rpjs

I had to show ID to a NYPD cop once and it was before I got a NYS license so I used my green Card. He didn't have a clue what it was, but just shrugged and asked me for my address (I'd been in a minor railroad accident in case anyone's curious).

To the OP one thing the NYS DMV *absolutely* requires is sight of your Social Security *Card* - just supplying an SSN isn't enough. You can't begin your NYS license application until you have your SSC.

Pulaski

I used my green card as my go-to "government-issued photo ID" for several years before I became a citizen, and I must have showed it many dozens of times, in restaurants, bars, groceries, and in support of large credit card transactions. Only TWO people asked what it was, NOBODY refused it as valid ID, and I am 100% certain that the vast majority of people had no idea what the card was and its validity.

sir_eccles

I had a TSA agent look at my greencard once didn't know what it was and had to ask a colleague if it was good enough to fly on.

Pulaski

Well at least he was smart enough to ask a colleague rather than nod you through.

sir_eccles

I say ask, but as I recall it was more like shouting across the room to say "do we accept these?" and a vague shrug from the other guy.

SanDiegogirl

While "themadpooper" was incorrect in his thinking that one could not marry on the VWP, he was correct in thinking that the OP is not home and dry yet as far as getting his residency is concerned.

He still has to convince the authorities that his marriage was spontaneous, and, who know, maybe the official won't believe his story - visiting regularly, been in States since just after Christmas, love interest for past three years.

We are always advising folks to go about immigration the right way !!

ian-mstm

Perhaps, but I doubt it'll even come up during the interview - although you're correct that there is a non-zero chance of being asked the question.


There is nothing here to suggest the OP has done anything wrong... and spontaneously marrying a USC is a provided exception.

Ian

themadpooper

This was basically what I was getting at

Yes, of course foreigners can get married in America as many do in Vegas and elsewhere, but there is the issue of intent and the OP will need to prove to immigration what he did wasn't intentional. It absolutely CAN be an issue, depends largely on the officer who interviews you

ian-mstm

You need to be much more specific. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having the intent to get married when you enter the US. The problem is when you have the intent to get married and the intent to stay to adjust status. The former is absolutely fine; the latter might bring some grief.


He will need to prove it only if he is asked the question - which almost never happens. For someone who truly did not have that intent, it should be a fairly easy thing to demonstrate.


I agree... but it's not very likely. You probably want to quote the "30/60 rule" to demonstrate that you're savvy!

Ian

hungryhorace

One of my friends who I used to work with many years ago, emigrated to the US just under a decade ago now. I didn't even know how he had got here until I went through the process myself and showed interest in it.

Here's a (brief) synopsis of his story, as we're talking about 'intent'.

He had been seeing his missus for a couple of years and due to his freelance employment he was spending as long as possible on each VWP entry with her. As he continued to (ab)use the visa waiver programme, the CBP would warn him on a more regular basis that he was spending too much time in the US. He was told on his last entry, after being sent to secondary, that he would probably be refused next time.

Anyway, my friend stays another 3 months...leaves to return back to London. At a point, said friend and his missus decide to marry. So, over my friend comes armed with letters from his employer that he's going to return, showing his mortgage agreement etc.

He gets sent to secondary. After a long time being quizzed about his intentions, he's admitted.

Friend then marries.

Friend then remains in US and files their AOS package.

Friend is approved for CPR. Is now LPR, and I continue to bug him to file his N-400.

Anyway, my point is, if this guy - after all the 'warnings' he received - can successfully adjust status, I'm pretty sure the OP will be just fine!

themadpooper

I also know people who abused the system and are now citizens, I have friends from South America who came in illegally back in the day and worked for years using someone else's ss number. They are now citizens. Doesn't mean the op won't have any problems. It's 2016 for a start, not the early 1980s before conditional (2 year) green cards were even a thing

Jerni

AOS from VWP is not "abusing the system" it's a perfectly legal pathway. The chances of the OP having issues is about the same as someone adjusting status from a K-1.

Rete

I laugh at this "need to prove". I have only once in 17 years of being on this forum heard anyone say that their wedding was judged preplanned and not spontaneous. That occurrence that was almost 15 years ago was from a German who married an American in Las Vegas and his entire family attended. He didn't have to prove anything. USCIS immediately knew that it was not spontaneous has they had a full wedding with the entire foreign family in attendance. If I'm recalling correctly, he was asked when his family purchased their flights to attend the wedding. He was denied residency.

For the 99.9999999% of the 'spontaneous' marriages and adjustment of status cases, the examining agent just treats it like any other case. You have the paperwork that is required, have a financial sponsor able to sponsor you, had and passed your medical, don't have a criminal record that will bar you from residency, then you get approved.

If you enter under the VWP, you are admitted normally for 90 days. You don't have to take more than 30 days to plan a nice wedding which includes a wedding dress, tux or good suit for the groom, flowers, chapel and small restaurant and/or catering hall and inviting guests to attend.

Thus the issue of spur of the moment can include a planned wedding rather than a trip to city hall in jeans and a tee shirt.

themadpooper

Entering the States on a tourist visa or any form of temporary visa is a legal agreement you make with immigration that you will leave the country within 90 days or however long it stipulates on your visa agreement, it doesn't say at the bottom in small print on any visa I know of, "by the way, if you want to apply for residency, find someone to marry and go ahead". The fact people are still allowed to do this is because immigration allows for a change in circumstances and doesn't want to penalize them for this. It's not, as the comments on this thread are suggesting, a free for all for those who can't be arsed to go back to their home countries and apply for residency there. I will say this for the last time as someone who immigrated to America via marriage myself, adjusting your status just out of convenience CAN be an issue for some people and I don't really care how many more times I'm condescended to by people who think they know better than the legal advice I received

ian-mstm

In fact, it did say as much on the I-94W which predates ESTA... quite specifically, in fact! So, just because you don't know of it, doesn't mean it's not there! Look for it - you'll find it.


No one has denied that it can be an issue for some people. The percentage of people for whom it's an issue, however, is less than 0.1%... (Pulaski would say 0.01% but I'm more cautious than he is) which is as near to zero as makes no difference!


Some of us have been here a long time. We were here long before you arrived, and we'll be here long after you're nothing but a distant memory. Rete (who has actually been here 18 years and not 17) and I have been here longer than most lawyers have practiced. We've seen a lot of stupid lawyers in our time. They're not gods - they make mistakes... and when they do make mistakes, it's not the lawyers who pay for it - it's people like you who can't be arsed to do their own research; don't know the difference between what is allowed and what isn't; and who believe that anything from a lawyer's mouth is as good as gospel. I'll bet you haven't even bothered to look up the "30/60 rule" to find out what that was about!

Ian