Marriage interview for ethnic couples is worse? YES OR NO?

[faryan 4]

I can't believe a "the-USCIS-is-racist" thread is turning into an Eric thread. That's too funny.

Hehe..

Well, I would say if USCIS is racist, then most of us wont be able to be together at all.

ken and eric are posting related, one for what he does with it and the other for how much he talked about it

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

I can't believe a "the-USCIS-is-racist" thread is turning into an Eric thread. That's too funny.

WELCOME TO VJ!!!

[trailmix 77]

I can't believe a "the-USCIS-is-racist" thread is turning into an Eric thread. That's too funny.

If this were the Canada forum it would be about food by now.

Doughnuts and poutine (not together of course)

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

I can't believe a "the-USCIS-is-racist" thread is turning into an Eric thread. That's too funny.

If this were the Canada forum it would be about food by now.

Doughnuts and poutine (not together of course)

i hear that's against the law in quebec.

[Emancipation 2]

I can't believe a "the-USCIS-is-racist" thread is turning into an Eric thread. That's too funny.

If this were the Canada forum it would be about food by now.

Doughnuts and poutine (not together of course)

i hear that's against the law in quebec.

Only if the packaging is in English silly

[NickD 203]

I never saw that tentative fraud list before. The definition of ethnic is "Of or relating to sizable groups of people sharing a common and distinctive racial, national, religious, linguistic, or cultural heritage. Guess I am white, but not exactly supreme, wife is clearly defined as Hispanic.

Maybe we would have felt persecuted too if we read that list, we certainly hit the profile. As the USC just felt that we all are guilty of fraud until we prove ourselves innocent. Forms definitely infer that if just don't right say so with stiff fines, imprisonment, and deportation. But we showed ample evidence of our marriage, were cross examined like criminals, kept a cool head and answered all of their questions. We put up with their ####### for over five years, but my wife is a USC now, it's a battle for all of us. But that is the way it is.

As a USC, would be stupid to marry a foreigner just to bring them here. That person is in a perfect position to blackmail you with a five year prison term, if you charged them a million bucks to bring them over, and a million bucks is just about what you would have to charge with all the expense. And if it's a USC male bringing over a female, our state creams the male in a divorce case, so besides getting her money back could also take half of what you own. The I-751 was started in 1988, two years after limits were put on immigration quotas in this country, marriage was just about the only way left to bring people here and was taken advantage of. But I see last year the USCIS posted only 140,000 I-751 applications were processed, so is the I-751 really necessary? Besides the I-751, was far more difficult to even bring that special person here, legally. We all know what we had to go through.

So if you are thinking they are picking on you because you are black, that is not the reason, they are picking on you because you married a person from a different country, and they equally pick on any USC plus their spouse when you go in. Only time they treated my wife with respect is during her UCS oath ceremony.

[cdneh 3,112]

I can't believe a "the-USCIS-is-racist" thread is turning into an Eric thread. That's too funny.

If this were the Canada forum it would be about food by now.

Doughnuts and poutine (not together of course)

[morocco4ever 63]

So if you are thinking they are picking on you because you are black, that is not the reason, they are picking on you because you married a person from a different country, and they equally pick on any USC plus their spouse when you go in.

I was told once by the USCIS officer (that just happened to be a black woman) that "this is the price you pay for marrying a foreigner". Another time I went to the USCIS again, and was told by another officer (this time a Tongan I believe) that my husband is lying to me. I don't feel that I, a white USC, was treated with respect on either of those occasions. We went back into the USCIS again, after he got here and low and behold we were both treated with respect by the same man that dissed my husband and his honesty to me. So what should I make of this? Racism? No, it's the price I paid for marrying a foreigner. Oh well...we got over it.

[NickD 203]

So if you are thinking they are picking on you because you are black, that is not the reason, they are picking on you because you married a person from a different country, and they equally pick on any USC plus their spouse when you go in.

I was told once by the USCIS officer (that just happened to be a black woman) that "this is the price you pay for marrying a foreigner". Another time I went to the USCIS again, and was told by another officer (this time a Tongan I believe) that my husband is lying to me. I don't feel that I, a white USC, was treated with respect on either of those occasions. We went back into the USCIS again, after he got here and low and behold we were both treated with respect by the same man that dissed my husband and his honesty to me. So what should I make of this? Racism? No, it's the price I paid for marrying a foreigner. Oh well...we got over it.

It was a very humiliating experience. Ha, are we sure that we are over it? Does the USCIS offer free therapy?

[Nessa 23]

american ethnic couples is so common, that it would be extremely stup!d to think about fraud.

[rin and john 71]

Where are you getting this info from?

The USCIS iMMIGRATION OFFICERS MANUAL, look it up, they have these beliefs on how to detect marriage fraud, called "marriage fraud factors"

Marriage fraud factors

Other issues involving marriage revolve around the "marriage fraud factors" passed by Congress in 1986 to discourage "sham" or marriages of convenience to get around the immigration laws and illegally obtain federal immigration benefits.

