Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 2660 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#visa#status#immigrant#green#processing#country#intent#while#years#card

Discussion (73 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

arrowleaf•about 3 hours ago
Curious to know how this will affect immigrants who arrived on a student visa, receive OPT to stay while working, and then subsequently get married. I know many top performers at my company who are in that boat, especially from India, who have built lives here during their OPT + STEM. It would be a shame to lose them if they have to go back to India and wait years (if not decades) for a green card or H-1B.
freediddy•about 3 hours ago
No. This is the last stage of the Green Card process. When you do Consular processing you make an appointment at the US embassy or consulate in your country, go do the interview and then you are granted the GC on the spot. Then you fly back. You don't need to fly back for years, it's only for the purpose of the interview at the consulate.
throwaway219450•about 2 hours ago
IANAL. If you adjust status in the US you can also apply for AP/EAD if your original visa/legal status expires. You can't do that if you opt for consular processing.

Nothing new there, but under the new rules the former is no longer an option and you'd need to leave immediately. On the plus side consular processing tends to be cheaper and often faster (AOS and all the approvals vs the consular processing fee and a plane ticket).

arrowleaf•about 3 hours ago
What is the typical wait time for appointments when going to consular processing route? My brief searches say anywhere from 2-9 months. 60-90 day NVC review phase, 60-120 day interview scheduling, and then 1-2 weeks once you have the interview. Are you saying that the 120-210 day wait time can happen while you're still in the US?
freediddy•about 2 hours ago
Yes, the wait time is in the US. You just leave the country for the appointment.

All this FUD in this entire post is disheartening.

ryandrake•about 3 hours ago
Looks like this means if a US Citizen marries someone who visited on a non-immigrant visa without the intention of getting married, the US government will now force the family apart for an unknown amount of time, potentially forever, instead of allowing the spouse to stay while the I-485 is processed.

I wonder how this would work with a K-1 "Fiancé" Visa. Typically a K-1 holder can enter the country as long as they get married within 90 days, and then the family stays together while the I-485 is processed. Now what? Come to the USA, marry the US Citizen, and then you're banished back to your home country?

There's also the K-3 which lets the foreign spouse enter as a non-immigrant to keep the family together while the I-485 is processed. Are they getting rid of that entirely?

This is all totally bonkers, likely not well thought out, and pretty cruel to families, which is completely on-point for this Administration.

electronsoup•about 3 hours ago
> likely not well thought out

Or it has been, and cruelty is the point

cozzyd•about 3 hours ago
I wonder how this would have applied to Melania
kylehotchkiss•about 2 hours ago
I responded similarly in another article. This policy punishes American citizens who pursue relationships with people they met in USA who were foreign born. At a time when marriage rates are rapidly declining.

FWIW K1s were never a great visa category. Doing an engagement party with a white dress and posting it on instagram could lead to a "go apply for CR1 instead" rejection.

mothballed•about 3 hours ago
The reason why you allow married people to adjust status is because it's absurd to actually expect a spouse not to just break the law and harbor their illegal immigrant spouse. They are going to choose to break the law rather than kick their spouse out and have them apply from overseas. Maybe they deserve to be punished when inevitably that happens en masse, but one has to consider the societal effects of creating a bunch of criminals over what amounts to an administrative fuck-fuck game over a spouse who was already determined to be admissible to the US.
adjejmxbdjdn•about 2 hours ago
This government is run on mafioso leadership principles.

Thats why they’re appointed a whole bunch of unqualified people at high positions. This is what happens in the mafia. Those people know that the only reason they’re there is because of the dear leader and not because of their competence, so purely out of self preservation, they will put loyalty to dear leader above every other principle.

Similarly gangs will get even low level people to commit completely unnecessary crimes. Because once you’ve committed a crime, they own you. You’re at their mercy, since you can’t run to the police anymore, without risking jail time yourself.

So you make a whole bunch of your residents criminals, so they’re unable to exercise their rights effectively without threat of being punished for a completely different reason that the government now holds against them.

They’ve started with immigrants because making them criminals is as easy as writing administrative memos, but the same incentives will lead them to start making criminals out of American citizens too. You can already see some of it with the way they’ve criminalized protest against Israel. The next step will be to redefine whatever acts they can as terrorism since Congress granted the executive tremendous power when it comes to terrorism. But they won’t stop there.

charcircuit•about 3 hours ago
>who was already determined to be admissible to the US

If that was true why even go through a whole process. To me it sounds like there is still an approval required meaning the person is not determined to be admissible yet.

exsomet•about 2 hours ago
The process as it relates to a K1 Visa is a multi-step series of approval gates designed to state that someone is “admissible” based on certain conditions, which change as you move through the process.

