Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Three and Ten Year Ban (and parole?)

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    to KBB: Your husband likely made representations to the embassy that he would abide by our laws and they gave him a privilege. He likely told them he was going to stay a month or so, not a year or so. He told them he was not going to work. Undoubtedly the embassy knew the conditions of the country he is from and whether or not the situation is as bad as you suggested, yet they gave him the privilege and trust anyway. And how was this trust repaid?
    If he had bought a round trip airline ticket, what happened on the day he was supposed to go back? What stopped him? And if his goal was to find illegal work, etc, then perhaps he did not tell the truth when he applied for his visa. What happened to his job, for example, in his home country (if he had one)?

    The point of all of this is that he was given a chance to demonstrate his willingness to obey US law and, well, he didn't. And now he wants to be given a reward. What does this say to those who obey our laws and patiently wait their turn? How must they feel?
    He could have established a relationship with you, returned to his country when he was supposed to and waited while you filed a petition for him (fiancee or spouse). Then he would not be facing difficulties nor would you. True, he would have to return to a country where things were apparently not so good. But that was the promise he made when he was given the tourist visa.

    Are the 3/10yr bars too harsh? Well, what is wrong with telling the truth and doing what you say, and if you don't, then what should the penalty be? If a person's word has no value, then how should visas be given out? If embassies deny visas to some, what happens? People from the US are unhappy. They cannot understand the decision. But not everyone qualifies and not every country has the waiver program.

    I was reading an article a couple of weeks ago about some Romanian orphans that did not get visas to visit the US. Why? Apparently the embassy did not think that some or all of them would go back to Romania. And a lot of people apparently thought the embassy employees were the bad guys. But from what I read, the embassy was FOLLOWING THE LAW. They made their decision based on the law and their view that they did not believe that those kids would return to Romania after being a tourist. Everyone of those kids had to prove , somehow, that they would return to what was described as a rather unpleasant environment (the orphanages) instead of staying in the US. They could not and they did not get to go. But I do not believe that the embassy employees were at fault. I am sure others would agree or disagree. So be it. Would some or all of them return? Who can say? The point was that they could not qualify and missed a summer camp or something. Was that cruel? Well, the law says everyone who asks for a tourist visa is presumed to be an intending immigrant until they convince the embassy otherwise. Sounds like it requires a lot of trust on behalf of the embassy.The law apparently does not say that a person should automatically get a tourist visa if they are going to summer camp or if they plan on working illegally later. I read later that it turned there was no summer camp; the orphans were going to be "auditioned" or something so American families could adopt them. It turned out that the organizers did not tell the truth to the embassy and got caught. So the embassy was right after all even though they were given bad press initially.

    I would not be surprised when the embassy in your husband's country finds out about people who have abused the visas that they look at applications more closely. Probably that will mean fewer and fewer visas given out. And the people who hear the words "no visa" who are from your husband's country, whom should they thank for the extra scrutiny?

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Juju, thanks for raising this topic. It is of keen interest to me, as my husband is facing a 10-year bar to reentry because he overstayed a tourist visa by more than one year. Did my husband knowingly violate the US immigration laws? Yes. Did my husband have a choice? I suppose he did. He could choose between remaining in the United States where he was able to find work that allowed him to support himself and spending every dime he had managed to save to return to a life of poverty in a repressive country.

    My husband knew that his choice to remain in the United States meant that he would have to work long hours for minimum wage, that he would constantly have to look over his shoulder, and that he would be someone who had no status. What would happen if he became seriously ill or severely injured? He knew that it meant a long, possibly permanent, separation from his family. If someone chooses to live like this, what must life be like in his or her home country? To whoever thinks that being faced with this choice is baloney, I hope you are never in this position.

    I can't imagine being faced with such a choice and because I have lived my entire life in the United States I've never been faced with such a choice until now. Because I chose to marry my husband, I am now faced with a similar (but not the same) choice: If he is denied a waiver, do I stay or do I go?

    All choices have consequences; some have penalties. My husband chose to violate the US immigration laws, and I chose to marry him. Now together we face the consequences of our choices--not being able to live together in the United States for at least 10 years.

    I agree that visa violators should be penalized; they have violated the law; whether they of the law and it's penalties is not the issue. Should the penalty be harsh, as someone suggested earlier? I'm not so certain about that, and the fact that a waiver is available makes me think that Congress believed that, under certain circumstances, a three- or 10-year bar is too harsh.

    If the goal of the three- and 10-year bars is to deter visa overstays, I don't think it works. If anyone has any statics on overstays prior to 1997 and after, I'd love to see them. If the goal is to punish those who overstay; it does punish those who return to their home countries but desire to return to the United States for one reason or another.

    In the end, I agree that the bars are harsh, but I'm not sure if the bars are fair penalties for the transgression of overstaying a visa. Admittedly my personal experience makes me somewhat bias.

    To everyone trying to reunite with a barred loved one, I understand your pain and frustration. Good luck.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Mischa: I could not have said it any better. Folks, read and reread what she wrote. It is on the money. If someone has come to the US on a tourist visa (or the waiver program) and decides to get married to an Amcit, there are plenty of legitimate ways to change status or return to country x, y or z and do the immigrant visa there without having to overstay, work illegally or anything else.
    For those who are the beneficiaries of a petition from an LPR or brother/sister of an American, yes, it is true you have a long wait ahead of you. That fact is NOT justification for breaking our laws. Someday Congress may decide to add more visa numbers; but until they do, the current laws are what we have. Disobey them, face the consequences, stop whining.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    to sony, clinton broke the law, but he's paying dearly for his actions, he's in millions of dollars in debt from lawyer fees and his reputation is forever tarnished. yes, he is not perfect but guess what? this is his country and he's still paying for his actions.

