randomstairs

That's not a serious argument. Are unlawful non-citizens not subject to the US jurisdiction? If so, then how can the US even enforce its laws against them? Do they have the diplomatic immunity? I read it somewhere on the internet: her own Twitter ("now X") feed.

That's not a serious challenge. The wording is unambiguous: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Candance Owens who promotes extreme antisemitic conspiracy theories? That Candace Owens?

Irrelevant?

This might be a ToS violation. You can't just accuse someone of lying about the most fundamental aspects of their lives just because you don't like them. Unless you provide strong evidence for Harris's not being born in the US, this is blatant slander, and, at the very least, inflammatory language.

It is an outlandish idea because it proposes amending the 14th Amendment, which provides for a lot more than just the birthright citizenship. In fact, it may be one of the most fundamental parts of the post-Civil War Constitution.

If there was no plea it most likely won't count as a conviction. They may still enquire about what actually happened.

Did the defendant enter a guilty plea? If not, the lack of conviction will probably make them eligible for the visa (not a conviction for USCIS purposes). But, if conviction for immigration purposes has been established, this offense may count as a CIMT (crime involving moral turpitude), which could preclude the applicant from being admitted. Talking to a lawyer may be a good idea.

Yes, that's exactly what I plan to do. I wasn't sure if it could work, so it's good to hear from someone with a first hand experience.

I could try that the next time. When I check-in in the US I always use the US passport (that's my understanding of the law), so I fill in the Japanese immigration form with the same pp number.

Sounds like she used her NZ passport when leaving NZ and showed the US passport when entering the US. She also might had left the US with the NZ passport being used for checking-in/buying the ticket. This method is recommended by many dual citizens, but I've always been skeptical about it. The problem arises when buying a round trip from the US to the country of second citizenship. I blame the airlines. This problem is even more exposed when traveling between a third country and the country of non-US citizenship. I've been using my US passport everywhere, including the EU, where I have the other citizenship. I often travel to Japan and, ofc, use the US passport to enter. However, with the new EU electronic authorization rule, airlines will demand to see if I'm authorized to enter the EU (from Japan). Using a different passport when leaving Japan could easily create an overstay there, so that's not an option. If worse comes to worse, I'll travel to the EU via a land border port of entry, excluding the annoying airlines from the process. Also, for anyone who may be interested: Using the non-US passport may make it difficult to obtain a TS security clearance if you're applying for certain gov positions.

The risk is much higher if you're on a visa, though. I would buy the ticket with the passport that has the US visa, skip the electronic check-in, and do it in person, showing the passport of the destination country as a proof of entry authorization. CBP might not catch their departure otherwise, which is a huge risk.

That's almost exactly the problem with US/EU dual citizens now with the ETIAS. We are supposed to exit the US with the US passport and enter the EU with the EU one. The airlines will demand to see the ETIAS for US citizens but dual citizens aren't eligible. My proposed solution: check in/buy the ticket with the UK passport bc that's in the CBP system! If the airline asks for NZ electronic authorization (or whatever the equivalent is) show them your NZ passport at the check in.

It only depends on your risk-aversion. I'm highly risk-averse when it comes to anything immigration, for example, and I would definitely apply ASAP and postpone/cancel the trips, especially in the light of the most unpredictable admin in modern US history taking over. But that's me.

Nope. She got the EB1A.

Not cutting the funding per se, but his admin can use other means to slow down the legal immigration. They could interfere with the workforce at USCIS, but also keep the DoS from operating normally. Their loathing of merit-based civil service employees, especially the Foreign Service is notorious. No one knows where this is gonna go, but my concern would be more in regards to the DoS (embassies, consulates, etc) than to USCIS.

That depends on the country. In Australia if you're refused entry you are automatically unlawfully present, for example. It's usually best to interpret questions literally. So, the answer should be YES. They can explain that they were only refused entry due to the travel agent's error.

This sounds like a REMOVAL from a country. (In the US they can offer one to withdraw their application to enter, but I don't know how it works in other countries.) Answer YES and explain.

Not much you can do, really. Give it some time before the next visit. I believe if they search you physically, first, they can do that only with your permission, of course, and, second, a female officer would perform the search. Hopefully now, that you have been already scrutinized thoroughly, they won't repeat the procedure. However, the fact that you were only permitted to stay for one month probably means that they see you as an immigration risk (having a close family member in the US is always gonna create that).

In some cases Notice to Appear is sent to people who are *already* in deportation proceedings. If they change their address they could always claim to have never received the notice and are thus not liable for not showing up at the Immigration Judge (or some other appointment). But with the requirement to notify USCIS of address changes, the government can disregard such a claim and proceed with the deportation. On the other hand, if such a person has reported the change of address, and the notice is nevertheless sent to the old one, then they can still claim to have never received it and get another appointment (thus they are protected from the deportation enforcement). That's the most logical explanation I've seen. So, this has about zero effect on you or other regular cases.

In terms of policy nothing can significantly change until January. But in terms of flights or other logistics there could be some unforeseen national security incidents, given that the results of the election will likely be disputed and the recent history. Overall I don't think that's likely to happen but, everything being equal, if your flight options are 11/4 or 11/5, I'd pick the former.

You have to permanently reside (and intend to reside) in the US to maintain the LPR status (green card). You must file taxes in the US as a resident. Even with a re-entry permit, filing taxes in the US as a non-resident is grounds for abandoning your status.

I'm referring to filing the N-400 online. A missing field or a signature could be a reason for a rejection (a rejection is not a denial). The electronic form will output an error if anything like that happens, so you can easily fix it before submitting it. And, as mentioned earlier, you'll get the PDFs of the receipts and other notices right in your account, so no need to worry about the mail.

She will almost certainly be a US citizen two years after filing the N-400, but if nothing happens in a year or so, file the I-90 then if you're concerned. Also, filing online is not only faster but much safer too! You'll get the receipts immediately (as well as other notices, including the interview date/time notice!) and the system can eliminate a bunch of potential reasons for rejection.

Yeah, my understanding is that the name change has to go through other institutions (a court?) outside the USCIS, so it can take a while. It doesn't sound like anything unusual in terms of the waiting time. As you know by now, it is highly recommended not to apply for the name change before becoming a citizen.