S2N

They mail/issue the letter before they update the timeline. Once you see the letter you’re fine. You can use the date listed there. The real date that matters is when they send to NVC, which is up to two weeks after approval.

Looks like today they did the straightforward cases with PDs 12/31/24-1/2/25. Current case rate being starting 2-3 new PDs a day and working through any backlog of cases with extra administrative items. If you’re left behind don’t worry — the government has a lot more data in the databases on my husband and me than most people that would make my case by definition straightforward even ignoring what we’ve upoloaded. I would suggest tracking on Reddit/Discord/Facebook though to see what the current newest approvals are. VJs estimate is (imo) skewed by us getting complex cases here. Use current data to plan for the earliest on average, and use VJ data to plan for the 80th percentile approval timeframe.

Approved. Got the “still processing your case” email an hour ago. Checked 10 minutes ago and the approval notice was in my documents. Approval date: 1/22/2026 PD: 1/1/2025 Original SC: Nebraska Approving SC: Texas

And Reddit/Facebook/Discord are reporting 1/1/25 approvals coming through (our PD) hoping for something soon

Not true. They were approving cases from 12/18 a week ago. You can find websites that give detailed readouts of the API. They didn’t skip ahead. It’s that some cases take longer to process than others.

Saw reports of PD 12/31/24 being approved ed 1/21/26. January 2025 should start seeing approvals tomorrow or Friday at the current pace.

Only thing that will impact is what metro stop she gets off at. At least Las Condes has a lot of nice restaurants and bars you can hit up for lunch after

You don’t declare assets on your taxes. You declare income. The distinction matters. There are federal forms for declaring foreign assets that are reported to the IRS, but those aren’t tax returns in themselves, the IRS just collects the information as part of ongoing monitoring for tax evasion using foreign accounts. Here is the Washington Society of CPA’s find a CPA feature filtered for international tax. I’d call a few of them and see who you like.

Whats the standard option? A DHL drop point or something like that?

Documents in the language of the country you’re applying from don’t need to be translated once you reach the NVC/Consulate stages (i.e. Spanish for Colombia)

As a 1/1/25 filer with a fairly standard case, I’m expecting week of 2/1/26. Though the Christmas holiday falling in the period under review might speed that up (i.e. less cases around that date.) Unfortunately all the free API analysis websites are down and still trying to recover, so hard to see number approved a day vs. number of cases until January. Time will tell, I guess

Birth certificates have no security features as they are a copy taken from the book where they are registered. Each copy must have a blue or black stamp with a legend stating “es copia fiel del original.” Digital copies may not have the stamp but will be issued as a PDF with a digital signature. Digital copies from the Province of Buenos Aires and the City of Buenos Aires will have a verification code. Other provinces may have a verification code or scannable code. Digital is accepted. Apostille is never required in the immigration process but if it’s anything like Chile, they’re free and automatic with the digital version so might as well in case it’s needed in the future, but that’s a consideration outside of immigration.

It’d be whatever is listed here for Argentina.

It’d be next to impossible for there to be a criminal case even ignoring the current administration. That standard is incredibly high and very hard to prove. Civil is almost always the only thing that matters in these cases (and also the only thing that really ever changes government policy; since criminal cases are usually only brought when the LEO is acting outside of policy, but civil can be brought for in-policy shootings by arguing it’s unconstitutional.) We’ll see how it shakes out. My last comment on this theme: I posted a few links to court cases around this: the 9th circuit held that three plus volleys over 6 seconds were three uses of force that needed to be analyzed separately and SCOTUS very recently overruled the 5th circuit standard that only required an analysis in the moment of force/threat (which had been defined as 2 seconds), and required a totality of the facts review. The fact that this was all within two seconds doesn’t necessarily make it one use of force or reasonable (nor does the fact it was on the side make it unreasonable.) My entire point over the last few days is we don’t have enough of the facts to determine what the result here will be. Most of the people here have been on the ICE side, so I’ve been arguing caution on that, but I’d equally argue we don’t have enough facts to make it clear he acted incorrectly or there was a clear case of anything. Based on what we do know, I see the potential for a civil case, but we’re far from having all the facts and anything anyone says (including me) is pure speculation on either side. Anyway — more heat than light at this point and like and appreciate all of you guys, so disengaging. Anyone who is curious as to my thoughts can read all I’ve already posted. Thanks as always to everyone here for the engaging discussion

That was my interpretation of when people kept saying you shoot until neutralized (or something similar) for justifying shooting on the side. I didn’t think I was adding anything new. If you prefer, happy to have it framed as “My judgement as to if I need to keep shooting to neutralize the threat after it has passed me is reasonable.” To me they’re identical statements, but if they’re not to others, don’t want to fight in semantics. I’ve read a decent amount of legal analysis from real lawyers on the topic. I try to avoid YouTube experts on any topic, since they usually oversimplify complex topics for views.