The general logic has been that it’s really easy for people to say they want to marry a U.S. citizen, get approved to emigrate, and then change their mind after (the common term for this is visa fraud). So the government grants a series of visas for increasing lengths as you move through that process and prove that it is a bona-fide relationship.

A K1 visa is the last step before getting married, and stipulates that you get married within a short time after entering the country, after which you have to remain married for several years, prove you’re doing things normal married couples do (like live together), and then you can get your permanent residency.

So, in short, it’s not as clear cut as a one-time yes/no decision. You very much live within a prescribed framework for several years until the government is satisfied that your relationship is real.

(Source: personal experience)

mothballed•about 3 hours ago
If they were here on a non-immigrant visa then they were already found admissible to the US. Some of them were just straight up illegals (like dreamers). I've met dreamers from time to time and all of them regularized their status after marrying (I assume the ones that didn't though weren't eager to tell me about their status so I simply never found out).

One interesting note here is the case of DACA recipients. If they leave the country to adjust status it should triggers a re-entry ban unless they're granted parole (DACA are quasi-illegal but granted a form of amnesty as long as they remain in US). AFAIK parole isn't granted for US consular visits, so it's effectively banishment as punishment for trying to adjust their status to reflect their marriage.

daft_pink•about 3 hours ago
I think if you enter on a B1/B2 tourist visa, you should not be allowed to adjust status to a green card except in extraordinary circumstances. I’m not so sure about other non-immigrant visas.

K1 will obviously be an exception as substantial steps are generally taken at a home consulate.

nrmitchi•about 2 hours ago
There is no carve out in this memo that says it’s only for B1/B2. Or that K-1 is excluded.

An entire visa class is not “obviously an exception”, or it would be clear.

adjejmxbdjdn•about 2 hours ago
I’m also pretty sure you cannot apply for an AOS from a B1/B2 to a green card.

I think you can apply for an AOS to a different dual intent visa which could then allow you to apply for a green card if you meet the requirements for that visa.

Maybe something like if you get married while visiting, but even then I believe you need to apply for an adjustment of status to a marriage visa and then apply for a green card.

wesleyd•about 3 hours ago
When I renewed my H1B visa (I think after three years), I had to leave the US to do it. I couldn't renew it from inside. The permission to work got renewed just fine - I could just keep on working for another three years - but if I left after the first visa expired, and wanted to come back, I would need a new _visa_ (thing stuck into my passport) to come back, and I could only apply for that while outside the country.

I read that it used to not be like this, that it used to be possible to renew the _visa_ itself from inside the US, but that got changed before my time. I can only imagine that the reason for that was that non-citizens inside the US are entitled to due process, but non-citizens outside the US are not. And denying a visa to somebody outside the US is therefore a lot easier than denying it to somebody inside the US, and essentially cannot be appealed.

When I applied for AOS form H1B to Green Card, I didn't have to leave the US. With this change, I would have had to. The only reason I can think for this change is that denials of AOS would now become unappealable. I hate this.

ivewonyoung•about 2 hours ago
> I read that it used to not be like this, that it used to be possible to renew the _visa_ itself from inside the US, but that got changed before my time. I can only imagine that the reason for that was that non-citizens inside the US are entitled to due process, but non-citizens outside the US are not. And denying a visa to somebody outside the US is therefore a lot easier than denying it to somebody inside the US, and essentially cannot be appealed

No, after 9/11 they passed a rule to always collect biometrics before issuing visas and validating them at border entry. The DoS facilities in the US did not have fingerprinting facilities but the consulates and embassies did, so they forced the change. Recently there was a pilot to allow it in the US itself.

nutjob2•about 3 hours ago
This is just Trump trying to torture immigrants likely due to the psychopath Steven Miller.

In general the law applies equally to everyone associated with the US in any respect so you get due process (in theory) regardless. Specific laws may apply to different classes of people though (see 'enemy combatants').

boredatoms•about 3 hours ago
Is this just for when applying for I-485 that you have to make a quick entry/exit trip,

or is it effective all the way back at I-140 time where people would then need to spend years away from the US?

freediddy•about 3 hours ago
All this means is that I485 is no longer allowed and everyone needs to do Consular processing. It doesn't mean that Green Cards are no longer being processed.

