Edward and Jaycel

I get the skepticism however a Policy Memo cannot rewrite the law and Section 214(d)(1) of the INA [8 U.S.C. 1184(d)(1)] explicitly mandates Adjustment of Status (AOS) as the intended and legally required route to a Green Card for a K-1 visa holder who fulfills the marriage requirement.

I would have to say not since the K-1 is a nonimmigrant visa that is specifically codified in the INA as an "Immigrant Intent" visa

Agreed.... this is the classic and enduring societal, political, policy truth of "The Pendulum". For decades "The Pendulum" has swung in the direction of very permissive immigration policies and nature, physics, reality (whatever you want to call it) will always dictate a swing back in the other direction at some point. It can only swing so far in the "Openly Permissive" realm because the farther it goes, the more loopholes, grift, abuse, fraud, etc. forces it to swing back.

Agree.... there will still be denials for "immigrant intent" because people will stay here without status making that a de-facto immigration (legal or not)

It seems that unless you can prove "Extraordinary Circumstances" that merits favorable discretion and administrative grace, the intending immigrant will need to return to their home country and gain their LPR through consular processing..... This is a seismic shift in policy.

The relevant "Guidance" section of the memo: Guidance Where consular processing is available to an alien based on the immigrant category in which he or she seeks adjustment of status, in determining whether the alien warrants a favorable exercise of discretion officers are to consider the consistent understanding of the courts and the BIA that adjustment of status is an extraordinary discretionary relief to the regular immigrant visa process and is an act of administrative grace. Where adjustment of status is in the discretion of USCIS, officers are reminded that they are to consider all relevant factors and information in the totality of the circumstances in exercising that discretion. For example, existing guidance19 directs officers to consider violations of our immigration laws or the conditions of any immigration status held, current or previous instances of fraud or false testimony in dealings with USCIS or any government agency, whether an alien’s application for admission or parole violated the laws, regulations, and policies in place at the time, and any conduct of the alien after admission as a nonimmigrant or parolee inconsistent with the purpose of that nonimmigrant status or parole or with representations made to consular or DHS officers when applying for a visa, admission, or parole. An alien’s failure to comply with the conditions of their nonimmigrant admission or parole and an alien’s failure to depart as expected are highly relevant to this analysis. This is particularly true when the failure is connected to the alien’s intention to reside permanently in the United States and the alien could have achieved that goal through the normal immigrant visa process. USCIS reminds its officers that applying for adjustment of status is not inconsistent with simultaneously maintaining nonimmigrant status in a category with dual intent.20 Given the significant privileges granted to lawful permanent residents, USCIS reminds its officers that they must consider and weigh all the relevant evidence in the record, taking into account the totality of the circumstances to determine whether the alien is suitable for permanent residence and if approval of the alien’s adjustment of status application is in the best interest of the United States.21 Adjudicators must weigh all positive and negative factors, including family ties, immigration status and history, the applicant’s moral character, and any other relevant factor that bears on determining whether the alien warrants a favorable exercise of discretion.22 USCIS reminds officers that when they deny a benefit request, they must issue a denial notice explaining in writing the specific reasons for denial.23 When the denial is based on an unfavorable exercise of discretion, 24 the denial notice must include an analysis containing the positive and negative factors considered, along with an explanation of why the negative factors outweigh the positive factors in the decision. USCIS will carefully review the various pathways to discretionary adjustment of status as well as discrete populations of aliens applying for adjustment of status in the context of the consistent and longstanding finding that adjustment of status is an extraordinary matter of discretion and administrative grace not designed to supersede the regular consular processing of immigrant visas. USCIS may provide policy guidance specific to certain adjustment of status categories or discrete populations of aliens to aid officers in identifying those applications that may or may not warrant this act of grace and exception to the regular consular process.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/PM-602-0199-AdjustmentOfStatusAndDiscretion-20260521.pdf U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services <uscis@messages.dhs.gov> WASHINGTON—U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services today announced a new policy memo reiterating the fact that, consistent with long-standing immigration law and immigration court decisions, aliens seeking adjustment of status must do so through consular processing via the Department of State outside of the country. Officers are directed to consider all relevant factors and information on a case-by-case basis when determining whether an alien warrants this extraordinary form of relief. “We’re returning to the original intent of the law to ensure aliens navigate our nation’s immigration system properly. From now on, an alien who is in the U.S. temporarily and wants a Green Card must return to their home country to apply, except in extraordinary circumstances. This policy allows our immigration system to function as the law intended instead of incentivizing loopholes. When aliens apply from their home country, it reduces the need to find and remove those who decide to slip into the shadows and remain in the U.S. illegally after being denied residency,” said USCIS Spokesman Zach Kahler. “Nonimmigrants, like students, temporary workers, or people on tourist visas, come to the U.S. for a short time and for a specific purpose. Our system is designed for them to leave when their visit is over. Their visit should not function as the first step in the Green Card process. Following the law allows the majority of these cases to be handled by the State Department at U.S. consular offices abroad and frees up limited USCIS resources to focus on processing other cases that fall under its purview, including visas for victims of violent crime and human trafficking, naturalization applications, and other priorities. The law was written this way for a reason, and despite the fact that it has been ignored for years, following it will help make our system fairer and more efficient.” For more information, see the policy memo to USCIS immigration officers. For more information on USCIS and its programs, please visit uscis.gov or follow us on X, Instagram, YouTube, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Please do not reply to this message. See our Contact Us page for phone numbers and e-mail addresses.

This is the date that matters... so 90 days before the exact date in June 2027 is when she is eligible to file for Naturalization.

Your wife's eligibility to file the N-400 under the 3-year rule is based on the date your wife became a Lawful Permanent Resident, not the date of your marriage. She can file the N-400 within 90 days of the 3 year anniversary of the "Resident Since" date on her Green Card

Get used to radio silence on an I-751 - Most cases don't hear anything for 2 or more years. The current processing time for cases at a service center is 29.5 months. For field offices, it's 35.5 months.

Your husband must do his by mail by filling out Form I-865 and actually mailing it in sadly.

That should be good enough. No notarization needed from what I am aware, but going that extra step won't hurt and with USCIS, my default mode is to always go the extra step. LOL

Yes I should have made that clear that I just meant that by certifying to USCIS, they would technically be making the certification under penalty of perjury

They certify (or in other words swear) that the translation they made is accurate and they certify (or in other words swear) that they are competent to translate from that language to English. They don't have to be a "certified translator" to be able to swear to these two facts. They just have to swear out a statement, "under penalty of perjury" that the translation they made is accurate and that they are competent and attach it to the "document". Your fiancée can do this as long as she can legally swear to these two facts.

Yes... I can tell you from experience on this. I had something from the 1990s I had to disclose and I got an RFE for the official documents. In the case of the arrest records, I sent them a printout of the email I got from the state police stating that due to the age of the records, they were not available because they had been purged and destroyed and USCIS accepted that.