Integrity Legal
- Legal Blog
- Integrity Legal Home
- Thai Visa
- Company in Thailand
- Real Estate Thailand
- US Visa
- Contact Us
Archive for the ‘Fiance Visa Thailand’ Category
7th April 2010
US Visa Denial: Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude
Posted by : admin
As this author has discussed in previous blog posts, one major reason for US visa denial is based upon a finding that a legal grounds of inadmissibility exists in a given case. One legal grounds of inadmissibility is based upon a finding by the Consular Officer that the applicant committed a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude (CIMT). That being said, at times it can be difficult to determine whether or not an individual’s prior actions would be considered a crime involving moral turpitude. The Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) provides some insight into what types of crimes are considered to be crimes involving moral turpitude, the following are excerpts from the FAM:
“9 FAM 40.21(a) N2.3-1 Crimes Committed Against
Property
(CT:VISA-1318; 09-24-2009)
a. Most crimes committed against property that involve moral turpitude
include the element of fraud. The act of fraud involves moral turpitude
whether it is aimed against individuals or government. Fraud generally
involves:
(1) Making false representation;
(2) Knowledge of such false representation by the perpetrator;
(3) Reliance on the false representation by the person defrauded;
(4) An intent to defraud; and
(5) The actual act of committing fraud”
Property Crimes are not the only activities that can be construed as crimes involving moral turpitude as criminal actions which violate or undermine governmental authority are also considered to be CIMT:
“9 FAM 40.21(a) N2.3-2 Crimes Committed Against
Governmental Authority
(CT:VISA-1318; 09-24-2009)
a. Crimes committed against governmental authority which fall within the
definition of moral turpitude include:
(1) Bribery;
(2) Counterfeiting;
(3) Fraud against revenue or other government functions;
(4) Mail fraud;
(5) Perjury;
(6) Harboring a fugitive from justice (with guilty knowledge); and
(7) Tax evasion (willful).”
The FAM also goes on to note the various activities that may not be considered CIMT. However, it is incumbent upon the adjudicating officer to examine the facts of a given case and make a decision as to whether the underlying actions that gave rise to a criminal conviction in fact constitutes a Crime Involving Moral Turpitude for purposes of visa issuance. If the officer decides that a CIMT was committed, then the visa application will likely be denied. Under the doctrine of Consular NonReviewability (also known as Consular Absolutism) this decision is not subject to appeal. However, the applicant make be able to overcome the visa denial by applying for, and obtaining, an I-601 waiver.
Of interest to some may be the recent Circuit Court decision which held:
“An order of removal from the United States was entered against Petitioner Armando Alvarez-Reynaga based on his felony conviction for receipt of a stolen vehicle in violation of section 496d(a) of the California Penal Code. His petition for review presents the questions of whether a conviction under that statute qualifies categorically as a conviction for an aggravated felony, and whether it qualifies categorically as a crime involving moral turpitude. We conclude that it qualifies as the first, but not the second. We deny the petition for review.”
As the law continues to evolve, so to does the definition of CIMT and the activities that are considered to be covered by the CIMT provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
For more information about US Visas from the Kingdom of Thailand please see: US Visa Thailand.
(Readers should be advised that the above does not constitute a full analysis of CIMT issues. Each application has its own unique set of facts and those facts must be analyzed on an individual basis in order to form a professional opinion.)
6th April 2010
USCIS Promulgates New Naturalization Video
Posted by : admin
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) is responsible for overseeing the United States naturalization process. Each year, many Immigrants in the United States take advantage of the ability to naturalize to US Citizenship. For some, the Naturalization test is a daunting prospect. In order to help inform the public, USCIS has provided a video on their website that can be of assistance to those looking into the naturalization process. To quote the USCIS website directly:
“The USCIS Naturalization Interview and Test was developed as an informational resource for individuals interested in learning more about the naturalization process. The 16-minute video provides an overview of the naturalization process including the eligibility requirements, the application process, preliminary steps, the naturalization interview, the English tests and the U.S. history and government test (civics). The video includes two simulated interviews between applicants and USCIS Officers. Individuals applying for naturalization may use this video as a reference tool to prepare for the naturalization interview. Teachers and volunteers can use this video to complement classroom instruction.”
Although naturalization is the most common method employed by foreign nationals seeking US citizenship. Few are aware that there is another method of obtaining Citizenship for the children of United States Citizens who did not receive Citizenship at birth. The Child Citizenship Act of 2000 provides a legal means for the minor children of United States Citizens to obtain American Citizenship.