I did consular processing when I got my Green Card. It's the FINAL step fo the GC process. You don't need to be outside the US for all the other stages, in fact I think if you leave during some parts, it would be considered abandoning your application. It just means that while you're in the US, you need to schedule an appointment at the US embassy/consulate in your home country, and fly back. Then you go through the appointment and there on the spot you're approved or rejected. It's a big nerve wracking but unless you lied you will be fine. Then you fly back to the US.

For me CP was much much faster, on the order of months.

daft_pink•about 3 hours ago
I think in specific visa circumstances, an i485 will still be required such as K1 visa which is granted outside the country and then by nature of a K1 visa, adjustment to green card must happen within the United States.
adjejmxbdjdn•about 2 hours ago
> but unless you lied you will be fine.

That’s a huge unsubstantiated claim.

bradreaves2•about 3 hours ago
Is this intended to ensure that students and H1-Bs will not have a path to residency unless they disrupt their lives here?
outside1234•about 3 hours ago
It is intended to disrupt immigration full stop and especially brown immigration.
hobonation•about 2 hours ago
Unskilled immigration. Following instructions is a skill.
hgoel•about 3 hours ago
Isn't this about applying for a green card directly from a non-immigrant visa, e.g. student? H1-B is an immigrant visa.
bradreaves2•about 3 hours ago
H1-B is defined as “non-immigrant.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-1B_visa
sokoloff•about 3 hours ago
> H1-B is an immigrant visa.

I don't believe that's correct. H1-B is formally a temporary, nonimmigrant work visa/status which permits "dual-intent" (meaning a holder can be openly seeking permanent residence when applying for [or when on] such a visa without that dual intent being immigration fraud).

hgoel•about 1 hour ago
Ah you're right, I mixed up immigrant and dual intent.
0xy•about 3 hours ago
This is to close the common loophole where people would fly into the US on an ESTA, B-2 or another temporary visa "without immigration intent" (fraud) and then marry a US Citizen and adjust status.

On visa forums this method is commonly discussed. By entering on an ESTA/B-2 with the intent to marry a US Citizen, they're committing immigration fraud, inherently. You would be denied entry at the border if you admitted to your plans.

The correct way to do this is to file a K-1 visa outside the United States, or marry outside then file a IR-1/CR-1.

BrokenCogs•about 3 hours ago
No, this also affects anyone under employment based immigration petitions unrelated to marrying a US citizen.
0xy•about 3 hours ago
Only if they do not maintain lawful status, which is what the law says anyway. In fact, it specifically mentions this: "USCIS acknowledges exceptions including nonimmigrant categories with dual intent and immigrant categories where only adjustment of status provides a pathway to permanent resident status"

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/PM-...

zippothrowaway•about 2 hours ago
Footnote 20 on page 4:

Footnote 20: However, maintaining lawful status in a dual intent nonimmigrant category is not sufficient, on its own, to warrant a favorable exercise of discretion

BrokenCogs•about 2 hours ago
Where in the memo does it say "only if they do not maintain lawful status"? there are plenty of people adjusting under employment based petitions who have non-immigrant visas (eg O-1) which are not dual intent.
rafram•about 3 hours ago
Maybe it does close that loophole, but the effects are much, much broader and more harmful: https://www.cato.org/blog/dhs-quits-granting-green-cards-alm...
freediddy•about 2 hours ago
This article is intentionally misleading.

Department of Homeland Security is no longer processing Green Cards via AOS. That included UCSIS.

However the STATE DEPARTMENT is still processing it via Consular Processing.

The article makes it sounds like the US is no longer offering Green Cards which is false.

0xy•about 3 hours ago
The article you linked is patently incorrect. It claims "Now, every legal immigrant must leave the country—that is, self-deport—even if they are qualified for a green card and even if leaving would disqualify them.". This is false according to USCIS' memo.

It very specifically lays out common exceptions to this, including for legal immigrants on dual intent visas and those whose only pathway to permanent residency is via adjustment of status.

It also wildly misinterprets the news to claim that the K-1 visa has been effectively ended, even though the memo specifically excludes it.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/PM-...

throwaway_62022•about 3 hours ago
No the memo specifically says:

> However, maintaining lawful status in a dual intent nonimmigrant category is not sufficient, on its own, to warrant a favorable exercise of discretion.

Which basically means that, applying AOS while being in dual-intent category is not favorable and you will have to prove extraordinary circumstance for a simple i-485 AOS on H1B. Lacking the extraordinary circumstance, your application may be denied.

