visa marriage fraud

[MrMrsKnight 0]

Let's hope anti-illegal immigrant doesn't turn into anti-immigrant.

Good point.

Great point

So let me see if I get this right. This mess is going to end up turning all kinds of immigration into something bad. We know more than anyone that there are frauds, but there are honest people wanting to be with their loved ones too.

It seems like they can't find any other reason for the family related immigration process to take so long and now they blame it on frauds, saying that if the love is real, we'll wait. Well I guess that's true isn't it? That's what we've been doing and I don't see it changing anytime soon.....

[meauxna 15]

Awesome post, C. Awesome.

nothing but a soap box to parrot the words the media feeds them as their proof.

ooh, had to come back and tell you how much I appreciate your posts in here too... excellent points & well stated!

I'm just really impressed with everyone's comments, actually,.. don't feel left out, anyone! What a great discussion this board has had with the topic, really!

Edited April 11, 2006 by meauxna

[ChristinaM 0]

I'm a salesperson, Mo

Thank you.

[*Robert* 2]

Awesome post, C. Awesome.

Awesome posts to both meauxna and clmarsh!

After reading this thread, it has certainly cooled my jets as well. I would really hate for anything we do as part of the "Legal Immigrant" community, by getting involved in the Illegal Immigrant issue, to have adverse consequences.

It would really be a sad day indeed, if the majority of this Immigrant Nation turned Anti-Immigrant! Guess we would have to tear down the Statue of Liberty, sink Ellis Island, and plow under all the Chinese gravesites throughout the Pacific states. Immigrants, including my great grandparents, built this country. I can’t see how an Anti-Immigrant movement could ever form, but then again… worse things have happened!

I now agree that it’s best not to get involved in the illegal immigration issue for fear of retaliation to the legal immigrants. Best not to stir the coals.

Edited April 11, 2006 by roi_aggie

[rebeccajo 14]

Mainly because so many have been swimming a river and doing so.

I think I want to take argument with that one, r'jo. I think, and I haven't looked this up, that it may be that that *was* the rule in the long ago days.

Mo, I love the war bride stories. Was part of what we talked about with Widge and hubby in Pittsburgh the afternoon of Wes' interview.

My point though wasn't about marriage visas, although that's the thread topic. My point was that most americans I have met think that if go through the legal process of any visa, you are entitled to work as soon as you hit the shoreline. In other words, they don't realize that the EWI's, by taking work, are doing something many legal immigrants can't immediately do. And they are amazed. Are they amazed because the war brides were able to go to work immediately? I don't know.....

So what can we as an immigrant community do? In my view, stay out of the illegals' issues. Let them deal with their fate, and concentrate on our own. Concentrate on raising awareness of what legal immigrants go through to get here, what the cost is and how long it takes. There's far too much ignorance out there, much of it being purpetrated by the media. Write an op-ed piece, keep a blog and get your name out there, write to your senators, congresspeople, George W. Bush. Make sure that your boss knows that you ARE legal, and keep your status sound. Let's focus on making it better for those who follow us and OUR needs, because the illegals as sure as heck will be focussing on theirs.

Yes, Christina is absolutely right, that is what we need to do. The letter I have written to my representatives asks only that all immigrants be asked to do what was asked of my husband.

Oh, and I have e-mailed Oprah.....

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

But, Reinhard, I think that was merc's point: It's a tactic of the anti-illegal crowd, too.

How so? Who in the anti-illegal crowd is actually watering down any of the illegal immigration schemes? Examples?

We ignore the schemes that are convenient. This loophole or legal recourse was adopted to deal with a specific set of circumstances but in reality, those people should have to go through the same process that we all do. They are essentially given legal amnesty for going outside of the process.

Not really. There are various non-immigrant visa available that one can adjust status from. Some are even dual-intent allowing entry evenif an immigrant intend exists (H1B, for example). Then there are some that one can adjust status from if one meets certain requirements (the K1, for example, falls into that category). It's all within the law and there are rules and procedures in place to deal with it. All of these require a LEGAL ENTRY into the country. That's not even close to an amnesty.

Edited April 11, 2006 by ET-US2004

[Ladylethal 12]

Just as long as don´t get stopped ´cus of this.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

But, Reinhard, I think that was merc's point: It's a tactic of the anti-illegal crowd, too.

How so? Who in the anti-illegal crowd is actually watering down any of the illegal immigration schemes? Examples?

