Spouse Visa - Page 5 of 6 - Smart Immigration Lawyer

601 Waiver Legal News: 212(h) Waiver Approved for Marijuana Conviction

August 21, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

The applicant in this case is a citizen of Zimbabwe who was found inadmissible to the United States due to a conviction in 1998 for possession of less than 20 grams of marijuana. He also had a theft conviction in 1993, a trespass conviction from 1996, a conducting business without occupational license in 1997, and driving without a license twice in 1996.

He married his U.S. citizen spouse in 1998, had a child together with her in 2000. After his marriage to his wife, he was never convicted of another crime. He worked successfully as an electrician, contributing towards the household expenses including property payments and automobile leases. He attended night school in computer science, paid IRS taxes together with his wife, and shares a strong and close bond with his child. The applicant’s spouse submitted country conditions for Zimbabwe, stating that it would be dangerous for her and their child to move to Zimbabwe. She also submitted medical information for her child, citing the lack of adequate medical care in Zimbabwe if they were forced to move there. She also stated that she would suffer financial hardship without the money contributed by her husband.

Section 212(h) of the Immigration & Nationality Act states that:

The Attorney General [Secretary of Homeland Security) may, in his discretion, waive the application of subparagraph (A)(i)(I), (B), . .. of subsection (a)(2) and subparagraph (A)(i)(II) of such subsection insofar as it relates to a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana if – (1) (A) in the case of any immigrant it is established to the satisfaction of the Attorney General that:

(i) the alien is inadmissible only under subparagraph (D)(i) or (D)(ii) of such subsection or the activities for which the alien is inadmissible occurred more than 15 years before the date of the alien’s application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status.

(ii) the admission to the United States of such alien would not be contrary to the national welfare, safety, or security of the United States,. and

(iii) the alien has been rehabilitated; or

(B) in the case of an immigrant who is the spouse, parent, son, or daughter of a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if it is established to the satisfaction of the Attorney General [Secretary] that the alien’s denial of admission would result in extreme hardship to the United States citizen.

The AAO did not rule on extreme hardship. However, it did find that the applicant demonstrated rehabilitation and that his admission to the United States would not be contrary to the national welfare, safety, or security of the United States.

The important take-away from this case is the turning point in the applicant’s life (his marriage to his wife and birth of their child), after which he changed his life and was never again convicted of any crimes. He became a devoted husband and father, worked as an electrician to support his family, went to school in the evening to better himself, paid his taxes, and became an ethical and contributing member of society. The fact that all of his convictions occurred over 15 years ago was also a favorable factor in this case.

Thus, it is often useful and persuasive to show a “turning point” in an applicant’s life. Every applicant claim rehabilitation from past bad behavior in their waiver applications. I always try to find an important event in my client’s life that made him realize the full consequences of his past mistakes. I highlight that life-changing event, and then demonstrate the changes that occurred as a result of it.

601 Waiver Legal News: Balancing of the Equities and Adverse Matters in I-601 Waivers

August 18, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

This case demonstrates the importance of balancing the need for conciseness in a I-601 waiver case (you do not want to overwhelm the USCIS officer with too much documentation) with presenting as many favorable factors from your lives as possible.

The applicant in this case is a citizen of Mexico who had an approved I-130 Petition for Immediate Relative filed by her lawful permanent resident husband and son. She previously obtained a lawful permanent residence card using the identity of her sister-in-law and procured admission into the U.S. on six separate occasions.

She was deemed inadmissible to the U.S. based on Section 212(a)(6)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act which provides, in relevant part:

(i) In general.- Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this Act is inadmissible.

She applied for the I-601 waiver pursuant to Section 212(i) of the INA which provides, in relevant part:

(1) The Attorney General [now the Secretary of Homeland Security (Secretary)] may, in the discretion of the [Secretary], waive the application of clause (i) of subsection (a)(6)(C) in the case of an alien who is the spouse, son or daughter of a United States citizen or of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, if it is established to the satisfaction of the [Secretary] that the refusal of admission to the United States of such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of such an alien.