    As for bushmaster, he was already overstaying when they got married. Why did he overstayed in the first place?

    The point is, these are laws. Wether we like it or not, they should be followed because we choose to live in this country. It's one's own fault that they are punished because they ignored it.

    As for people overstaying their visas, most do mainly to find work, work illegally and then scramble to legalize their status when they run out of time. I read through the discussion board and read about people who are in another country waiting for their petition to be approved, finding ways to shorten the already lengthy process but still not breaking the rules. What makes them different from us? Nothing. They just took time and bear the loneliness of being away from their families because they want a good life in the future and not break any laws.

    I read through the discussion board and since we are posting, we all know we can read and write English. In the months that we are here, we can read through the whole INS process and get to know the law. Law Associations in DC provide for free consultation for aliens who are in need of legal advice. So there is help BEFORE you break any laws.

    I have no axe to grind with any of you. I am for immigration, as I am an immigrant myself. But I took time to research and planned for this so I never was in any position that I will have no law on my side. I'm not perfect even. So what gives?

    Sorry, but I have no respect for people wh

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Dear Bushmaster: Your problems are your own, not to be blamed on some snitch. And, check the constitution carefully; you will not find that a citizen has the right to live with their spouse; if that were true, no waiver would be required. Think about it. You were given a privilege; you decided the law did not apply to you. You were wrong.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    well mr philipino no body is perfect..it happens that some dayr someone breaks a law..I am not talkings about criminal stuff or somthing like that..just talking about some kind of people who would rather stay illegal here to be with their family...
    what did Clinton do with Lewinsky ?did he break the law when lying under oath or no ?? He was a president by then !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Please don't judge..nobody is PERFECTTTTTTTTTTTTT

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Juju, I moved here in 1997. you know what? when they passed the law in 1997, they featured it on all news stations in my area. CNN had a field day with the lawmakers. I knew about the law since as a foreigner in this country, I keep up with the laws. The Philippine consulate also issued an advisory about this.

    The thing is, INS already has a waiver for overstaying your visa status. If one leaves within 180 days (that's six months!), they can exit without any ban. within a year after 180 days, 3-yr ban and more than a year, 10 years. Even for laid off workers, one has 180 days to find a new job and not violate his visa status.

    I agree with Guest that we should be responsible for our own actions and not try to see the INS law as a severe punishment. The law was put to place to prevent people from overstaying their visas. And people do overstay, looking for work, working illegally. Why reward someone for ignoring the law. It's actually stamped on the visa that you cannot overstay.

    And the time ratio is not severe. I think it's just fair, do you know how long six months feels like when you are on vacation.

    As they say, one's ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law.

    If you want to immigrate into this country, I suggest you read all the laws that affects you as an immigrant and not blame someone else for blatantly ignoring it's laws.

    I'm not American, but I hate it when people break laws and demand that they be given the same privilege as the citizens of this country when they broke the law that protects it's citizens in the first place.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    My wife and I are in a good faith marriage. Unfortunately, I was apprehended by INS before our marriage date (thanks to a snitch) and charged with overstaying. We married after they started the proceedings. An I-130 is filed 7 months ago and it's approval will terminate the proceedings. In any case, it's not approved soon and the IJ grants me voluntary departure, I might have to leave Feb '03.

    So are waivers available for this 10 yr ban? I am not sitting and waiting overseas for 10 years while my wife is over here. And she is a US citizen, she has the right to be here with her husband, she is not leaving here!

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Perhaps somebody should have thought of that before violating US laws and abusing a privilege. Very few people overstay because they "don't have a choice." Unless a person was in jail or a coma, they had every free choice to leave the US when their authorized stay was over...other excuses are just plain baloney.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Thank you

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    Wait until it involves losing your immediate family.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    These laws were passed in 1996 and took effect in 1997 and have been well known ever since. They were designed to encourage visa applicants to tell the truth and do what they said they were going to do when coming to the US. If someone overstays by a year for example, it would seem then that person did tell not the truth to a) the embassy and b) the INS. Yet the US bestowed a privilege upon the visa applicant but that person decided not to abide by the terms of that privilege. Why should we reward such behavior?
    A visa is a privilege, not a right. Abusers should expect a severe penalty for violating the terms of the visa privilege.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    These laws were passed in 1996 and took effect in 1997 and have been well known ever since. They were designed to encourage visa applicants to tell the truth and do what they said they were going to do when coming to the US. If someone overstays by a year for example, it would seem then that person did tell the truth to a) the embassy and b) the INS. Yet the US bestowed a privilege upon the visa applicant but that person decided not to abide by the terms of that privilege. Why should we reward such behavior?
    A visa is a privilege, not a right. Abusers should expect a severe penalty for violating the terms of the visa privilege.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    I suppose most American wouldn't know about immigration unless they are some how related to a person that is going through INS process. My husband doesn't know a thing about immigration until he met me neither do my American friends. The same goes for me with immigration laws in my own country.

    I sort of knew about the bar, but not in detail. What I do know is that I would be trouble if I didn't maintain my non-immigrant status.

    I do agree that 10 year bar is a somewhat too extreme. Maybe it should 3 and 5.

    Leave a comment:


  • Guest's Avatar
    Guest replied
    None of us knew about this bar. I think most immigrants as well as Americans have no idea it exists. A deterrent cannot work if nobody knows about it. And isn't the ratio of time a little extreme?

    Leave a comment:

Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

Home Page

Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Questions/Comments

SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily



Working...
X