SansTortoise

For what it’s worth, depending on the U.S. state it is entirely possible to be charged with a criminal minor traffic violation for speeding (in some states once you hit 81 it becomes a criminal charge even if the speed limit was 70mph, but they’re deemed minor still on most forms you have to fill out.) Comes up a ton in professional licensing where I’m from since the criminal charge comes up on background checks even if pled down and even though they fall into the minor traffic violation category the licensing laws exempt from causes of moral character concern. Advice licensing boards give applicants is the same advice for OP — disclose and explain in factual terms. Stick to the facts. Presumably the consulate in Montreal has seen people who’ve lived in Ireland. They’ll be able to distinguish between actual concerns impacting moral character and traffic violations that show up on criminal reports since it’s not an issue unique to Ireland.

It’s a reasonable question; my reply to pushbrk mentioned that I think I got the medical tourism phrase from an AMA with a CBP agent on it. Wasn’t able to find the exact thread but did find one of them by the same confirmed agent: https://www.reddit.com/r/askimmigration/s/Vt5GothEfk Used to do it annually before deleting his account and this question always came up. Response was always that CBP viewed it as a medical use of a ESTA or existing B2 and the primary concern was becoming a public charge. That’s one agent, but it’s consistent with the information posted on the CBP website, which gives it credibility.

Yep — typo, apologies. Medical tourism was probably loose language. I think I pulled it from a Reddit AMA with a CBP officer where this topic came up and that was the language they used to explain why they’d admit pregnant people. The important thing to note in OP’s case is she has a valid ESTA and is from a VWP country and they would be coming to the US on an ESTA to give birth. Medical treatment is listed as a valid use of an ESTA, and if they needed additional reasons visiting a spouse so that they could be present for the birth would be a reasonable use: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/us-visas/tourism-visit/visa-waiver-program.html CBP has a help article on the topic of both the decision at the border and at the consulate: https://www.help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article1838?language=en_US The primary consideration at the border is whether or not they’ll be a ward of the state, which presumably if OP’s husband adds her to his health insurance she wouldn’t be. There is not a blanket policy of denying pregnant individuals coming to the U.S. to give birth by CBP. Applying for a B visa for the primary purpose of giving birth is automatically denied by the consulate. Singapore is a VWP participant so that wouldn’t be applicable. There’s not a separate visa needed to visit the U.S. for medical treatment if someone has an ESTA. My point was it’s an option for OP because she’s from a VWP country. Whether she prefers that or CRBA is up to her,

For what it’s worth if you do want to give birth in the U.S.: medical tourism is a perfectly valid use of ESTA and your husband still has time to add you to his health insurance for next year. You would not need to apply for a B visa. If open enrollment has closed for 2025, he should be able to email HR to make changes (usually) and regardless getting married is a qualifying event to change health insurance elections. Advantage of a U.S. birth certificate is that they’re incredibly easy to replace when they inevitably get lost. Less so for CRBA. What you prefer to do really depends on your preferences and situation. On CRBA also make sure your husband meets the physical presence in the U.S. requirements if you choose to go that route (5 years in the US, two of which must be after 18.) You need proof of this. Easiest way to prove is school transcripts and employment verification letters. If he has easy access to university and high school transcripts it should be fine. There’s other ways, but transcripts are the easiest.

Book a round trip ticket to Guam for $500 at some point before the visa expires then use the endorsed visa as proof of LPR status to enter the U.S. later in the summer. That’d be the cheapest way to handle it for you given your location. If you’re already past 2 years of marriage, like saying it’s IR-1 suggests, only real consideration for when to book the flight would be to make sure you plan to enter the U.S. within 6 months of getting the visa endorsed in Guam (or other Port of Entry; just using Guam here because it’d be the cheapest and easiest logistically for you.)

BIA precedents from the 80s are still binding on immigration judges absent a precedent reversing. There’s binding circuit court rulings from the 90s also making clear that pre-conceived intent does not trigger an automatic lifetime ban. The reason there aren’t more recent ones is that it’s settled law the immigration judges and USCIS follow, so it doesn’t get to BIA. Like I said, there’s many practical reasons not to enter with pre-conceived intent: the politics of it is certainly is one of them. As is the fact that no one wants to win in an administrative tribunal But it’s also not correct to say it’s fraud and subjects someone to the lifetime ban in itself. It’s worth making the distinction when responding to questions since the law does make it.

So, this technically isn’t true. BIA has held on at least three occasions that pre-conceived intent isn’t fraud or misrepresentation and does not subject an individual to the lifetime ban. There’s even a precedent where it reversed an immigration judge and ordered them to grant LPR status to a spouse who entered on B1/B2 with the intent to adjust (Link for anyone interested: https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/eoir/legacy/2012/08/17/2750.pdf) There’s still very good reasons not to do it, though: first and foremost it’s a lot easier to commit misrepresentation when you have pre-conceived intent (i.e. "I’m leaving in 2 weeks!" would subject you to a lifetime ban if you knew that to be false when you said it.) That and no one wants to go before an immigration judge. It’s not a great place to be. The BIA cases on this are worth mentioning though since there is a legal distinction in the eyes of immigration judges between pre-conceived intent and fraud, and people have thrown around the latter word a few times.

Re: naturalization certificate; if you want to replace it, it could take a while. It took 18 months for a friend as she had to physically go to the local USCIS office so they could look up data she didn’t have about her naturalization, only to be told that when they digitized paper records, they only recorded her date of birth, parents names, and date of entry into the United States and they didn’t know if, when, or where she became a citizen. They then had to manually search the paper records storage warehouse to re-digitize the records, so that she could go physically to the local USCIS office again, so they could tell her the data she needed to apply for a naturalization certificate. Heard similar horror stories both pre and post the change from district courts to administrative agencies handling naturalization. All that to say — USCIS does not keep good electronic records of who is and is not a citizen after someone becomes a citizen. Just use your full passport (every page scanned.) If you want a new naturalization certificate it’s going to take a while.

A general rule of thumb for anything semi-official is use PDF. There will almost never be file issues on an upload website with PDFs.

Depends on mix of federal and state laws for who will be included. My advice would be to go to a local legal aid clinic and talk with a local attorney who is probably familiar with the requirements. For my state, spouses are counted even if MFS on taxes and not living together. Other laws might be different. Local advice is needed. This might be a case where it makes sense to do a K-1 for non-immigrantion reasons since that would exclude OP from the household until he at least moves here. But I’d reiterate to talk to a local legal aid attorney so you get a better answer.

Cool, thanks. He’s visiting and we’re close to a consulate so just going to have the consulate do it while he’s here since it’s easier than getting it done by the issuing agency. Just wasn’t clear as to if it was bio page or everything.

Called the IRS and asked several tax CPA friends who didn’t know the answer to this — for a certified passport copy when applying for an ITIN, does the IRS want every page certified or just the biographic details? Called the IRS help line and the response was “the form instructions don’t say.”

Travel to Cuba is a reason to deny an ESTA application, not a visa. Mongolia isn’t a VWP country so not applicable to you. Visiting Cuba for family reasons is allowed for US citizens: https://cu.usembassy.gov/services/traveling-to-cuba/ Don’t see why it’d cause a problem.

Good point. If the physical card arrives it’s a less urgent item, but getting it stamped is a positive regardless.

Yeah, it doesn’t work like that even if your local immigration officer is lazy. If the actual green card doesn’t arrive Tuesday call your local CBP office and ask for an appointment to get it stamped.