. Would you really suggest that I (or we) should move to the UK so we can apply for CR-1? How would she legally reside in the UK while we apply for my GC? I have (or had) the legal right to live and work in this country by my own volition, why should there not be a pathway for me to directly adjust my status?

 

You seem to have a problem with people abusing AOS, which most here agree is an issue.

[Boiler 45,441]

Your premise seems to work from the basis that the rules and regulations are logical, they are not.

 

We can only comment on how they are, there are no end of bills, NGOs whatever promulgating change, do not remember ever seeing one worried about this.

 

 

[RoyalBlue22 0]

15 minutes ago, Yorkie62 said:

I for example, came to the US on a student visa (later a work visa) and met my now wife whilst living here. Would you really suggest that I (or we) should move to the UK so we can apply for CR-1? How would she legally reside in the UK while we apply for my GC? I have (or had) the legal right to live and work in this country by my own volition, why should there not be a pathway for me to directly adjust my status?

 

You seem to have a problem with people abusing AOS, which most here agree is an issue.

Thanks for the response! Thinking about it a bit, I actually don't have a problem with AOS as a concept, but just in its execution. Both the "prior intent to adjust status" exclusion and the fact that it takes less time to process than either the K1/CR1, create a situation where your relationship is deemed to be superior to mine from an immigration prioritization perspective (even if our spouses/gfs were from the same country), and I just don't see why that should be the case.

 

My girlfriend as well could go out and apply for a graduate study program in the US (she's likely to do so) and put herself in the same situation you were previously in as a foreign student here. But because of the fact that we decided before she entered the country that we wanted to get married and adjust her status to take advantage of the shorter processing times (just as you did, only you made that decision while in country), we get the short end of the stick? It just seems like an odd value judgement to make/codify into our policy. And yet people on this website seem to want crucify people who try to find ways around the "prior immigration intent" exclusion...go figure. 

[Yorkie62 53]

The issue that everyone is facing is that timelines have gotten crazy, so you're seeing these discrepancies arise. It's not really a case of who is more deserving than who to get processed faster, it's just the way the cookie crumbles.

 

I'm in Seattle, so the exact same application I send is taking 12-24 months longer than people applying in different cities because the system can't (or won't) catch up fast enough with changes in the real world. Is that fair? I don't know. It's not equal, but fair is a different question. It's the way it is and it's frustrating. It's a sad acquiescence, but there's not much you can do, which is why I suppose some people in less fortunate positions than I will skirt or even break the rules.

[OldUser 6,602]

17 minutes ago, RoyalBlue22 said:

And yet people on this website seem to want crucify people who try to find ways around the "prior immigration intent" exclusion...go figure. 

Better to be crucified by folks on the forum than by Immigration Officer during stokes interview!

 

19 minutes ago, RoyalBlue22 said:

My girlfriend as well could go out and apply for a graduate study program in the US (she's likely to do so) and put herself in the same situation you were previously in as a foreign student here. 

She could come to study, she just cannot be 100% sure she will be marrying and staying in the US. 

 

25 minutes ago, RoyalBlue22 said:

Both the "prior intent to adjust status" exclusion and the fact that it takes less time to process than either the K1/CR1, create a situation where your relationship is deemed to be superior to mine from an immigration prioritization perspective (even if our spouses/gfs were from the same country), and I just don't see why that should be the case.

While I see your point, I do not agree with you fully.

- AOS and CR1 take about the same time nowadays.

- If AOS is from B1/B2 the beneficiary cannot work legally in the US for a while, and fully depends on the US spouse. At least the beneficiary usually can work back in their country while waiting for CR1 visa.

- Beneficiary going through AOS usually cannot travel anywhere outside of the US for some time, even for emergency. Beneficiary waiting for CR1 visa can take trips anywhere other than US (and sometimes to US) freely.

- AFAIK consular interviews are much shorter than AOS interviews at USCIS local field office.

- CR1 applicants do not have to worry about immigrant intent, whereas some AOS applicants go through increased scrutiny and have to prove they did not plan to adjust.

 

Of course, there's many downsides to CR1. But to suggest AOS is walk in the park and doesn't have any downside would be unfair.