The AAO found that the lawful permanent spouse of the applicant in this case would suffer extreme hardship. It is notable that the AAO found extreme hardship despite the LPR spouse having no particular medical condition of his own aside from being elderly.

The AAO also cited Matter of Mendez-Moralez, 21 I&N Dec. 296, 301 (BIA 1996) in finding that extreme hardship is but one favorable discretionary factor to be considered. The AAO went on to state:

For waivers of inadmissibility, the burden is on the applicant to establish that a grant of a waiver of inadmissibility is warranted in the exercise of discretion. The adverse factors evidencing an alien’s undesirability as a permanent resident must be balanced with the social and humane considerations presented on his behalf to determine whether the grant of relief in the exercise of discretion appears to be in the best interests of this country.

The factors adverse to the applicant include:

the nature and underlying circumstances of the exclusion ground at issue
the presence of additional significant violations of this country’s immigration laws
the existence of a criminal record and, if so, its nature, recency and seriousness, and
the presence of other evidence indicative of an alien’s bad character or undesirability as a permanent resident of this country

The favorable considerations include:

family ties in the United States
residence of long duration in this country (particularly where the alien began his residency at a young age)
evidence of hardship to the alien and his family if he is excluded and deported
service in this country’s Armed Forces
a history of stable employment
the existence of property or business ties
evidence of value and service to the community
evidence of genuine rehabilitation if a criminal record exists, and
other evidence attesting to the alien’s good character (e.g., affidavits from family, friends, and responsible community representatives)

Thus, in all I-601 waiver cases, the record as a whole is reviewed and a “balancing of the equities and adverse matters” is conducted to determine whether discretion should be favorably exercised.

In this case, the applicant and her LPR husband have been married for 33 years. The LPR husband has always cared for the applicant, who suffers from several medical conditions that have required surgeries and on-going treatment. These conditions include Basal Cell Carcinoma, Rectal Carcinoid Tumors, Seizure Disorder, Dyslipidemia, Hypothyroidism, and has undergone reconstruction and flap replacement of her right cheek. She is permanently unable to drive due to epilepsy.

The lawful permanent resident husband was the sole financial provider for the family. He demonstrated that he could not afford to pay for the applicant’s medical care in Mexico nor the travel costs to take care of her there. He also feared for his wife’s well-being given the lack of medical care in remote areas of Mexico as well as high-rates of violence throughout the country. He could not live in Mexico given his extensive family ties in the U.S. as well as his advanced age.

The applicant helps care for her grandchildren while her daughter works. Her daughter would have to quit her job without the applicant’s babysitting since she cannot afford child care. The applicant has numerous family ties to the U.S., has always paid taxes, and has no criminal record.

Given the situation described above, and despite the LPR husband having no notable medical condition of his own, extreme hardship was still found and the I-601 waiver approved.

601 Waiver Legal News: AAO Overturns USCIS Decision on 601 Waiver

August 15, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

I personally try to review every 601, 601A, and 212 waiver case that is made available, as they provide a valuable insight into the discretionary standards applied in deciding immigration waiver applications.

This case is instructive in the persuasive importance of medical hardship when waiver cases are adjudicated. It involves a citizen of the Philippines who was found inadmissible to the U.S. under Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The applicant is the spouse of a U.S. citizen who previously entered the United States using a fraudulent passport.

Section 212(a)(6)(C) of the Act provides, in pertinent part: (i) Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this Act is inadmissible.

The applicant applied for a 601 waiver pursuant to Section 212(i) of the INA which provides: (1) The [Secretary] may, in the discretion of the [Secretary], waive the application of clause (i) of subsection (a)(6)(C) in the case of an alien who is the spouse, son or daughter of a United States citizen or of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence, if it is established to the satisfaction of the [Secretary] that the refusal of admission to the United States of such immigrant alien would result in extreme hardship to the citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent of such an alien.

The USCIS Field Director concluded that the applicant had failed to demonstrate extreme hardship to her qualifying spouse and denied the application. The AAO overturned the decision on appeal and granted the waiver.

The AAO stated that extreme hardship is “not a definable term of fixed and inflexible content or meaning,” but “necessarily depends upon the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case.” Matter of Hwang, 10 I&N Dec. 448, 451 (BIA 1964).