We ignore the schemes that are convenient. This loophole or legal recourse was adopted to deal with a specific set of circumstances but in reality, those people should have to go through the same process that we all do. They are essentially given legal amnesty for going outside of the process.

Not really. There are various non-immigrant visa available that one can adjust status from. Some are even dual-intent allowing entry evenif an immigrant intend exists (H1B, for example). Then there are some that one can adjust status from if one meets certain requirements (the K1, for example, falls into that category). It's all within the law and there are rules and procedures in place to deal with it. All of these require a LEGAL ENTRY into the country. That's not even close to an amnesty.

But a tourist visa is different from those other non-immigrant categories because it indicates that you're only visiting the US for a short period of time, namely for vacation. If you're staying then you're basically abandoning the purpose of the visa and violating one of its primary goals, to allow people to enter the US for short visits. By pretending that anyone entering on a B-visa and then adjusting is following the rules, USCIS just shows its credulity concerning the motives of the visa holder. Noone applying for a B-visa or entering on VWP has to undergo the same scrutiny as someone entering in other visa-categories which assume at least residency intent (you can be a non-immigrant legal alien with temporary residence in the US).

To make this same argument for other classes of non-immigrants is much harder even though it would be possible to argue (and USCIS sometimes does) that anyone entering with a non-immigrant visa has shown non-immigrant intent, which is why foreign students are advised not to marry or adjust status shortly after receiving their visa.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

Awesome post, C. Awesome.

Awesome posts to both meauxna and clmarsh!

After reading this thread, it has certainly cooled my jets as well. I would really hate for anything we do as part of the "Legal Immigrant" community, by getting involved in the Illegal Immigrant issue, to have adverse consequences.

It would really be a sad day indeed, if the majority of this Immigrant Nation turned Anti-Immigrant! Guess we would have to tear down the Statue of Liberty, sink Ellis Island, and plow under all the Chinese gravesites throughout the Pacific states. Immigrants, including my great grandparents, built this country. I can’t see how an Anti-Immigrant movement could ever form, but then again… worse things have happened!

.

As much as America has always been a nation of immigrants, there have at all time been strong sentiments against new arrivals and attempts to curb immigration in various ways. That's how the immigration laws came about and that is why they have become increasingly stricter and convoluted.

There used to be a time when illegal immigration did not exist because anyone could enter at any time. That is not possible anymore, and most likely for good reason. But high influx of immigrants has always resulted in a nativist backlash, beginning in 1790 with laws that only allowed whites to become naturalized citizens, through the 19th century and early twentieth century, to today.

But as you say it is important to realize that a lot of people don't have as differentiated a view on immigration as we do. We're privileged in this way, but we have to make sure that we don't play into the hands of those who follow the old nativist tradition and reject immigration flat out.

[mercuryroad 0]

All of these require a LEGAL ENTRY into the country. That's not even close to an amnesty.

Call it what you want dude.....it's exception processing to deal with a certain group of people that are not following the intent of their visa. They are rewarded for going outside of the normal process and thus granted amnesty from the true process.

These illegal immigrants only want the same legal recourse to handle their exception cases. They did not enter legally but also had no legal options to perform the work that American employers contracted them to do. They want legal process behind the current economic conditions.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

But, Reinhard, I think that was merc's point: It's a tactic of the anti-illegal crowd, too.

How so? Who in the anti-illegal crowd is actually watering down any of the illegal immigration schemes? Examples?

We ignore the schemes that are convenient. This loophole or legal recourse was adopted to deal with a specific set of circumstances but in reality, those people should have to go through the same process that we all do. They are essentially given legal amnesty for going outside of the process.

Not really. There are various non-immigrant visa available that one can adjust status from. Some are even dual-intent allowing entry evenif an immigrant intend exists (H1B, for example). Then there are some that one can adjust status from if one meets certain requirements (the K1, for example, falls into that category). It's all within the law and there are rules and procedures in place to deal with it. All of these require a LEGAL ENTRY into the country. That's not even close to an amnesty.

But a tourist visa is different from those other non-immigrant categories because it indicates that you're only visiting the US for a short period of time, namely for vacation. If you're staying then you're basically abandoning the purpose of the visa and violating one of its primary goals, to allow people to enter the US for short visits. By pretending that anyone entering on a B-visa and then adjusting is following the rules, USCIS just shows its credulity concerning the motives of the visa holder.