 

[SalishSea 17,801]

5 hours ago, RoyalBlue22 said:

I previously asked a question in a thread regarding a potential strategy to propose to and marry my long-time, foreign girlfriend while she is in the US on a tourist visa, and then have her apply for an AOS to a greencard, with her having no prior knowledge of this plan--nor intent to immigrate/apply for the AOS--until her arrival in the country. I got a few comments claiming such a strategy is not permitted/could be illegal, which I appreciated (any feedback is useful, even if it's not the feedback I was hoping for), and then the thread was locked. Fair play, as the Brits say. Seems like K1/CR1 is going to be the way to go.

 

But this raised a more fundamental question for me, which I think is worth posing to the group: Why does the US allow marriage based AOS in the first place? What is the goal of this immigration pathway, as it pertains to the US national interest/our immigration policy in general?

 

The only scenario I can envision where it would seem fair/serve the US national interest for allowing marriage based AOS at all (as opposed to removing that as an option, and requiring the petitioner to return home and file for a CR1/K1), let alone expediting such cases/processing them more quickly than K1/CR1s, would be if there is some dramatic change in circumstances in a person's home country--or their circumstances in that country--meaning that they can't return home safely and apply for a KR1/CR1 there. Maybe a war broke out, a huge natural disaster struck, the Taliban took over and they worked for the old government...essentially the same circumstances that qualify people to be granted asylum/Temporary Protected Status. 

 

If the AOS applicant doesn't even to try to claim to meet that standard, why should their application take any less time than my girlfriend or wife's K1/CR1 application? In so doing, it seems to me that the system is essentially incentivizing (pressuring, really) couples to get prematurely married and adjust their status after only knowing/dating each other for.a short period of time, and meanwhile penalizing couples like me and my girlfriend who decided not to get married prematurely and instead take years of long-distance and in person (as much as possible) courting to get to know each other and our families better.

 

More power to the couples who take the leap quickly and manage to get an AOS processed successfully (sometimes I wish I was one of them), but research shows that longer courting time correlates to higher marital satisfaction and lower divorce rates (https://www.thecut.com/2018/06/do-marriages-last-longer-if-the-couple-dated-longer-first.html), so you'd think those would be outcomes we'd want to promote in our immigration policy. 

 

I'll close with a final question: If AOS were banned except in emergency circumstances (or at least de-prioritized from its current priority over K1/CR1 petitions), might USCIS be able to shift some of those resources to K1/CR1 applications, and shorten those times? 

It is seen by people who went about it the “right” way as jumping the line.

 

And in terms of the laws pertaining to intent, what do you think would happen if your gf was completely honest at POE and told CBP that she intends to marry and AOS to stay whilst on a non immigrant visa or ESTA?   Would she be admitted?

[Daphne . 1,852]

AOS from non-immigrant visas unfortunately is abused by many. And with that I mean that the couple/individual already knew that they were going to adjust status once they were let into the US. And for others, the circumstances genuinely changed and they have every right to adjust status .

 

For the people who abuse the system, I feel a lot of comfort knowing that the adjustment of status process is not fun at all. As much as these people think that it is awesome that they managed to stay in the US, they will soon realize that not being able to work or leave the US isn't that much fun after all. And then we see posts like "how can I expedite?", "I need to expedite because we have financial hardship" or " I need to expedite my AP because I need to attend XYX in my home country" . 

 

As much as I tell people that AOS is not the best invention since sliced bread, they won't listen and underestimate how challenging the process is. I wouldn't want to trade places with them.

[JeanneAdil 6,489]

years ago the way the process worked was a fiancee or  came to USA,  interviewed here and then was approved or denied 

 

when and why it changed i could not locate by doing internet search

 

But as far as why some can AOS and others can't?   Ask one of the Senators on the committee

 

https://www.senate.gov/general/committee_membership/committee_memberships_SSGA.htm

 

when u write ask also why they 

approve DACA and then take it away and then approve it again (over and over)?

why they have a 10 year bar but then have a waiver for it?

why they allow joint sponsors when the poverty level is so low?

why they say "criminal past" is a "no no "  but have a waiver for that too?

why they say some student visa holders have to return home for 2 years but then allow a waiver?

