|
Ten Foot Pole!
Recently referred to on this website.
What is the 'ten foot pole'? Would you touch it? With your's? Or someone else's? Answers please????? CB |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by CaliforniaBride Recently referred to on this website. What is the 'ten foot pole'? Would you touch it? With your's? Or someone else's? Answers please????? CB Admission as a tourist then getting married and applying for adjustment of status based on that marriage. A scenario just LOADED with issues. |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
My understanding is that this term is usually used to act as a big warning to anyone tempted to bypass the visa petition waiting time by abusing the Visa Waiver Program.
The VWP is intended for tourists only. If you don't have a valid visa and you enter the US intending to get married and remain in the country then you're clearly *not* a tourist and you're taking a very big risk. Lying to the officers at the Point Of Entry is about as bad as it gets, and you run the risk of immediate deportation and triggering a lengthy (or even lifelong) ban. Even if you do manage to get into the country on the VWP and subsequently marry you will have to face Adjustment of Status two years later. If you cannot successfully prove that you entered the US without the intention to marry then once again you will risk deportation and ban. Not good, is it? So risky in fact that people are advised to not touch it with so much as a Ten Foot Pole! If, however, you were joking, then No, I would not eat green eggs and ham, I would not eat them, Sam I am. :) |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by mrpink My understanding is that this term is usually used to act as a big warning to anyone tempted to bypass the visa petition waiting time by abusing the Visa Waiver Program. The VWP is intended for tourists only. If you don't have a valid visa and you enter the US intending to get married and remain in the country then you're clearly *not* a tourist and you're taking a very big risk. Lying to the officers at the Point Of Entry is about as bad as it gets, and you run the risk of immediate deportation and triggering a lengthy (or even lifelong) ban. Even if you do manage to get into the country on the VWP and subsequently marry you will have to face Adjustment of Status two years later. If you cannot successfully prove that you entered the US without the intention to marry then once again you will risk deportation and ban. Not good, is it? So risky in fact that people are advised to not touch it with so much as a Ten Foot Pole! If, however, you were joking, then No, I would not eat green eggs and ham, I would not eat them, Sam I am. :) Made me smile. Thanks for the explanation too. It's a lot clearer now. Not in a box, or with a fox, in a house or with a mouse, not here, there or anywhere, if it's not truthfull then just don't dare! CB |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Just out of curiousity, but does anyone have any idea of what percentage of people actually do get denied AOS and/or deported/banned when adjusting status from VWP?? Might change the minds of people considering this option if they had an idea what the success/failure rate was.
Alie |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by mrpink Not good, is it? So risky in fact that people are advised to not touch it with so much as a Ten Foot Pole! NG participants are/were threatened by legal repercussions for discussing the act, "intent" and what is or is not typically or always forgiven by the US government when an AOS is based on marriage to a USC. The safest course of action in a public discussion is to state that it is illegal to enter on the VWP/tourist entry with the preconceived intent to adjust status after marrying a USC. That doesn't do much for people in the US who need information, but we're Keeping Our Borders Safe(tm). |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Alie&Steve Just out of curiousity, but does anyone have any idea of what percentage of people actually do get denied AOS and/or deported/banned when adjusting status from VWP?? Might change the minds of people considering this option if they had an idea what the success/failure rate was. Alie |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by meauxna Actually, the use of that phrase originated here as the topic itself, not the act. NG participants are/were threatened by legal repercussions for discussing the act, "intent" and what is or is not typically or always forgiven by the US government when an AOS is based on marriage to a USC. The safest course of action in a public discussion is to state that it is illegal to enter on the VWP/tourist entry with the preconceived intent to adjust status after marrying a USC. That doesn't do much for people in the US who need information, but we're Keeping Our Borders Safe(tm). |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
It's a scare tactic. But if you read sites and newgroups -- plenty of people use VWP to get married and have adjusted no problem. They just claim they were vacationing and got married on a whim. The IS can't really say squat. I think you have to do it *after* 30 days of being here, otherwise they can use some internal memo that automatically denies it if it's within 30 days.
-= nav =- |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Hebapotamus42 So this means that the USCIS does in fact read this newsgroup. :scared: That's not what it meant at all. |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
If the BCIS is so intent on people NOT entering on a visitor's VISA and then getting married, they need to speed up the waiting time for a Fiance VISA. It is very hard to take your loved one back to the airport without any idea of how long it will be until you see them again or even if they will be allowed back in the next time they visit. I can see how anyone would be tempted to take the option. Why is it those of us who want to follow the immigration laws are made to pay with long separations and uncertainty?!? I am so discouraged by the stories I have read on the internet about the backlog and obstacles that are thrown in the way. I have so far to go.