The AAO also cited Matter of Cervantes-Gonzalez, in which the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) provided a list of factors it deemed relevant in determining whether an alien has established extreme hardship to a qualifying relative. 22 I&N Dec. 560, 565 (BIA 1999). The factors include the presence of a lawful permanent resident or U.S. citizen spouse or parent in this country; the qualifying relative’s family ties outside the United States; the conditions in the country or countries to which the qualifying relative would relocate and the extent of the qualifying relative’s ties in such countries; the financial impact of departure from this country; and significant conditions of health, particularly when tied to an unavailability of suitable medical care in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate. Id. The Board added that not all of the foregoing factors need be analyzed in any given case and emphasized that the list of factors was not exclusive. Id. at 566.

The following factors in this case were deemed persuasive in granting the 601 waiver:

The applicant suffered from reproductive health issues since 2000
The applicant has resided for a long period of time in the U.S. and has a husband and family members who are U.S. citizens
A letter from her doctor and medical records showed that she has been attempting to have a child with her U.S. citizen husband through in vitro fertilization since 2006.
The letter from her doctor stated that she must avoid stress and remain in the U.S. for fertility treatments if she wishes to ever have a child in the future.
She has undergone surgeries due to her reproductive health issue, and takes medication for depression and anxiety.
Bank statements, mortgage payments, and utility bills showed that the U.S. citizen husband could not afford fertility treatments for his wife if she were forced to live in the Philippines.
They demonstrated that the applicant moving to the Philippines would prevent the couple from having the child they so desperately wanted, which would in turn cause tremendous emotional stress on the U.S. citizen husband
They demonstrated that the U.S. citizen husband could not afford to make mortgage payments on their family home or afford his other monthly payments without his wife’s financial contributions.
The U.S. citizen husband has significant family ties to the United States, including parents, sisters, nieces, aunts, and uncles.
The U.S. citizen husband has enjoyed long-term employment in the U.S.
The U.S. citizen husband provided medical documentation showing a severe allergic reaction he suffered during his last visit to the Philippines due to pollution

I-601 Extreme Hardship Waiver Approved

August 10, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer 1 Comment

Our office received approval of the I-601 Application of Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility for a Mexican client who was subject to the 10 year unlawful presence bar under INA Section 212(a)(9)(B). She was also subject to the fraud/misrepresentation ground of inadmissibility under INA Section 212(a)(6)(C)(i) due to the use of a false document to enter the United States.

I prepared and filed three separate I-130 immediate relative petitions and ultimately received approval for three immigrant visas: for the Mexican wife who required the I-601 waiver, and her two Mexican children who did not require unlawful presence waivers since they were both under the age of 18. Any period of time spent unlawfully in the U.S. while under the age of 18 does not count toward calculating unlawful presence under INA Section 212(a)(9)(B) [9 FAM 40.92 N 4.1].

An I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility requires a showing that the applicant’s U.S. citizen spouse or parent would suffer “extreme hardship” if the applicant is refused admission into the United States. A US citizen fiancé(e) may also be a qualifying relative for purposes of the waiver according to 9 FAM 41.81 N9.3(a) and 8 CFR 212.7(a)(1)(i).

”Extreme hardship” has a special meaning under U.S. immigration law. The factors considered relevant in determining extreme hardship include:

Health of the qualifying relative: ongoing or specialized treatment requirements for a physical or mental condition; availability and quality of such treatment in the foreign national’s country, anticipated duration of the treatment; whether a condition is chronic or acute, or long or short-term.

Financial considerations: future employability; loss due to sale of home or business or termination of a professional practice; decline in standard of living; ability to recoup short-term losses; cost of extraordinary needs, such as special education or training for children; cost of caring for family members (i.e., elderly and infirm parents).

Education: loss of opportunity for higher education; lower quality or limited scope of education options; disruption of current program; requirement to be educated in a foreign language or culture with ensuing loss of time in grade; availability of special requirements, such as training programs or internships in specific fields.

