S Folinsky

Google "consular non-reviewability doctrine"

celticgrid

You are absolutely correct. You are naive. And many other things. But not, as claimed, humourous.

There are Americans who fight to have a system that reflects their beliefs. However, many of those are in groups whose beliefs are, shall we say, not ones you would agree with. Showing such a lack of knowledge about the country I wonder why you are so intent on visiting it?

sir_eccles

If you have read Don Quixote you'll surely know the phrase "tilting at windmills", I believe it is quite apt to apply it here.

maore

Thanks for asking the question, I am the kind of traveller who would go to a place where I do not have the foggiest idea what it is about just to discover it and ending up asking for some help from his consulate to get back home: this interest in going to the USA came from I was ten years and I had my first library card, I read this book about american folklore ,history through classical literature (pre 1960's) and ever since I said to myself I have got to check it out.

Noorah101

OK, so whenever your AP is finished and you get a visa, you can do that. It's nothing urgent. Or, maybe now that you're going through a process you don't approve of, you might change your mind about wanting to visit the USA after all.

Rene

maore

Thanks, it is quiet an exciting subject.especially this pdf "CHALLENGING THE DOCTRINE OF CONSULAR NONREVIEWABILITY IN IMMIGRATION CASES
By Donald S. Dobkin∗" quiet an interesting reading...

maore

LOL

lansbury

When you come to my house I decide if I let you in. I make up the rules by which I decide and quite frankly I don't give a toss if you like my rules or not. It is my house and my decision is final.

My belief is that my country should do the same and it and it alone decides which non citizens get in and who do not. As someone who protected the borders of their former home country, I didn't play by the rules, I used discretion and sometimes people didn't get in because quite frankly I thought the UK would be better of if they didn't. I prefered to be given a bollocking for keeping the wrong person out rather than having let the wrong person in. I expect USCIS, Consular Officers and the CBP to do exactly what I did.

maore

I am not approving or disapproving the process per se (who can be against preserving the safety of a country ?) .

It might sound pedantic but what I have an issue with is the procedure ,not because my important stubborn self is under it but because it seems to me un-transparent (you ve got to scramble through pages of google just to know the meaning of "administrative processing"), arbitrary (the human consular officer who did not have his/her morning cup of coffee) and discriminatory(the peasant from xinjang is more dangerous than the gun carrying norvegian).

Noorah101

The typical layman is not supposed to comprehend the whole meaning of "administrative processing". All the typical layman needs to know is that his case is under review and has to wait for a decision from DOS.

This is not the case, to my knowlege. Everyone who applies for a visa has their name run through databases and security checks are done. If the name matches that of someone undesireable, then manual verifications must be done to make sure that isn't you. Or, if you have worked in a field like biochemistry, they want to do more research on you. It's not just that a ConOff woke up on the wrong side of the bed, didn't like the looks of you, and said nahhh, forget this one.

See above. It doesn't matter where that person is from or what they are carrying...it depends on how your results come through the security check process. Perhaps that peasant has the same name as a criminal and it needs to be cleared up. Perhaps that gun carrying guy has a squeaky clean record and never got caught, even though he did so many bad things. That's not discrimination. Everyone goes through security checks, regardless of where they are from.

Rene

maore

So Subjective and that s exactly the reason why your decisions should reviewed and monitored.Again for the 333 rd times It is not a matter of liking or not liking the rules and regulations because it will just be coming from a gut feeling - let us get the part of our body Up there instead

scrubbedexpat099

Reading this and your other thread it sounds like you have been playing games and it has somewhat backfired.

I am sure I have read of an AP longer than 2 years....

Anyway I have been to 30 odd countries which leaves about 150 on my Bucket List. Missing out on a few is no biggie.

maore

OK we are basically cheeky monkeys and "not supposed to comprehend the whole meaning of "administrative processing"" -humour

Are you sure about this one ? "This is not the case, to my knowlege. Everyone who applies for a visa has their name run through databases and security checks are done. If the name matches that of someone undesireable, then manual verifications must be done to make sure that isn't you. Or, if you have worked in a field like biochemistry, they want to do more research on you. It's not just that a ConOff woke up on the wrong side of the bed, didn't like the looks of you, and said nahhh, forget this one" I tried to go through FAM during my spare time (yep quiet a sad life) and at no time it does mention an SAO,AO or AP should be limited solely at the examples you gave. You might be completely right but there is no way to check this one out due to the lack of transparency ...

"That's not discrimination. Everyone goes through security checks, regardless of where they are from." As far as I understand, everyone goes through the CLASS system (FAM) but a few goes through SOA,AO or AP.The regulation states the following "When, as a result of the visa interview, you decide that an advisory opinion (AO) is necessary" (9 FAM 41.121 PN3) - Now I might be silly to think there are more Paul Jones commited crimes in the USA than our poor peasant from xinjang region Mr Lu Chuan

Squirrel

This post kind of makes the OP's point that it is not the checks but the length of time it takes that is troublesome. The Syrian born Brit flies to the USA and because of his name being similar to a name on the watch list, he gets put into secondary. However (presumably) the matter is cleared up pretty quickly (I don't imagine the guy was kept waiting in secondary for 2 years!)

Yet if this same guy needed a visa he'd be put through AP which could take 2 years?

How come if he uses VW it takes an hour or so, if he needs a visa it takes up to 2 years? For the same checks?

maore

I have to admit I try my best being cheeky ,"backfired" well you can keep it as quiet or just blazing through the whole process - it does not change how a consular officer will view you or decide about your case for the simple reason that he is human with his weaknesses,strengths,prejudices and ability to do great things...