Greenhorn

I visited Siskind's immigration website at http://www.visalaw.com and in the Advocacy
updates there's this bill that was filed by a certain lawmaker called Permanent
Partners Act that would allow common law or permanent partners to have derivative
status for US immigration purposes. I feel that this bill if it passes would be
heaven sent for people like me who have an F2b family petition who are not allowed to
get married without losing entitlement to the immigrant visa, but have common law
spouses with kids. Furthermore, this bill would also allow US citizens to pass on
immigration benefits to their wife and kids even if their not married. There would be
hope for the long separation being endured by a lot of people if this one pushes
through. Please ask your congressman to support this bill.

Ingo Pakleppa

I'm sorry to dash your hopes, but, first, it is unfortunately highly unlikely to
pass, and second, it wouldn't help you.

It is highly unlikely to pass because the main beneficiaries would be homosexual
couples, and the US is generally a bit behind the curve on equal rights for
homosexuals.

And it wouldn't help you because even if your domestic partner would be recognized,
by the same token you would no longer be a beneficiary of F2b because you would then
be considered married for immigration purposes. Sorry, can't have it both ways.

Ingo

On 23 Jun 2002 22:36:15 -0700, [email protected] (greenhorn) wrote:

    >I visited Siskind's immigration website at http://www.visalaw.com and in the
    >Advocacy updates there's this bill that was filed by a certain lawmaker called
    >Permanent Partners Act that would allow common law or permanent partners to have
    >derivative status for US immigration purposes. I feel that this bill if it passes
    >would be heaven sent for people like me who have an F2b family petition who are not
    >allowed to get married without losing entitlement to the immigrant visa, but have
    >common law spouses with kids. Furthermore, this bill would also allow US citizens to
    >pass on immigration benefits to their wife and kids even if their not married. There
    >would be hope for the long separation being endured by a lot of people if this one
    >pushes through. Please ask your congressman to support this bill.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. For reliable advice, please consult
with a professional immigration attorney.

For further information, check the following frequently-requested links.

For many questions, you may find answers at
http://travel.state.gov/visa_services.html (Department of State)

or http://ins.usdoj.gov (INS).

For consular policies and visa reciprocity fees, find your consulate in
http://travel.state.gov/links.html

For visa denial and suggestions what to do about them, see
http://travel.state.gov/visadenials.html

For DOL Online Labor Certification: http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/

For information on affidavit of support for marriage to US citizens (I-864), go to
http://travel.state.gov/i864gen.html and http://travel.state.gov/checklist.html

For information on entering the US as a K-1: http://www.k1poelist.com/

For poverty levels, see http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/poverty/00poverty.htm

For information on H/L/O/P visa extensions at Dept. of State in St. Louis, MO, see
http://travel.state.gov/revals.html

For non-official information, check:

(When using these sites, and any Web sites, please watch out for privacy, as I do not
know all site operators.)

http://www.visalaw.com http://www.shusterman.com http://www.immigration.com
http://members.aol.com/MDUdall http://www.murthy.com/ http://www.richw.org/dualcit/
(dual citizenship FAQ) http://www.ilw.com http://www.srs-usvisa.com
http://www.getusavisa.com http://greencard-lottery.virtualave.net/
http://www.jcvisa.com (H-1B) http://www.h1bresources.com (marriage and fiancee)
http://www.kamya.com/misc/ (marriage and fiancee)
http://www.mindspring.com/~docsteen/...o/visainfo.htm http://www.workpermit.com

This is not an endorsement of any of these Web sites. I am not affiliated with any of
the Web site owners and do not receive nor accept payment in return for listing them,
and typically don't even know them.

(if believe you have a good immigration-related Web site and want your Web site
listed here, please e-mail me).

