3 ms·

So the right process is to request for a K1 fiancé visa which takes over a year?! I can see why people were tempted to cut corners, especially given past toler

by jackjeff 10mo ago

So the right process is to request for a K1 fiancé visa which takes over a year?! I can see why people were tempted to cut corners, especially given past tolerance…

aikinai 10mo ago
Yes, exactly. Your legal options are to either remain separated for one or two years while you wait, or the American can immigrate to the spouse’s country and wait there (since almost every other country is easier to immigrate to). It's an inhumane system, but as someone heavily impacted by US immigration policy, I'd much prefer they enforce the laws evenly and then fix them where they're broken rather than disadvantaging everyone going through the legal process while those that cheat get to jump ahead.
- iscoelho 10mo ago
  > I'd much prefer they enforce the laws evenly and then fix them where they're broken rather than disadvantaging everyone going through the legal process while those that cheat get to jump ahead. That is incredibly optimistic to believe that any legislation reforming immigration will be passed in the next decade. There is a reason ICE was neutralized until now. Life is short. We don't have time for congress to play politics while Americans and their spouses suffer. Let people live their lives.
  - aikinai 10mo ago
    Maybe I'm too stiff, but even if they don't get around to updating the laws, I'd still prefer they enforce the ones that exist so it's clear, fair, and safe. And so upstanding citizens aren't spending years separated from their spouses while they keep getting skipped by people willing to cheat the system. It's not even a law that results in the years-long wait; it's just because the system is clogged up with other junk and understaffed. As other's have mentioned; there's no formal waiting for citizen spouses—it's supposed to be immediate—it's just that they don't even get to look at your application for years.
    - iamflimflam1 10mo ago
      What would be your definition of “upstanding citizens”. I’ve found that people tend to respond as you have until the laws impact themselves or their friends. Then it’s very much a case of - I didn’t think this applied to us…
      - aikinai 10mo ago
        People following the actual immigration law, like I did. This very much impacts me and has determined my family's country of residence for many years. The process is horrible, but we still aren't cheating and I don't appreciate being skipped by people that are cheating.
      - mlrtime 10mo ago
        I've spent hours on immigrations forums trying to understand the law and have filed many US Federal forms (and have mad mistakes) taken years to get action done while following the law. It really feels like a slap in the face to the people who do the "right thing" to allow others to be allowed in freely not following the law. Fix the issues first.
    - danenania 10mo ago
      [flagged]
      - aikinai 10mo ago
        I assume you’re insinuating some kind of insult? I’m honestly not sure which one. For not risking my family to cheat US immigration law? Edit: And now browsing the latest on this thread, it seems all the commenters here who have actually filed petitions agree—the law should be enforced evenly.
      - mlrtime 10mo ago
        Come on, just say it. Don't hide behind your thoughts.
  - someperson 10mo ago
    As somebody also directly impacted by the US immigration system, yes please do enforce the laws on the books universally and impartially. Immigration reform will happen, but regardless no queue cutting.
- saltcured 10mo ago
  Yeah, we married in California but then left when my wife finished her Ph.D. and used up her optional practical training period on her student visa. After about four years of being an expat, I realized it wasn't for me and we started planning a return. So, we filed the spousal petition with USCIS overseas. It was a lot of paperwork, interviews for her, and some process delays. Eventually she got her immigrant visa issued. Upon arrival in the US on that visa, it was endorsed to reflect immigration status. This was about fifteen years ago, and as I recall the process delays were pretty much as advertised at the time. We were able to time our filing so that the visa was issued around when she would be ready to relocate. Most of the time we spent apart was due to our conflicting career opportunities and obligations. I think the petition could have been pipelined better if I'd been willing to stick with my expat job until she also wrapped up her work there.
tpmoney 10mo ago
> I can see why people were tempted to cut corners, especially given past tolerance… Which is one of the reasons that the pre-trump executive orders that granted leniency and amnesty at times were all terrible terrible things to do. We really have a problem in this country where we've decided that the laws suck, but we don't want to do the hard part of changing the law, so we just decide to ignore it. Until at some point someone comes along and decides to enforce the law and now a whole bunch of people who were acting on the de facto state of the law now have to deal with the consequences of the de jure state of the law. Immigration is a place we've done this a lot, but things like the status of marijuana across the country is also predicated on this sort of arbitrary non-enforcement of the law. Obviously the states are not obligated to enforce federal law, but the feds absolutely can. The feds could raid every marijuana dispensary in the country and take them all down with barely a hiccup, at least from a legality standpoint. Yet they don't because we have decided to arbitrarily not enforce the law, even if we haven't changed the law. I had really hoped after Trump's first term, we would have seen a real awakening to the amount of things that are allowed only because we don't actually enforce the laws that are on the books, and a real push to both fix the laws and roll back the abuses of executive power like this. But we didn't seem to learn that lesson, and sadly it doesn't look like that lesson is going to be learned this time either.
- metadope 10mo ago
  > The feds could raid every marijuana dispensary in the country This is not a realistic scenario, but does seem to present the argument, that Federal law and the power to enforce it is inherently and legally superior to individual State laws? > fix the laws and roll back the abuses of executive power Perhaps we could start with the federal law that made marijuana a Schedule One controlled substance: so that ordinary residents of responsible and responsive states would not have to rely on "arbitrary non-enforcement of the law" in order to get their smoke on. Think about it! Every one of those citizen-puffers are in violation of federal law! Send in the troops! The argument seems to be that federal laws overrule states', and that underlying idea justifies sending military forces into cities, because, you know, federal laws are being violated, everywhere, like, all the time, man. Sheesh.