Personal considerations: close relatives in the United States and/or the foreign national’s country; separation from spouse/children; ages of involved parties; length of residence and community ties in the United States.

Special considerations: cultural, language, religious, and ethnic obstacles; valid fears of persecution, physical harm, or injury; social ostracism or stigma; access to social institutions or structures.

Any other information that explains how your personal circumstances may qualify as imposing extreme hardship on a qualifying U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident relative.

Spouses must demonstrate that their relationship will suffer more than the normal hardship or financial inconvenience caused by family separation.

In support of her I-601 waiver application, I prepared a comprehensive legal brief going over how the facts and circumstances of her situation met the legal standards used to define “extreme hardship.” I also discussed and presented evidence of her rehabilitation, good moral character, and overall dedication as a wife and mother who was integral to the daily care of her ill U.S. citizen husband (and his elderly mother). Since this was her second marriage to a U.S. citizen, I presented compelling evidence that both marriages were genuine when entered into as well as the reasons why her previous marriage ended in divorce. A table of exhibits also listed a variety of evidence in support of a showing of “extreme hardship” including:

Letter and medical records from the physician of the U.S. citizen husband’s mother, confirming her diabetes, hip surgery, frequent infections, low blood sugar, and overall precarious health

Affidavits attesting to the U.S. citizen husband’s daily care of his elderly mother with the assistance of his Mexican wife, including hand-feeding her meals on a regular basis

U.S. citizen husband being evaluated as 100% disabled for post-traumatic stress disorder by the Dept. of Veterans Affairs resulting from his tours of duty during the Vietnam War

Letter from a psychiatrist confirming long-term treatment of the U.S. citizen husband for post-traumatic stress disorder

War decorations awarded to the U.S. citizen husband during his service during the Vietnam War

As a result of our efforts, our client was approved for the I-601 and subsequently, received her lawful permanent residence together with her two children.

I-601 Waiver Approved by I-601 Attorney Michael Cho

August 2, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

Our office received approval of the I-601 waiver on behalf of the Brazilian wife of a U.S. citizen. She had previously entered the U.S. as the K-1 fiancee of her U.S. citizen husband. However, the couple attempted to handle her adjustment of status themselves, leading to mistakes in the filing of the application. She then departed the U.S. after exceeding her authorized period of stay by over one year. Our office was contacted after she was deemed inadmissible to the U.S. based on Section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, for having been unlawfully present in the United States for more than one year and seeking readmission within 10 years of her last departure from the United States.

INA Section 212(a)(9)(B)(v) provides that a waiver, under INA Section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II), is applicable solely where the applicant establishes extreme hardship to her U.S. citizen or lawfully resident spouse or parent. Extreme hardship is “not a definable term of fixed and inflexible content or meaning, but necessarily depends upon the facts and circumstances peculiar to each case.” Matter of Hwang, 10 I&N Dec. 448, 451 (BIA 1964 ).

In Matter of Cervantes-Gonzalez, 22 I&N Dec. 560, 565-66 (BIA 1999), the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) provided a list of factors it deemed relevant in determining whether an alien has established extreme hardship to a qualifying relative. The factors include the presence of a lawful permanent resident or United States citizen spouse or parent in this country; the qualifying relative’s family ties outside the United States; the conditions in the country or countries to which the qualifying relative would relocate and the extent of the qualifying relative’s ties in such countries; the financial impact of departure from this country; and significant conditions of health, particularly when tied to an unavailability of suitable medical care in the country to which the qualifying relative would relocate.

The Board of Immigration Appeals has also made it clear that although hardships may not be extreme when considered abstractly or individually, “relevant factors, though not extreme in themselves, must be considered in the aggregate in determining whether extreme hardship exists.” Matter of O-J-O, 21 I&N Dec. 381, 383 (BIA 1996) (quoting Matter of Ige, 20 I&N Dec. at 882). The adjudicator “must consider the entire range of factors concerning hardship in their totality and determine whether the combination of hardships takes the case beyond those hardships ordinarily associated with deportation.”

