Dear Donald: Perhaps this is why you don’t get “...more immigrants from places l

[cwericb]

Dear Donald: Perhaps this is why you don’t get “...more immigrants from places like Norway”

 

A person close to me applied for a U.S. Green Card. She had a lawyer prepare the application so there would be no errors and everything was legal.

 

She is ....

 

A) Canadian citizen born & bred

B) Married to an American citizen.

C) Has a Masters degree from a leading Canadian university

D) Has no criminal past

E) Has a job waiting for her

F) Is in good health

 

Aside from this her husband has a good job and they have purchased their own home in the anticipation that the Green Card would not be a problem.

 

The application was rejected with a note that the decision was not subject to appeal and given 33 days to leave the United States.

 

Should have gone to Mexico and paddled across the Rio?

 

So the bottom line here is ... just exactly what sort of people does the U.S. wish to attract?

 

 

[cubsfan]

 

Should have gone to Mexico and paddled across the Rio?

 

Yes she should - you are correct, this is totally ridiculous and awful.

 

One caveat you should consider - Don't blame Trump - Blame a do-nothing and worthless US Congress for allowing this situation to persist.

And when I "blame" Congress, I mean Democrats and Republicans alike.

 

Trump will be more than happy to "fix" immigration once Congress does something for once.

[cwericb]

Nope, as much as I dislike Trump I'm not going to blame him for this one nor congress for that matter. This one gets laid squarely on bureaucrats who have a total lack common sense who can’t properly interpret the rule book.

 

Actually I think The Donald would be just as frustrated and ticked off by this as am I.

[Parsad]

Dear Donald: Perhaps this is why you don’t get “...more immigrants from places like Norway”

 

A person close to me applied for a U.S. Green Card. She had a lawyer prepare the application so there would be no errors and everything was legal.

 

She is ....

 

A) Canadian citizen born & bred

B) Married to an American citizen.

C) Has a Masters degree from a leading Canadian university

D) Has no criminal past

E) Has a job waiting for her

F) Is in good health

 

Aside from this her husband has a good job and they have purchased their own home in the anticipation that the Green Card would not be a problem.

 

The application was rejected with a note that the decision was not subject to appeal and given 33 days to leave the United States.

 

Should have gone to Mexico and paddled across the Rio?

 

So the bottom line here is ... just exactly what sort of people does the U.S. wish to attract?

 

Why was she denied a Green Card?  Cheers!

[cwericb]

I don’t like to get too specific here as this is ongoing right now.

 

However, she was in the US on a certain type of visa and immigration rejected her Green Card application citing that she was in the US illegally on the wrong type of Visa.

 

This is the second time this has come up.

 

A few years ago she was denied entry at a smaller border crossing on the grounds that she was traveling on wrong type of visa. She knew this was not correct because she had been traveling back and forth frequently on that visa without a problem. However, these guys threw her in the lock up for 7 hours and then denied her entry.

 

She then spent several months in Canada and got the necessary documentation to travel as a professional. This probably cost her about $60K in legal fees, lost wages, etc.

 

She eventually flew back to the States through Montreal on her new visa. The US immigration officer took her aside to examine her documentation. He told her that there was absolutely nothing wrong with her original visa and that she shouldn’t have been denied entry previously. He then admitted her under her original visa.

 

This time the reason given for the rejection of her Green Card was the same as given at the small crossing into the US several years before - once again saying she had been in the US illegally on the incorrect visa type. One might suspect that this occurred because they saw that denial on her old record. So it would seem that Immigration has made a mistake - but they also state that the denial is not subject to appeal.

 

She now has a new lawyer but her life has been totally and completely disrupted and it may take a year to get this resolved.

 

 

[Parsad]

I don’t like to get too specific here as this is ongoing right now.

 

However, she was in the US on a certain type of visa and immigration rejected her Green Card application citing that she was in the US illegally on the wrong type of Visa.

 

This is the second time this has come up.

 

A few years ago she was denied entry at a smaller border crossing on the grounds that she was traveling on wrong type of visa. She knew this was not correct because she had been traveling back and forth frequently on that visa without a problem. However, these guys threw her in the lock up for 7 hours and then denied her entry.

 

She then spent several months in Canada and got the necessary documentation to travel as a professional. This probably cost her about $60K in legal fees, lost wages, etc.

 

She eventually flew back to the States through Montreal on her new visa. The US immigration officer took her aside to examine her documentation. He told her that there was absolutely nothing wrong with her original visa and that she shouldn’t have been denied entry previously. He then admitted her under her original visa.

 

This time the reason given for the rejection of her Green Card was the same as given at the small crossing into the US several years before - once again saying she had been in the US illegally on the incorrect visa type. One might suspect that this occurred because they saw that denial on her old record. So it would seem that Immigration has made a mistake - but they also state that the denial is not subject to appeal.

 

She now has a new lawyer but her life has been totally and completely disrupted and it may take a year to get this resolved.