 

Seems all rules are made and then rules are made to break the rules 

[Ontarkie 14,214]

~~Moved to General Immigration, from AOS From W,S & T Visas - As this is snot a processing question but a discussion about the different processes.~~

[Ontarkie 14,214]

1 hour ago, JeanneAdil said:

years ago the way the process worked was a fiancee or  came to USA,  interviewed here and then was approved or denied 

 

when and why it changed i could not locate by doing internet search

 

But as far as why some can AOS and others can't?   Ask one of the Senators on the committee

 

https://www.senate.gov/general/committee_membership/committee_memberships_SSGA.htm

 

when u write ask also why they 

approve DACA and then take it away and then approve it again (over and over)?

why they have a 10 year bar but then have a waiver for it?

why they allow joint sponsors when the poverty level is so low?

why they say "criminal past" is a "no no "  but have a waiver for that too?

why they say some student visa holders have to return home for 2 years but then allow a waiver?

 

Seems all rules are made and then rules are made to break the rules 

Yes sometime around the late 80's early 90's my Aunt did just that. Arrived at the border with all their stuff along with kids and moved, married and adjusted.  So sometime after that it was stopped for at least the Canadians. 

[Daphne . 1,852]

3 hours ago, JeanneAdil said:

 

 

when u write ask also why they 

approve DACA and then take it away and then approve it again (over and over)?

why they have a 10 year bar but then have a waiver for it?

why they allow joint sponsors when the poverty level is so low?

why they say "criminal past" is a "no no "  but have a waiver for that too?

why they say some student visa holders have to return home for 2 years but then allow a waiver?

 

Seems all rules are made and then rules are made to break the rules 

This is so spot on! And to add: overstay and unauthorized work are big no’s but get forgiven if married to a USC.
 

So even the advice that somebody who adjusts status cannot work sometimes sounds silly (and I get laughed at on Reddit) because all will be good once married to a USC 😅

[JeanneAdil 6,489]

2 hours ago, Ontarkie said:

Yes sometime around the late 80's early 90's my Aunt did just that. Arrived at the border with all their stuff along with kids and moved, married and adjusted.  So sometime after that it was stopped for at least the Canadians. 

it was an overhall of the system to interview abroad

 

but the funny part is the questions didn't change

some favorite questions were 

1 what color is spouse's house?

2 what color is bedroom carpet ?

3/ What restaurant do u often eat at in US?

 

these types of questions that someone would know only if living her with spouse continued  even in 2009 when we first interviewed

[Boiler 45,441]

7 minutes ago, JeanneAdil said:

it was an overhall of the system to interview abroad

 

but the funny part is the questions didn't change

some favorite questions were 

1 what color is spouse's house?

2 what color is bedroom carpet ?

3/ What restaurant do u often eat at in US?

 

these types of questions that someone would know only if living her with spouse continued  even in 2009 when we first interviewed

I could have answered those questions if asked.

[iwannaplay54 985]

19 hours ago, RoyalBlue22 said:

Thanks for the response! Thinking about it a bit, I actually don't have a problem with AOS as a concept, but just in its execution. Both the "prior intent to adjust status" exclusion and the fact that it takes less time to process than either the K1/CR1, create a situation where your relationship is deemed to be superior to mine from an immigration prioritization perspective (even if our spouses/gfs were from the same country), and I just don't see why that should be the case.

 

My girlfriend as well could go out and apply for a graduate study program in the US (she's likely to do so) and put herself in the same situation you were previously in as a foreign student here. But because of the fact that we decided before she entered the country that we wanted to get married and adjust her status to take advantage of the shorter processing times (just as you did, only you made that decision while in country), we get the short end of the stick? It just seems like an odd value judgement to make/codify into our policy. And yet people on this website seem to want crucify people who try to find ways around the "prior immigration intent" exclusion...go figure. 

A student or someone here on a work visa who gets married and adjusts status gets enthusiastic support.  They’re already here under one status, their circumstances change, they adjust status, and that is what the process is for.

In your previous post you expressed a desire for your significant other to enter on a non-immigrant visa with immigrant intent.  You spelled it out.  The act of filling out that application for one reason (tourist) but intending to use it for another reason (immigration) is illegal and we can not and will not advise you to do that.  We did not write that law and we did not set those rules.  

Edited December 15, 2022 by iwannaplay54