The Board of Immigration Appeals has also held that hardship factors such as family separation, economic disadvantage, cultural readjustment, et cetera, differ in nature and severity depending on the unique circumstances of each case, as does the cumulative hardship a qualifying relative experiences as a result of aggregated individual hardships. See, e.g., Matter of Bing Chih Kao and Mei Tsui Lin, 23 I&N Dec. 45, 51 (BIA 2001) (distinguishing Matter of Pilch regarding hardship faced by qualifying relatives on the basis of variations in the length of residence in the United States and the ability to speak the language of the country to which they would relocate).

As an example, the Board of Immigration Appeals has found family separation, a common result of inadmissibility or removal, can also be the most important single hardship factor in considering hardship in the aggregate. See Salcido-Salcido, 138 F.3d at 1293 (quoting Contreras-Buenfil v. INS, 712 F.2d 401, 403 (9th Cir. 1983; but see Matter of Ngai, 19 I&N Dec. at 247 (separation of spouse and children from applicant not extreme hardship due to conflicting evidence in the record and because applicant and spouse had been voluntarily separated from one another for 28 years).

In support of my client’s I-601 waiver application, I prepared a comprehensive legal brief going over how the facts and circumstances of her situation met the legal standards used to define “extreme hardship.” This brief was accompanied by supporting exhibits that provided proof of the statements made in the legal brief.

The positive factors in this case included:

The U.S. citizen husband suffered from high blood pressure, which was shown to be a hereditary disease influenced by lifestyle factors. He was also diagnosed with Clinical Depression, with a rapidly deteriorating condition as a result of a miscarriage suffered by his wife during the immigration process.
The U.S. citizen husband’s mother recently suffered two heart attacks and was now dependent on her son to take care of her, hand-feed her meals, and provide for her financially. He could not move to Brazil without abandoning his U.S. citizen mother and putting her health at risk.
The U.S. citizen husband received medical care for his high blood pressure and clinical depression through the insurance provided by his U.S. employer. We demonstrated that his work performance had suffered noticeably due to the stress and emotional toll caused by the separation from his wife.

As a result of the I-601 waiver prepared and submitted by our office, she has received her lawful permanent resident status and the couple is now re-united inside the United States.

I-601 Waiver Approval

July 29, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

Our office received approval of an I-601 waiver filed on behalf of a Mexican wife and her U.S. citizen husband. Our client entered the United States without inspection over 12 years ago with her family and has lived in the U.S. since then. She was deemed inadmissible to the U.S. based on Section 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(II) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, for having been unlawfully present in the United States for more than one year and seeking readmission within 10 years of her last departure from the United States.

This case was decided before the current I-601A provisional waiver came into effect. As a result, we first obtained approval of the I-130 Petition for Alien Relative. Our client then traveled to the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez to attend her consular interview where she submitted the I-601 waiver package I prepared on her behalf. In support of her I-601 waiver application, I prepared a comprehensive legal brief going over how the facts and circumstances of her situation met the legal standards used to define “extreme hardship.” This brief was accompanied by supporting exhibits that provided proof of the statements made in the legal brief.

This case was particularly challenging because our client and her husband had no children. The U.S. citizen husband also had no medical problems of note, and his U.S. citizen parents were in relatively good health. However, the U.S. citizen husband was in the U.S. Navy serving on board a guided missile cruiser. Among a variety of extreme hardships discussed, we showed that the extreme psychological hardship he would suffer upon separation from his wife would seriously impact his ability to perform his critical military duties. Alternatively, moving to Mexico to be with his wife would not be possible since that would be considered desertion and lead to a court marshal. This case was approved and our client now resides legally inside the United States as a lawful permanent resident.

I-601 Waiver Approved by Waiver Attorney Michael Cho

July 25, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

We received approval of a client’s immigrant visa petition and I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility. Our office prepared and filed the I-130 petition, secured its approval, then put together a comprehensive I-601 waiver package that was submitted to the USCIS for adjudication. The I-601 waiver was approved and our client obtained his immigrant visa at the U.S. consulate in Ciudad Juarez before returning to the U.S. as a lawful permanent resident.