 

So there was a valid issue with her visa and thus denied a Green Card.  So this has nothing to do with Mexicans, the Rio Grande, etc.  It's a bureaucratic bungle, but a smudge on her record nonethless. 

 

Until the issue is fixed, it's not really anyone's fault is it?  Just a clerical/historical error that is popping up on her file and forcing them to deny entry. 

 

Let's not create racial biases where none existed...there are plenty of issues already that have become racist and divisive.  Cheers!

[LC]

I read the original post and thought it was very odd that a marriage green card would be denied. It is incredible how much legal discrepancy there is at customs. You would think it is very cut-and-dry when it comes to which visa types are allowed, what the dates are, etc.

 

I would suggest border crossing through well-traveled routes. I would assume customs at major crossings are (1) better versed in the law, (2) less biased as they have more exposure to different people constantly coming in/out, (3) simply busier and therefore less likely to make mountains out of molehills and waste time.

 

Good luck to your friend.

[cwericb]

 

First off as far as I, and her US lawyer, can see there is certainly no valid issue with the visa.

 

Also, nowhere did I mention anything racial. I guess the point I am trying to make here is that this is an actual example of just how the dysfunctional the US immigration system has become.

 

I was also trying to answer Mr. Trump’s question.

 

However.

 

Since the subject came up, I wonder if the motivation for this decision is actually deeper than it appears on the surface.

 

Is it actually racially motivated? Is it some sort of reverse discrimination - “we don’t want to be seen as just kicking out Hispanics, we better kick out some Canadians and Europeans to prove we are not discriminating against anyone”?

 

I say this with the personal knowledge that this has happened to her TWICE and also at least two other people who have had similar experiences, one from Sweden, one from S. Africa - all happen to be white - so is it just a bureaucratic screw up after all or are they attempting to balance the scale in any way they can, legitimate or not?

 

If even well educated, contributing people who can be of benefit to the US are being run out of the country, it would seem to be very short sighted for any country to try and completely close their borders.

 

As a Canadian I guess I would say that if you good folks to the South don't want well educated, stable, healthy English speaking people who are willing to work - send 'em North we'll take every one of them.

*****************************************

 

Off topic.....

 

As I write this CNN is playing clips of Trump repeatedly talking about the “Invasion” of Arizona, New Mexico and Texas from Mexico.

 

Hmmm ... Wasn't it the US that invaded Mexico in the mid 1800's and seized what is now Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California in the first place?

 

Naaa I must have that wrong.

*********************************************

 

LC - That is quite correct and very good advice, unfortuantely it is not always practical.

 

[Parsad]

I read the original post and thought it was very odd that a marriage green card would be denied. It is incredible how much legal discrepancy there is at customs. You would think it is very cut-and-dry when it comes to which visa types are allowed, what the dates are, etc.

 

I would suggest border crossing through well-traveled routes. I would assume customs at major crossings are (1) better versed in the law, (2) less biased as they have more exposure to different people constantly coming in/out, (3) simply busier and therefore less likely to make mountains out of molehills and waste time.

 

Good luck to your friend.

 

Surprisingly, this won't matter.  Under the Obama Administration, believe it or not, and made even more strict and tighter under the Trump Administration, it's very hard to correct errors on records so that you aren't denied entry to the U.S.  For some people using an immigration lawyer, it can still take a couple of years to fix it. 

 

Alot of this problem started when the Obama Administration gave customs officers the power to deny entry on sight...so you piss off the customs officers, BAM, he/she can ban you for five years.  No supervisor, administrator, etc...that custom's officer can put a mark on your record that bans you outright at all ports of entry for five years.  Now you have to go find a lawyer to argue it...and that takes time, paperwork and money.  Cheers!

[LC]

LC - That is quite correct and very good advice, unfortuantely it is not always practical.

Very true unfortunately.

 

Taking a guess as to how much of a cluster#(*@ US immigrations is, I would imagine they are (incorrectly) using the initial visa issue at that small crossing as the reason to deny the green card, i.e. a prior history of visa/immigration offenses.

 

The notice may say there is no recourse but I would advise the husband to investigate further. It sounds like US customs screwed up and now he, an American citizen, is paying the price. Hell, tell him to reach out to the office of his Senator if it gets that far. No stone unturned kind of attitude.

[Parsad]

Is it actually racially motivated? Is it some sort of reverse discrimination - “we don’t want to be seen as just kicking out Hispanics, we better kick out some Canadians and Europeans to prove we are not discriminating against anyone”?

 

No, it's not only that.  They are just tightening the screws on all forms of immigration.  Populous governments tend to become introverted...bring jobs home, close our borders, expel illegals, tighten rule of law, etc.  The U.S. has not been an easy place to immigrate to for nearly two decades now...and become much more difficult in the last decade...especially refugee applications. 