A list of factors that contribute to a determination by an examiner for the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) that the parties got married to get around the immigration laws follows:

* Rapid sequence of events (marriage, divorce, claimed death prior to filing petition ? adverse action by INS).

* Age difference -- 10 years or more.

* Prior marriages by petitioner to aliens or by aliens to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent resident aliens.

* Marriage outside ethnic or religious group.

* Marriage to "entry without inspection" alien not of the Western Hemisphere.

* Witnesses to marriage are same nationality as beneficiary.

* Beneficiary and petitioner claim separate address; beneficiary departed U.S. after marriage.

* Confidential marriage. This is a special proce-dure in California where the parties can request that their marriage not be recorded in the public record.

* Beneficiary has minor children residing abroad.

* Inconsistent or nonexistent petitioner identification.

* Excessive documentation in support of the application (e.g., Forms I-864, Affidavits of Support, submitted by relatives other than spou

maybe you can provide us a link to this..........

found it here:

http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?...8ce159d286150e2

That said, we had over half (5 to 6) of the red flags. Never any issues or "tough" questioning at the consulate or USCIS when we adjusted status.

* Rapid sequence of events (marriage, divorce, claimed death prior to filing petition ? adverse action by INS). Rin and I married the month after my divorce was final.

* Age difference -- 10 years or more. Rin was 28 yo and I was 42 yo when we married.

* Prior marriages by petitioner to aliens or by aliens to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent resident aliens. Nope

* Marriage outside ethnic or religious group. She is Thai and Buddhist; I am Caucasian and Christian (count that as two??)

* Marriage to "entry without inspection" alien not of the Western Hemisphere. nope

* Witnesses to marriage are same nationality as beneficiary. Since we married in Thailand, yep.

* Beneficiary and petitioner claim separate address; beneficiary departed U.S. after marriage. nope

* Confidential marriage. This is a special proce-dure in California where the parties can request that their marriage not be recorded in the public record. nope

* Beneficiary has minor children residing abroad. At the time, yes. Came to USA with her!

* Inconsistent or nonexistent petitioner identification. nope

* Excessive documentation in support of the application (e.g., Forms I-864, Affidavits of Support, submitted by relatives other than spou nope

[EstebanTrabajos 7]

Hispanic and Whitey...no problems whatsoever

[rin and john 71]

OKAY, the list in the manual is actually different from what the OP posted (sorry, didn't look closely at the link before posting above). Here is the list from the link above:

On the other hand, a marriage which was contracted solely for immigration purposes does not confer benefits under the Act. A number of factors may raise questions about the intent of the marriage, and therefore necessitate more in depth questioning (see Chapter 15 regarding interviewing techniques), or even a field examination (see Chapter 17 ) or an investgation (see Chapter 10.5(d) ). Some indications that a marriage may have been contracted solely for immigration benefits include:

• Large disparity of age;

• Inability of petitioner and beneficiary to speak each other's language;

• Vast difference in cultural and ethnic background;

• Family and/or friends unaware of the marriage;

• Marriage arranged by a third party;

• Marriage contracted immediately following the beneficiary's apprehension or receipt of notification to depart the United States;

• Discrepancies in statements on questions for which a husband and wife should have common knowledge;

• No cohabitation since marriage;

• Beneficiary is a friend of the family;

• Petitioner has filed previous petitions in behalf of aliens, especially prior alien spouses.

A sham marriage has been defined by the BIA as a marriage which may comply with all the formal requirements of the law but which the parties entered into with no intent, or "good faith", to live together and which is designed solely to circumvent the immigrations laws. Sham marriages are not recognized for immigration purposes. See Matter of Patel , 19 I&N Dec. 774 (BIA 1988).

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

edited - i see your later post.

Edited January 23, 2009 by charles!

[Sprailenes 47]

The whole process is slanted to favor European couples by letting them "sneak" in on the visa wavier program and adjust. The whole process stinks of KKK mentality

I wouldn't say that's true. I agree that there are people who use the VWP to come here and adjust instead of doing things the right way, and most of us would also agree that this is incredibly unfair to those of us who DON'T abuse that VWP -- but I went through the exact same process that everyone else has to go through. There's a reason why some countries are considered high fraud and others are not, and thus these countries tend to face higher scrutiny. I really don't think this can be seen as "kkk mentality."

IT IS KKK mentality because they are saying you are fraud if you marry someone that does not have the same skin color as you. That's racism not fraud. Just because i am not white like my husband does not mean i am a fraud. It does not say "marriage inside their ethnic group" it says marriage outside the ethnic group, meaning against interracial couples.

You're the only one who seems to be making an issue out of your race dear.

I think you enjoy it though.