Another interesting program for those interested in becoming United States Citizens is the expedited naturalization program for those foreign nationals enlisted in the United States military. The expedited naturalization process is a major benefit to foreign nationals and their families who choose to serve in A the United States trmed Forces.
Some are unaware that those who gained United States Lawful Permanent Residence based upon marriage are entitled to faster naturalization. For those who enter the United States and take up Permanent Residence based upon employment, the naturalization process generally takes about 5 years. However, for those married to a US Citizen the process takes 3 years from the time Permanent Residence is approved. This means that the naturalization “clock” starts running for K1 visa holders after the adjustment of status is approved. A CR1 visa holder who enters the country with conditional lawful permanent residence at entry begins accruing presence that can be used toward naturalization at entry. This being said, a CR1 visa holder must still get a lift of conditions before they will be entitled to a 10 year “Green Card.”
For information about US Immigration from Thailand Please See: American Visa Thailand.
3rd April 2010
The US Census, Undocumented Aliens, and US LGBT Immigration
Posted by : admin
As frequent readers of this blog may be aware, two of the most hotly debated issues in the realm of United States Immigration are: Comprehensive Immigration Reform and US Family Immigration benefits for LGBT bi-national couples. A seemingly unrelated issue is that of the upcoming United States Census. Recently, the LGBT immigration blog Immigration Equality.org discussed how the US Census and the issues of Comprehensive Immigration Reform and LGBT Visas are connected:
“Research conducted by the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund (AALDEF) shows an excellent reason for undocumented immigrants to participate in the census: They can actually use the completed census form as proof of continuous physical presence in the U.S., should Congress enact a path to citizenship, with requires such proof for residency, in the future. Additionally, certified copies of completed census forms can be used as evidence of continuous presence in the U.S. under certain current laws as well. These include the amnesty program under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA); amelioration provisions of the Legal Immigration Family Equity Act of 2000; and for Temporary Protected Status (TPS) (for when one cannot return due to war, natural disasters etc.) under the Immigration and Nationality Act Section 244…There are undocumented immigrants living in the US in same-sex binational relationships as well, and they should be counted, too. A recent Immigration Equality client, living here with his American partner for nearly 20 years, was detained upon trying to re-enter the United States after going home to visit his dying mother. By participating in the confidential census process, couples like these can be “counted,” and give voice, through their numbers, to the very real plight of binational couples who have, for too long, remain too hidden in the shadows.”
As explained above, proof of having participated in a US Census can be used as evidence to show one’s continuous residence in the United States of America. Therefore, participating in the Census can be a beneficial endeavor for certain individuals.
It is interesting to note how the issue of undocumented aliens intersects with the issue of LGBT Immigration rights as these two groups would otherwise seem to have interests that are unrelated, but at this time same sex bi-national and undocumented aliens are in legally precarious position. In this author’s opinion, Comprehensive Immigration Reform could be the solution to both of these groups’ problems, but this author believes that it is more likely that the US Courts will deal with the issue of same sex immigration when they adjudicate the Constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). However, the outcome with regard to all of these issues remains to be seen.
For information about US Immigration from the Kingdom of Thailand please see: US Visa Thailand.
2nd April 2010
The Affidavit of Support: US Federal Poverty Guidelines Extension
Posted by : admin
An integral component of the US visa process is the submission of an affidavit of support which attests to the US Citizen Petitioner’s ability to support a foreign fiance for a K1 visa or spouse for a CR1 Visa, IR1 Visa, or K3 Visa once they are in the United States. Usually, the Federal Poverty Guidelines are used as a basis for ascertaining the guidelines used by Consular Officers and USCIS officers to adjudicate the ability to provide support. In most cases, the Federal poverty guidelines are updated on a yearly basis, as of the time of this writing, the 2010 guidelines have not been published, per se. Instead, the US Congress has extended the guidelines from 2009. The following is quoted from the website of Housing and Human Services:
“Congress has taken action to keep the 2009 poverty guidelines in effect until at least March 31, 2010.