There are various scenarios imaginable under which a person that enters the US under a visitor scheme ( B visa or VWP) w/o any intent to remain here and adjust status runs into a situation where this changes during the time the person is here.

All of these require a LEGAL ENTRY into the country. That's not even close to an amnesty.

Call it what you want dude.....it's exception processing to deal with a certain group of people that are not following the intent of their visa. They are rewarded for going outside of the normal process and thus granted amnesty from the true process.

These illegal immigrants only want the same legal recourse to handle their exception cases. They did not enter legally but also had no legal options to perform the work that American employers contracted them to do. They want legal process behind the current economic conditions.

Dude, the former operate within, the latter ouside the law. Thus the distinction of legal vs. illegal.

I may go into Best Buy with the intent to purchase a CD and decide, while there, that I need this new big screen TV. That does not change my initial intent that I had when I entered the store. That's a whole lot different from entering the store with a clear intent not to pay for the goods I am looking to take with me.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

But, Reinhard, I think that was merc's point: It's a tactic of the anti-illegal crowd, too.

How so? Who in the anti-illegal crowd is actually watering down any of the illegal immigration schemes? Examples?

We ignore the schemes that are convenient. This loophole or legal recourse was adopted to deal with a specific set of circumstances but in reality, those people should have to go through the same process that we all do. They are essentially given legal amnesty for going outside of the process.

Not really. There are various non-immigrant visa available that one can adjust status from. Some are even dual-intent allowing entry evenif an immigrant intend exists (H1B, for example). Then there are some that one can adjust status from if one meets certain requirements (the K1, for example, falls into that category). It's all within the law and there are rules and procedures in place to deal with it. All of these require a LEGAL ENTRY into the country. That's not even close to an amnesty.

But a tourist visa is different from those other non-immigrant categories because it indicates that you're only visiting the US for a short period of time, namely for vacation. If you're staying then you're basically abandoning the purpose of the visa and violating one of its primary goals, to allow people to enter the US for short visits. By pretending that anyone entering on a B-visa and then adjusting is following the rules, USCIS just shows its credulity concerning the motives of the visa holder.

There are various scenarios imaginable under which a person that enters the US under a visitor scheme ( B visa or VWP) w/o any intent to remain here and adjust status runs into a situation where this changes during the time the person is here.

Of course, situations change, but theoretically USCIS could expect anyone to return to their home country before applying for immigrant status. Visitor visas are given to visitors who enter with the intention to leave, just as student visas are given to students who enter with the intention to study and then leave. The whole possibility rests on the assumption by USCIS that some people don't enter the country on B2/VWP with the intention to stay. It's not illegal because it is hard to argue intent after an alien is admitted, but the reason why spouses and fiance(e)s have a hard time visiting their SO is due to the fact that visitor visas are more often misused than other visa categories.

[Ladylethal 12]

I do agree that giving illegals a green card is saying "it´s ok you came illegaly, we still want you to stay, here, have a candy".

I think it´s unfair to people who have a real intent to just go visit NY or Disney and get their visas denied ´cus they´re so suspicious of everyone now, with the huge ammount of illegals going to US on B1 visa.

[faith 0]

I now agree that it’s best not to get involved in the illegal immigration issue for fear of retaliation to the legal immigrants. Best not to stir the coals.

No offense but that sounds like you are just sticking your head in the sand.

If you think an issue is wrong and then back away from it just because you are afraid that someone may bash your loved ones because they are immigrants, then you are backing away from the issue.

The people that I have encountered since J moved over here to be with me have been completely for the marriage immigration issues. They understand that love holds no boundaries, and have never accused my husband of stealing a job or taking a ####### job because he should be grateful. His employers he's had since he's been here have been extremely nice about the immigration issues and his past experience and have paid him accordingly and have given him the jobs he is most qualified for. We have encountered no intolerance for the fact that he's not American.

The BEST way to make sure that America in general understands the marriage immigration issue and that they don't confuse it with illegal immigration issues is information. Our stories need to be out there, the real stories need to be heard to refute this ridiculous article.

[pax 0]

I think Faith is right; regardless of a lack of easy answers, or indeed because there are no easy answers, we need to stay involved and informed as individuals and as a community. Not just for our own sake, but for the sake of people in our same or similar situations who'll be coming after us.