~Mystie |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
I believe the 3 paragraphs below which I wrote several months back
accurately addresses the issue, though I don't think it is INS anymore at the POE, but USCIS or BICE, or (doesn't anyone know?) I do find it curious that attorneys who claim to be bothered by the posting of incorrect information never seem inclined to question such statements (for example in this thread) such as: "Even if you do manage to get into the country on the VWP and subsequently marry you will have to face Adjustment of Status two years later. If you cannot successfully prove that you entered the US without the intention to marry then once again you will risk deportation and ban." It appears some incorrect postings bother them more than other incorrect postings. Funny how the incorrect postings that can help them drum up business don't seem to bother them quite as much as the ones that could cost them business. Paulgani ***************** It is illegal to enter the U.S. as a tourist (via. B1/B2, Visa Waiver, or Canadian Waiver), with a preconceived intent to immigrate by marrying and filing for AOS. It is NOT illegal to enter the U.S. as a tourist if your intent is to depart the U.S. after a temporary visit, but you change your mind and decide to marry and file AOS AFTER your arrival in the U.S. An INS official will attempt to determine your intent at the Port of Entry. Should you be determined to have "immigrant intent", you *will* be denied entry to the U.S., and you *could* be subjected to Expedited Removal, which entails a 5 year ban to reentry. Note, there is NO appeal of the POE official's decision. Should you successfully enter the U.S., you will be permitted to AOS, *regardless of your original intent* at the POE. Case law binds the INS to grant AOS if having "preconceived intent to immigrate" at entry is the only negative equity in your application. However, if it is determined that you made "material misrepresentations" at the POE in order to achieve an entry, you will be denied AOS. ***************** "meauxna" <member1851@british_expats.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > NG participants are/were threatened by legal repercussions for > discussing the act, "intent" and what is or is not typically or always > forgiven by the US government when an AOS is based on marriage to a USC. > The safest course of action in a public discussion is to state that it > is illegal to enter on the VWP/tourist entry with the preconceived > intent to adjust status after marrying a USC. > That doesn't do much for people in the US who need information, but > we're Keeping Our Borders Safe(tm). > -- > Posted via http://britishexpats.com |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
supernav wrote:
> It's a scare tactic. But if you read sites and newgroups -- plenty of > people use VWP to get married and have adjusted no problem. They just > claim they were vacationing and got married on a whim. The IS can't > really say squat. I think you have to do it *after* 30 days of being > here, otherwise they can use some internal memo that automatically > denies it if it's within 30 days. They can say a lot more than "squat". There are other factors to consider if you get married while here on VWP and it doesn't matter if you wait 30 days. |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Paul,
Thank you for correcting my omission, I should indeed have specified the pre-conceived intent to marry and *stay* as being ill advised. I believe I did mention that in my second paragraph, but that particular detail was absent in the subsequent comment. My intention here was not so much to advise on the detail of immigration law as to enlighten the original poster to the relevance of the term Ten Foot Pole in the context of this forum. Mr Pink |
Re: Ten Foot Pole!
Originally posted by Paul Gani I believe the 3 paragraphs below which I wrote several months back accurately addresses the issue, though I don't think it is INS anymore at the POE, but USCIS or BICE, or (doesn't anyone know?) I do find it curious that attorneys who claim to be bothered by the posting of incorrect information never seem inclined to question such statements (for example in this thread) such as: "Even if you do manage to get into the country on the VWP and subsequently marry you will have to face Adjustment of Status two years later. If you cannot successfully prove that you entered the US without the intention to marry then once again you will risk deportation and ban." It appears some incorrect postings bother them more than other incorrect postings. Funny how the incorrect postings that can help them drum up business don't seem to bother them quite as much as the ones that could cost them business. Paulgani ***************** It is illegal to enter the U.S. as a tourist (via. B1/B2, Visa Waiver, or Canadian Waiver), with a preconceived intent to immigrate by marrying and filing for AOS. It is NOT illegal to enter the U.S. as a tourist if your intent is to depart the U.S. after a temporary visit, but you change your mind and decide to marry and file AOS AFTER your arrival in the U.S. An INS official will attempt to determine your intent at the Port of Entry. Should you be determined to have "immigrant intent", you *will* be denied entry to the U.S., and you *could* be subjected to Expedited Removal, which entails a 5 year ban to reentry. Note, there is NO appeal of the POE official's decision. Should you successfully enter the U.S., you will be permitted to AOS, *regardless of your original intent* at the POE. Case law binds the INS to grant AOS if having "preconceived intent to immigrate" at entry is the only negative equity in your application. However, if it is determined that you made "material misrepresentations" at the POE in order to achieve an entry, you will be denied AOS. ***************** "meauxna" <member1851@british_expats.com> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > NG participants are/were threatened by legal repercussions for > discussing the act, "intent" and what is or is not typically or always > forgiven by the US government when an AOS is based on marriage to a USC. > The safest course of action in a public discussion is to state that it > is illegal to enter on the VWP/tourist entry with the preconceived > intent to adjust status after marrying a USC. > That doesn't do much for people in the US who need information, but > we're Keeping Our Borders Safe(tm). > -- > Posted via http://britishexpats.com At the POE, it is no longer INS and it is not ICE nor is it CIS -- it is CBP. I will admit the TO's are quite a bit screwed up at the moment. When I was in quartermaster school back in the pre-computer army, I learned all about TOE's and PLL's and such things -- and it is a total FUBAR in any case. Please note that the attorneys here are not obligated to respond to ANYTHING. On the "ten foot pole" -- MY concern is misuse of the information to violate the law. That is MY personal ten-foot pole -- I don't want to encourage people on how to PLAN this. On DHS being compelled to follow case authority -- that is true. It is so true, that appellate authorities find it necessary to repeat it over and over again -- now why do they find it necessary -- because the DHS often does NOT follow "binding" authority. Of course, the courts only get to reiterate this principle for those forturnate enough with a lawyer who has the keys to the courthouse, so to speak. No such keys exist at a POE anymore. Also, on "binding authority" -- the Supremes in Roe v. Wade made a ruling on abortion rights THIRTY YEARS ago. Yet the issue keeps coming up the Supremes over and over again. "Binding authority" ain't all that binding at times. I participate in this board to let the DIY community know the pitfalls and risks. However, I like to protect my own rear end while doing this. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 6:54 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.