So the right process is to request for a K1 fiancé visa which takes over a year?! I can see why people were tempted to cut corners, especially given past tolerance…

aikinai 10mo ago

Yes, exactly. Your legal options are to either remain separated for one or two years while you wait, or the American can immigrate to the spouse’s country and wait there (since almost every other country is easier to immigrate to). It's an inhumane system, but as someone heavily impacted by US immigration policy, I'd much prefer they enforce the laws evenly and then fix them where they're broken rather than disadvantaging everyone going through the legal process while those that cheat get to jump ahead.

iscoelho 10mo ago
> I'd much prefer they enforce the laws evenly and then fix them where they're broken rather than disadvantaging everyone going through the legal process while those that cheat get to jump ahead. That is incredibly optimistic to believe that any legislation reforming immigration will be passed in the next decade. There is a reason ICE was neutralized until now. Life is short. We don't have time for congress to play politics while Americans and their spouses suffer. Let people live their lives.
- aikinai 10mo ago
  Maybe I'm too stiff, but even if they don't get around to updating the laws, I'd still prefer they enforce the ones that exist so it's clear, fair, and safe. And so upstanding citizens aren't spending years separated from their spouses while they keep getting skipped by people willing to cheat the system. It's not even a law that results in the years-long wait; it's just because the system is clogged up with other junk and understaffed. As other's have mentioned; there's no formal waiting for citizen spouses—it's supposed to be immediate—it's just that they don't even get to look at your application for years.
  - iamflimflam1 10mo ago
    What would be your definition of “upstanding citizens”. I’ve found that people tend to respond as you have until the laws impact themselves or their friends. Then it’s very much a case of - I didn’t think this applied to us…
    - aikinai 10mo ago
      People following the actual immigration law, like I did. This very much impacts me and has determined my family's country of residence for many years. The process is horrible, but we still aren't cheating and I don't appreciate being skipped by people that are cheating.
    - mlrtime 10mo ago
      I've spent hours on immigrations forums trying to understand the law and have filed many US Federal forms (and have mad mistakes) taken years to get action done while following the law. It really feels like a slap in the face to the people who do the "right thing" to allow others to be allowed in freely not following the law. Fix the issues first.
  - danenania 10mo ago
    [flagged]
    - aikinai 10mo ago
      I assume you’re insinuating some kind of insult? I’m honestly not sure which one. For not risking my family to cheat US immigration law? Edit: And now browsing the latest on this thread, it seems all the commenters here who have actually filed petitions agree—the law should be enforced evenly.
    - mlrtime 10mo ago
      Come on, just say it. Don't hide behind your thoughts.
- someperson 10mo ago
  As somebody also directly impacted by the US immigration system, yes please do enforce the laws on the books universally and impartially. Immigration reform will happen, but regardless no queue cutting.
saltcured 10mo ago
Yeah, we married in California but then left when my wife finished her Ph.D. and used up her optional practical training period on her student visa. After about four years of being an expat, I realized it wasn't for me and we started planning a return. So, we filed the spousal petition with USCIS overseas. It was a lot of paperwork, interviews for her, and some process delays. Eventually she got her immigrant visa issued. Upon arrival in the US on that visa, it was endorsed to reflect immigration status. This was about fifteen years ago, and as I recall the process delays were pretty much as advertised at the time. We were able to time our filing so that the visa was issued around when she would be ready to relocate. Most of the time we spent apart was due to our conflicting career opportunities and obligations. I think the petition could have been pipelined better if I'd been willing to stick with my expat job until she also wrapped up her work there.

tpmoney 10mo ago

> I can see why people were tempted to cut corners, especially given past tolerance… Which is one of the reasons that the pre-trump executive orders that granted leniency and amnesty at times were all terrible terrible things to do. We really have a problem in this country where we've decided that the laws suck, but we don't want to do the hard part of changing the law, so we just decide to ignore it. Until at some point someone comes along and decides to enforce the law and now a whole bunch of people who were acting on the de facto state of the law now have to deal with the consequences of the de jure state of the law. Immigration is a place we've done this a lot, but things like the status of marijuana across the country is also predicated on this sort of arbitrary non-enforcement of the law. Obviously the states are not obligated to enforce federal law, but the feds absolutely can. The feds could raid every marijuana dispensary in the country and take them all down with barely a hiccup, at least from a legality standpoint. Yet they don't because we have decided to arbitrarily not enforce the law, even if we haven't changed the law. I had really hoped after Trump's first term, we would have seen a real awakening to the amount of things that are allowed only because we don't actually enforce the laws that are on the books, and a real push to both fix the laws and roll back the abuses of executive power like this. But we didn't seem to learn that lesson, and sadly it doesn't look like that lesson is going to be learned this time either.

metadope 10mo ago
> The feds could raid every marijuana dispensary in the country This is not a realistic scenario, but does seem to present the argument, that Federal law and the power to enforce it is inherently and legally superior to individual State laws? > fix the laws and roll back the abuses of executive power Perhaps we could start with the federal law that made marijuana a Schedule One controlled substance: so that ordinary residents of responsible and responsive states would not have to rely on "arbitrary non-enforcement of the law" in order to get their smoke on. Think about it! Every one of those citizen-puffers are in violation of federal law! Send in the troops! The argument seems to be that federal laws overrule states', and that underlying idea justifies sending military forces into cities, because, you know, federal laws are being violated, everywhere, like, all the time, man. Sheesh.