What this basically means for millions of people on H1B (especially from countries like India is), they have to go for consular processing. And given the lack of appointments in India and delays they are facing - you could be stuck for months to years and no company is going to wait for you while you go through the process. So leaving would definitely disqualify them.

nrmitchi•about 2 hours ago
It is absolutely NOT specific to the very limited situation you are describing, which is already a big red flag when processing applications.
0xy•about 2 hours ago
"USCIS acknowledges exceptions including nonimmigrant categories with dual intent and immigrant categories where only adjustment of status provides a pathway to permanent resident status"

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/document/memos/PM-...

nrmitchi•about 2 hours ago
The literal next line after your quote is:

> While aliens who were inspected and admitted or paroled may request adjustment of status, as a general matter the discretionary approval of such a request is extraordinary given Congress’s intent that aliens should depart once the purpose for which they sought parole or nonimmigrant admission from DHS has been accomplished.

beej71•about 3 hours ago
Given our population problems, I can't think of a single rational reason why we'd want to stop this from happening.
arrowleaf•about 2 hours ago
Our population problems, in that we need immigration to avoid population decline? Our total fertility rate is 1.6.
beej71•about 2 hours ago
Exactly that. And really, it's still not going to be enough.
mothballed•about 3 hours ago
This appears to close off the method by which all the "dreamers" I'm familiar with got GC/citizenship, which is by marriage.
enraged_camel•about 3 hours ago
This is an absurd change that will have catastrophic consequences in both academia and the private sector. Even if you're a US citizen who is "America First", you will feel the impact, and it will be net negative.
commandlinefan•about 3 hours ago
I doubt it. We've seen time and time again that what the USCIS considers "extraordinary" are actually very, very ordinary circumstances. Anybody with proof of employment will qualify.
arrowleaf•about 3 hours ago
Only after losing in court, time and time again. This will take expensive lawyers and a lot of heartache to get any clear answers.
freediddy•about 3 hours ago
You don't know what you're talking about. This is the very last stage of the GC process. Before everyone had the choice to do AOS or CP. I personally chose CP. Now there's only the choice of CP. But nothing else has changed. It means you need to fly back to your home country for a few days for the interview and then you get your GC on the spot.
nutjob2•about 2 hours ago
The bigots who support this sort of thing are not deterred by the self harm their obsession causes.
grahamgooch•about 3 hours ago
This is a good thing. Adjustment of status for those within the USA is backlogged- by years for people from certain countries. Going to the home consulate for the final stamp will save years for many people.

F1 and h1 are non-immigrant visa.

American law only allows a person to reside in the country with one Visa type.

The green card is an immigrant visa - and the new visa is issued through an adjustment of status for those inside the USA (backlogged) or by consulates (nearly immediately).

So this is a good thing. It’s easy to get alarmed.

ceejayoz•about 3 hours ago
Why is it "nearly immediately" at a consulate but "backlogged" in the US? Why can't that be fixed?
throwaway_62022•about 2 hours ago
This is not true. It is not nearly immediate at US consulate and backlogged in US. The parent doesn't know what they are talking about.
grahamgooch•about 2 hours ago
I went thru CP myself. It saved me 3 years
grahamgooch•about 2 hours ago
Because America only has a few processing centers in within the US where is that literally hundreds and hundreds of consulates that can now take on this activity they have always been doing this activity but the vast majority of the backlog is caused by the slow processing of the US processing centers.
ceejayoz•about 2 hours ago
So why not… expand the processing centers?
freediddy•about 3 hours ago
USCIS serializes it and they have a limited number of workers. CP shards it based on country so it will be much faster for many people.
ceejayoz•about 3 hours ago
That's a what, not a why.

Why can't USCIS shard it based on country within the US in a similar fashion?

grahamgooch•about 2 hours ago
Exactly. An extra points for using HN lingo.:)
arrowleaf•about 3 hours ago
From what I've gathered, the consular route is nowhere near immediate, especially if they are from one of the countries typically backlogged (e.g. India). You're saying that someone who gets married while on F1 + OPT/STEM should leave with their partner, potentially for months if not years, while pursuing the consular route.
grahamgooch•about 1 hour ago
No. All it leans that you go to the consulate on your appt and get your immigrant visa stamped - you get an appointment date and that’s it’s. It was a 3 hour process for me. I flew into Frankfurt and flew out the same evening.
kylehotchkiss•about 3 hours ago
Consulates are not nearly immediately. You have to wait months-years for appointments at some.