Greenhorn

[email protected] (Ingo Pakleppa) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
    > I'm sorry to dash your hopes, but, first, it is unfortunately highly unlikely to
    > pass, and second, it wouldn't help you.
    >
    > It is highly unlikely to pass because the main beneficiaries would be homosexual
    > couples, and the US is generally a bit behind the curve on equal rights for
    > homosexuals.
    >
    > And it wouldn't help you because even if your domestic partner would be
    > recognized, by the same token you would no longer be a beneficiary of F2b because
    > you would then be considered married for immigration purposes. Sorry, can't have
    > it both ways.
    >
    > Ingo
    >
    > On 23 Jun 2002 22:36:15 -0700, [email protected] (greenhorn) wrote:
    >
    > >I visited Siskind's immigration website at http://www.visalaw.com and in the
    > >Advocacy updates there's this bill that was filed by a certain lawmaker called
    > >Permanent Partners Act that would allow common law or permanent partners to have
    > >derivative status for US immigration purposes. I feel that this bill if it
    > >passes would be heaven sent for people like me who have an F2b family petition
    > >who are not allowed to get married without losing entitlement to the immigrant
    > >visa, but have common law spouses with kids. Furthermore, this bill would also
    > >allow US citizens to pass on immigration benefits to their wife and kids even if
    > >their not married. There would be hope for the long separation being endured by
    > >a lot of people if this one pushes through. Please ask your congressman to
    > >support this bill.
    >
    >
    > I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. For reliable advice, please consult
    > with a professional immigration attorney.
    >
    > For further information, check the following frequently-requested links.
    >
    > For many questions, you may find answers at
    > http://travel.state.gov/visa_services.html (Department of State)
    >
    > or http://ins.usdoj.gov (INS).
    >
    > For consular policies and visa reciprocity fees, find your consulate in
    > http://travel.state.gov/links.html
    >
    > For visa denial and suggestions what to do about them, see
    > http://travel.state.gov/visadenials.html
    >
    > For DOL Online Labor Certification: http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/
    >
    > For information on affidavit of support for marriage to US citizens (I-864), go to
    > http://travel.state.gov/i864gen.html and http://travel.state.gov/checklist.html
    >
    > For information on entering the US as a K-1: http://www.k1poelist.com/
    >
    > For poverty levels, see http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/poverty/00poverty.htm
    >
    >
    > For information on H/L/O/P visa extensions at Dept. of State in St. Louis, MO, see
    > http://travel.state.gov/revals.html
    >
    >
    > For non-official information, check:
    >
    > (When using these sites, and any Web sites, please watch out for privacy, as I do
    > not know all site operators.)
    >
    > http://www.visalaw.com http://www.shusterman.com http://www.immigration.com
    > http://members.aol.com/MDUdall http://www.murthy.com/ http://www.richw.org/dualcit/
    > (dual citizenship FAQ) http://www.ilw.com http://www.srs-usvisa.com
    > http://www.getusavisa.com http://greencard-lottery.virtualave.net/
    > http://www.jcvisa.com (H-1B) http://www.h1bresources.com (marriage and fiancee)
    > http://www.kamya.com/misc/ (marriage and fiancee)
    > http://www.mindspring.com/~docsteen/...o/visainfo.htm http://www.workpermit.com
    >
    > This is not an endorsement of any of these Web sites. I am not affiliated with any
    > of the Web site owners and do not receive nor accept payment in return for listing
    > them, and typically don't even know them.
    >
    > (if believe you have a good immigration-related Web site and want your Web site
    > listed here, please e-mail me).

If you take some time to read the wordings of this proposed bill you will find that
it applies to all "genders" male and female included. Furthermore, before u make any
conclusions, I suggest that u analyze first what the DOS considers as marriage for
immigration purposes. To give u a brief background, marriage for immigration purposes
is dependent upon the place where the marriage was celebrated or solemnized. If you
had common law status in countries that recogize common law relationships then you
would also be legally considered by the DOS as having a derivative spouse for
immigration purposes. If however, you live in a country whrere only legal marriages
are recognized, then u would still be considered single for F2b (unmarried adult sons
or daughters of GC holders)petition purposes. You first have to know what the
definitions are of a spouse, marriage and permanent partners. One of the effects upon
the passage of this bill is that it would create a new class of derivative
beneficiaries much like the "illegitimate under 21 children" who are entitled to an
immigrant visa but are not considered "legit". The INA would be amended as a
consequence, to include "permanent partners" for immigration purposes subject to
certain conditions. Meaning that you can have a "permanent partner" as a derivative
beneficiary and / or having sponsorship entitlements while still being "unmarried" if
your country of origin only recognizes legal marriages.

Ingo Pakleppa

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 23:18:15 -0700, greenhorn wrote:

    > [email protected] (Ingo Pakleppa) wrote in message
    > news:<[email protected]>...
    >> I'm sorry to dash your hopes, but, first, it is unfortunately highly unlikely to
    >> pass, and second, it wouldn't help you.
    >>
    >> It is highly unlikely to pass because the main beneficiaries would be homosexual
    >> couples, and the US is generally a bit behind the curve on equal rights for
    >> homosexuals.
    >>
    >> And it wouldn't help you because even if your domestic partner would be
    >> recognized, by the same token you would no longer be a beneficiary of F2b because
    >> you would then be considered married for immigration purposes. Sorry, can't have
    >> it both ways.
    >>
    >> Ingo
    >>
    >> On 23 Jun 2002 22:36:15 -0700, [email protected] (greenhorn) wrote:
    >>
    >> >I visited Siskind's immigration website at http://www.visalaw.com and in the
    >> >Advocacy updates there's this bill that was filed by a certain lawmaker called
    >> >Permanent Partners Act that would allow common law or permanent partners to have
    >> >derivative status for US immigration purposes. I feel that this bill if it
    >> >passes would be heaven sent for people like me who have an F2b family petition
    >> >who are not allowed to get married without losing entitlement to the immigrant
    >> >visa, but have common law spouses with kids. Furthermore, this bill would also
    >> >allow US citizens to pass on immigration benefits to their wife and kids even if
    >> >their not married. There would be hope for the long separation being endured by
    >> >a lot of people if this one pushes through. Please ask your congressman to
    >> >support this bill.
    >>
    >>
    >> I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. For reliable advice, please
    >> consult with a professional immigration attorney.
    >>
    >> For further information, check the following frequently-requested links.
    >>
    >> For many questions, you may find answers at
    >> http://travel.state.gov/visa_services.html (Department of State)
    >>
    >> or http://ins.usdoj.gov (INS).
    >>
    >> For consular policies and visa reciprocity fees, find your consulate in
    >> http://travel.state.gov/links.html
    >>
    >> For visa denial and suggestions what to do about them, see
    >> http://travel.state.gov/visadenials.html
    >>
    >> For DOL Online Labor Certification: http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/
    >>
    >> For information on affidavit of support for marriage to US citizens (I-864), go to
    >> http://travel.state.gov/i864gen.html and http://travel.state.gov/checklist.html
    >>
    >> For information on entering the US as a K-1: http://www.k1poelist.com/
    >>
    >> For poverty levels, see http://aspe.os.dhhs.gov/poverty/00poverty.htm
    >>
    >>
    >> For information on H/L/O/P visa extensions at Dept. of State in St. Louis, MO, see
    >> http://travel.state.gov/revals.html
    >>
    >>
    >> For non-official information, check:
    >>
    >> (When using these sites, and any Web sites, please watch out for privacy, as I do
    >> not know all site operators.)
    >>
    >> http://www.visalaw.com http://www.shusterman.com http://www.immigration.com
    >> http://members.aol.com/MDUdall http://www.murthy.com/
    >> http://www.richw.org/dualcit/ (dual citizenship FAQ) http://www.ilw.com
    >> http://www.srs-usvisa.com http://www.getusavisa.com
    >> http://greencard-lottery.virtualave.net/ http://www.jcvisa.com (H-1B)
    >> http://www.h1bresources.com (marriage and fiancee) http://www.kamya.com/misc/
    >> (marriage and fiancee) http://www.mindspring.com/~docsteen/...o/visainfo.htm
    >> http://www.workpermit.com
    >>
    >> This is not an endorsement of any of these Web sites. I am not affiliated with any
    >> of the Web site owners and do not receive nor accept payment in return for listing
    >> them, and typically don't even know them.
    >>
    >> (if believe you have a good immigration-related Web site and want your Web site
    >> listed here, please e-mail me).
    >
    > If you take some time to read the wordings of this proposed bill you will find that
    > it applies to all "genders" male and female included. Furthermore, before u make
    > any conclusions, I suggest that u analyze first what the DOS considers as marriage
    > for immigration purposes. To give u a brief background, marriage for immigration
    > purposes is dependent upon the place where the marriage was celebrated or
    > solemnized. If you had common law status in countries that recogize common law
    > relationships then you would also be legally considered by the DOS as having a
    > derivative spouse for immigration purposes. If however, you live in a country
    > whrere only legal marriages are recognized, then u would still be considered single
    > for F2b (unmarried adult sons or daughters of GC holders)petition purposes. You
    > first have to know what the definitions are of a spouse, marriage and permanent
    > partners. One of the effects upon the passage of this bill is that it would create
    > a new class of derivative beneficiaries much like the "illegitimate under 21
    > children" who are entitled to an immigrant visa but are not considered "legit". The
    > INA would be amended as a consequence, to include "permanent partners" for
    > immigration purposes subject to certain conditions. Meaning that you can have a
    > "permanent partner" as a derivative beneficiary and / or having sponsorship
    > entitlements while still being "unmarried" if your country of origin only
    > recognizes legal marriages.

Guessing on what a law may say that may or may not ever get passed is pretty
difficult. In this case, the situation would probably be addressed in regulations
rather than the law itself, making it a double-layered guess.

With that caveat, I would still maintain that somebody who tries to bring in a
partner that way most likely would end up being treated as "married" for quota
purposes, too. Any other interpretation would essentially render the quota system
pointless. Basically, you can't have your cake and eat it, too.