Our client was a native of Mexico who entered the U.S. without inspection over 11 years ago. He subsequently married a U.S. citizen and they had a daughter together. He required the I-601 Application of Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility due to his unlawful presence of over 1 year inside the United States, which made him subject to the 10 year unlawful presence bar under INA Section 212(a)(9)(B).

An I-601 Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility requires a showing that the applicant’s U.S. citizen spouse or parent would suffer “extreme hardship” if the applicant is refused admission into the United States. “Extreme hardship” has a special meaning under U.S. immigration law. The factors considered relevant in determining extreme hardship include:

Health of the qualifying relative: ongoing or specialized treatment requirements for a physical or mental condition; availability and quality of such treatment in the foreign national’s country, anticipated duration of the treatment; whether a condition is chronic or acute, or long or short-term.

Financial considerations: future employability; loss due to sale of home or business or termination of a professional practice; decline in standard of living; ability to recoup short-term losses; cost of extraordinary needs, such as special education or training for children; cost of caring for family members (i.e., elderly and infirm parents).

Education: loss of opportunity for higher education; lower quality or limited scope of education options; disruption of current program; requirement to be educated in a foreign language or culture with ensuing loss of time in grade; availability of special requirements, such as training programs or internships in specific fields.

Personal considerations: close relatives in the United States and/or the foreign national’s country; separation from spouse/children; ages of involved parties; length of residence and community ties in the United States.

Special considerations: cultural, language, religious, and ethnic obstacles; valid fears of persecution, physical harm, or injury; social ostracism or stigma; access to social institutions or structures.

Any other information that explains how your personal circumstances may qualify as imposing extreme hardship on a qualifying U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident relative.

Spouses must demonstrate that their relationship will suffer more than the normal hardship or financial inconvenience caused by family separation.

In support of his I-601 waiver application, I prepared a comprehensive legal brief going over how the facts and circumstances of his situation met the legal standards used to define “extreme hardship.” This brief was accompanied by supporting exhibits that provided proof of the statements made in the legal brief.

Factors in the favor of our client were the following:

Our client had no criminal record and was a law-abiding individual his entire life except for the immigration mistake he made to enter and live illegally inside the U.S.
His U.S. citizen wife had suffered from severe kidney and bladder infections her entire life. We obtained a letter from her physician confirming her chronic condition and recommending regular check-ups and treatment inside the United States
Their daughter had been diagnosed with jaundice. We obtained a letter from her physician confirming her illness and recommending regular check-ups inside the United States.
We provided a report of the Mexican health system and demonstrated that the U.S. citizen wife and daughter would not be able to receive reliable and adequate medical care for their conditions in rural Mexico where the Mexican husband was from.
The U.S. citizen wife and child received medical care in the United States through health insurance provided by the Mexican husband’s employment in the United States. Without his presence and employment in the U.S., they would lose their medical coverage. On the other hand, moving to Mexico would also mean no longer being able to obtain medical treatments since she could not afford private health insurance given their pre-existing conditions.
Our client was a devoted husband and father who took care of his U.S. citizen wife and child on a daily basis and worked hard to pay for their rent, food, and other living expenses. They would suffer financial hardship without his presence given their health problems and the U.S. citizen wife serving as the primary care-giver for their young daughter.
We submitted a psychological report which diagnosed the U.S. citizen wife with Clinical Anxiety Disorder. We showed the interrelationship between psychological and physical disease, and presented evidence to show that her condition would worsen without the presence of her husband together with her in the United States.

As a result of the I-601 waiver approval, this family now lives inside the United States as lawful, contributing citizens of the United States.

U.S. immigration benefits for same-sex legally married couples

July 3, 2013 By Michael Cho Immigration Lawyer Leave a Comment

Effective immediately after the U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional, immigration visa petitions filed on behalf of a same-sex legally married spouse shall be reviewed in the same manner as those filed on behalf of an opposite-sex spouse.

Practically, this means that a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident in a same-sex marriage to a foreign national may now sponsor his or her spouse for a family-based immigrant visa. U.S. citizens may also file for a K-1 Fiance Visa on behalf of their same-sex fiance. Further guidance from the USCIS is expected as it implements regulations to comply with the U.S. Supreme Court decision.

« Previous Page