helsjoy

I'm a UK citizen and my fiance is a US citizen.
We both work on cruise ships so do not intend on moving countries just yet so the citizenship will remain the same.
Can I travel into the US in August on my ESTA and get married?

Noorah101

Yes, as long as you do not intend to remain in the USA and adjust status to permanent resident.

Rene

jeffreyhy

Citizenship will remain the same even if one or the other of you do move to the other's country, for a few years at least. On the Visa Waiver Program. Yes. Regards, JEff

richbogle84

Welcome to BE

As Rene and Jeff have said, if you do not intend to stay in the US, then there is nothing wrong with you travelling to America under the VWP and getting married to a USC.

I would suggest however, that you bring evidence of your intent to return to the UK with you when you travel to America to get married. This is simply in case you are questioned at the port of entry, and they are concerned that you plan to reside in the States without the necessary visa. Evidence could include for example, a UK bank statement, a UK employment contract, return flight details, etc.

Others may be along with additional suggestions, but the short answer to your question is; it's absolutely fine, and you do not need a visa to get married in the US unless you're planning to remain there

Rich.

Pulaski

Agreed, I did it myself. The only thing I would add is that I recommend you fly in to and clear immigration at a major international hub, e.g. JFK, Newark, LAX, Chicago etc. as IMO & experience you are less likely to be given the third degree by the immigration officer than at a smaller airport.

DavidLemon

I too got married in the US when visiting as a tourist. It was a make or break decision, but my intention was never to remain in the US once the decision was made to get married. I indeed went home not more than 4 days after the wedding, however my wife accompanied me and we remained there for a few years before I ended up here in Boston.

S Folinsky

Side note: the working on cruise ship brings up some other issues.

Furthermore, deponent sayeth not.

jeffreyhy

This may not have anything to do with the things that deponent is not saying, but I notice that there is a D nonimmigrant visa for foreign crewmen that allows for a stay in the USA of up to 29 days. (Fishing vessels excluded, but we're talking about cruise ships here.)

That D visa aside, and I've no idea about how long a person who works on a cruise ship might be off the ship between 'shifts', but let's say for the purpose of discussion it's more than 29 days but less than 90 days and the person is from a VWP country. If said person spends all or most their time between shifts in the USA, not in their home country or elsewhere outside the USA, can they be deemed to be residing in the USA, in violation of the VWP, despite the fact that over the long haul they spend most of their time at work on the ship and less than half of their time in the USA off duty?

Regards, JEff

S Folinsky

The "D" visa applies when an alien crewman arrives in the US. I can envision a situation where a person arrives in the US to JOIN a ship. [Also, the issues can get complicated and the government takes some mighty weird positions].

jeffreyhy

Many (most?) cruise ships employ diverse international crews. When a ship is based out of a US port, and a non-USC crew member has finished their X number of cruises and leaves the ship for a period of R&R, do they need the D visa to leave the ship at it's US home port and enter the US enroute to wherever they're going to spend their time off?

In any case, if they always leave the ship at its US home port and procede to spend all of their time off in the USA until they rejoin the ship to resume working, always either at work or in the USA when not at work, might they not be considered to be residing in the USA? One of the complicated issues, perhaps.

Regards, JEff

Speedwell

JEff, I'm not in any way a lawyer, but it would make sense to me to guess that the crew member is "resident" in the country of registry of the ship. Of course, what makes sense to me is not necessarily what makes sense to the case law

jeffreyhy

Ah, I see what you mean!

Regards, JEff

jeffreyhy

Why does this make sense to you? It would make sense to me that a person is resident not where they work, but where they maintain their home and spend their time when not at work. Starting with a simple situation, my company has it's headquarters a few miles from a state line. Many of the HQ employees have their home in the adjoining state. I think we can agree that those employees are residents of the adjoining state even though they spend all of their working time in the HQ state?

Taking it one step further and in the direction of the situation we're discussing, my brother worked on a tugboat in San Francisco bay in California. He'd be on the tug for 6 weeks at a time. His house, where he spent his time off, was on Cape Cod bay in Massachusetts. The two states considered him a resident of Massachusetts, as did the IRS for federal tax purposes. I think we'd agree with them?

So why would a person who works on a cruise ship be considered a resident of the place where the ship is registered, rather than a resident of their country of citizenship or the place where they spend their time when they're not at work?

BTW, see 9 FAM 41.41 Notes, N1.3

Regards, JEff

Speedwell

Jesus, Jeff, what does a poster have to do to reassure you that they are not speaking officially, that they are not offering advice, and that they are stating a tentative guess? I don't think any reasonable person would think from my post that I was stating it as a fact. Maybe you should work on your reading skills instead of training your knees to jerk wildly.

jeffreyhy

I asked what your thought process was. Where did I say anything about you having presented a fact?

Then I went on to explain my thought process, so that you and others could see where I'm coming from.

Still wondering where you are coming from. I might agree with you if you were to explain.

Regards, JEff