 

In terms of ethnicity, there certainly has been some profiling over the last 50 years based more on region (so less Canada/Europe - Caucasian; and more Asia/Mexico/Africa,etc):

 

http://www.ncsl.org/research/immigration/snapshot-of-u-s-immigration-2017.aspx

 

Cheers!

 

 

[cwericb]

Looking at the page Sangeev referenced above...

 

Surprised to see that with a population of 327 million the US took in just  22,491 refugees in 2018 while Canada with a population of 38 million took in 28,000.

 

What ever happened to:

 

“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me: I lift my lamp beside the golden door. “

 

Before someone suggests that the above is outdated, then isn’t the following outdated as well?

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

[wachtwoord]

The first is outdated since the US became properous and stopped expanding.

 

The second can never be outdated.

[Gregmal]

Welcome to America. Where you can do anything you want to, provided you make a lawyer rich while doing so.

 

This is really the way the system is heavily rigged against normal people. Its a not so cleverly disguised pay for play situation. You need a lawyer, and typically, at least a decent one, in order to truly utilize many of your rights here. If you have access to a great lawyer, there are no rules.

[gfp]

Very true of course.  The last several years I have spent way more time interacting with young and/or disadvantaged people in New Orleans because of our adopted teenage son.  The few times we have put one of our lawyers, professionals, etc, in their corner - whatever the specific problem was seemed to very quickly go away.  It's a little embarrassing sometimes how much difficulty they will be having and how quickly we are able to resolve it once we get involved.  Of course the kids soak all this up - they are grateful for the help but it doesn't go unnoticed the differences in the process

 

*(of course selection bias is alive and well here, we are only going to stick our necks out on stuff that we think we have a real chance of helping on.  Also, this has led to young people just spontaneously showing up at our door even when they know our son is gone for several months each summer...)

 

Welcome to America. Where you can do anything you want to, provided you make a lawyer rich while doing so.

 

This is really the way the system is heavily rigged against normal people. Its a not so cleverly disguised pay for play situation. You need a lawyer, and typically, at least a decent one, in order to truly utilize many of your rights here. If you have access to a great lawyer, there are no rules.

[LC]

Welcome to America. Where you can do anything you want to, provided you make a lawyer rich while doing so.

 

This is really the way the system is heavily rigged against normal people. Its a not so cleverly disguised pay for play situation. You need a lawyer, and typically, at least a decent one, in order to truly utilize many of your rights here. If you have access to a great lawyer, there are no rules.

 

Greg our level of common ground is growing. This alarms me... ;D

 

Economically, capitalism it has been a great boon to our society. Is what we are seeing now what happens when capitalism takes over the judicial, political, and even moral structures in our society?

[Gregmal]

Welcome to America. Where you can do anything you want to, provided you make a lawyer rich while doing so.

 

This is really the way the system is heavily rigged against normal people. Its a not so cleverly disguised pay for play situation. You need a lawyer, and typically, at least a decent one, in order to truly utilize many of your rights here. If you have access to a great lawyer, there are no rules.

 

Greg our level of common ground is growing. This alarms me... ;D

 

Economically, capitalism it has been a great boon to our society. Is what we are seeing now what happens when capitalism takes over the judicial, political, and even moral structures in our society?

 

Perhaps. Although I'd say it also falls on the type of tribalism that never gets talked about. Not black, white, brown, etc. Not necessarily even rich vs poor. Its simply ruling class elites picking and choosing what goes. Quid pro quo agreements, with favors and IOU's the currency. Lawyers are almost always an intricate part of that network. Julie Smollett...black, gay, mediocre actor with probably less to his name than both of us...good lawyer and friendly with a few very important people though... boom, charges gone. You don't have to be a capitalist or have tons of money(although it helps), you just need to get into politics...you know, public service they call it...

 

The high end lawyers make just as much if not more money as "consultants", many never stepping into the court room. Money helps, but so does who you know. Lawyers are the lubricant to the system. Attorney client privilege enables this.

[cubsfan]

 

Greg our level of common ground is growing. This alarms me... ;D

 

 

This is truly disconcerting - and now Sanjeev and Cardboard are finding common ground as well?

 

What's the CoBF political discourse coming to!  ;)

[Parsad]

 

Greg our level of common ground is growing. This alarms me... ;D

 

 

This is truly disconcerting - and now Sanjeev and Cardboard are finding common ground as well?

 

What's the CoBF political discourse coming to!  ;)

 

Cardboard and I found common ground well over a decade ago...otherwise he would have been kicked off by now!  ;D  In fact, the world has found common ground regularly, otherwise it would be far more chaotic than it actually is.  Cheers!

[wachtwoord]

In fact wouldn't you say discovering common ground is one of the main* goals of these discussions? Discussions are a collaborative undertaking after all.

 

* One of the main secondary goals seems to be venting. Which is also healthy to do from time to time. Take the lid of the pressure pan rather than letting it blow in the future.