Congressional actions on this matter have been in response to a decrease in the annual average Consumer Price Index (CPI-U) for 2009, projected during 2009 and announced on January 15, 2010 (see http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/cpi_01152010.pdf, Table 1A). In the absence of legislative change, this decrease–the first since the poverty guidelines began to be issued in 1965–would have required HHS to issue 2010 poverty guidelines that were lower than the 2009 poverty guidelines; that would have led to the “reduction in eligibility” referred to in the Congressional explanatory language quoted below. Congress took several actions on this matter:
1. On December 19, 2009, Congress enacted and the President signed the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-118), which included a provision affecting the poverty guidelines. Section 1012 of this law (as originally enacted, before subsequent amendment) stated that:
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall not publish updated poverty guidelines for 2010 under section 673(2) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (42 U.S.C. 9902(2)) before March 1, 2010, and the poverty guidelines published under such section on January 23, 2009, shall remain in effect until updated poverty guidelines are published.
The Congressional Record (House) (December 16, 2009, p. H15370) provided the following explanation of this Congressional action in Pub. L. 111-118:
Section 1012 includes a provision to freeze the Department of Health and Human Services poverty guidelines at 2009 levels in order to prevent a reduction in eligibility for certain means-tested programs, including Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and child nutrition, through March 1, 2010.
A Federal Register notice about this initial extension of the 2009 poverty guidelines was published on January 22, 2010. (See Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 14, January 22, 2010, pp. 3734-3735.)
2. On March 2, 2010, Congress enacted and the President signed the Temporary Extension Act of 2010 (Pub. L. 111-144), which included a provision affecting the poverty guidelines. Section 7 of this law amended Section 1012 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2010, by replacing “March 1, 2010” with “March 31, 2010”. The effect of this was to extend the 2009 poverty guidelines until at least March 31, 2010.”
The issue of one’s ability to provide support to a foreign national is extremely important. Currently, the Federal poverty guidelines appear to still be those of the year 2009 as there is no word that new guidelines will be promulgated. Therefore, those who have an interest in the current guidelines would be wise to keep checking up on this issue as we are due for either a new extension of the 2009 guidelines or a new set of guidelines for 2010.
For further information please see: K1 Visa Requirements.
1st April 2010
Upcoming Cases to Address the Issue of K2 visas and Adjustment
Posted by : admin
As we have previously discussed on this blog, the K1 visa (the category that is used to denote the US fiance visa) has a derivative counterpart that allows for the children of a foreign fiance or fiancee to travel to the United States with their parent. From a legal standpoint, there is nothing particularly interesting about this, but it does become interesting when holders of K2 Visas apply for adjustment of status in order to obtain United States Lawful Permanent Residence also referred to as a “Green Card.” Under the current rules, there is some question as to whether or not a K2 visa holder is allowed to adjust status after they turn 21 years of age. In a recent article posted on the Immigration Slip Opinion Blog, the author noted that issues surrounding K2 adjustment have yet to be fully addressed, but upcoming cases before the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) may clarify this vexing issue:
“‘Aging out’ issues: K-2 and CSPA
There are at least seven cases currently before the BIA that raise the question of whether Congress intended that a K-2 visa holder, admitted to the United States as the child of a fiancé(e) of a U.S. citizen, would become ineligible for adjustment of status upon turning 21. In briefs submitted as amici curiae, the American Immigration Council (Immigration Council) and AILA argue that such a result would produce absurd results and could not have been Congress’s intent. After all, the statute permits – and DHS practice allows – a child of a fiancée to enter the country on a K-2 visa up until his or her 21st birthday. In numerous cases, children enter with only a few days to spare before turning 21. Interpreting the statute as allowing these children to enter until age 21, but then also requiring that an adjustment be completed before they turn 21, is simply unreasonable. The only reasonable interpretation of the statute is that a K-2 child must be under 21 at admission but not at the time of adjustment. A recent favorable 10th Circuit decision doesn’t go quite this far, but should help convince the BIA that DHS is wrong. We have asked the BIA to schedule oral argument on this issue and to decide these cases together.”
This author has yet to be convinced of Congress’s original intent, but this issue is interesting and it will be fascinating to see how this issue plays out in the Immigration Courts. A favorable decision could lead to major benefits for children of the Thai fiancees of American Citizens.
For general information about US Immigration from Thailand please see: US Visa Thailand.
31st March 2010
Changes In Filing Procedure For I-131 Advance Parole Travel Documents
Posted by : admin
The issue of advance parole can be extremely important for those enter the United States on a K1 visa. A K1 visa is a US fiance visa that allows the fiance of a US Citizen to enter the United States for a period of 90 days in order to marry and apply for adjustment of status. Adjustment of Status is the process of acquiring Lawful Permanent Residence (Also Known as a “Green Card”). For those who are awaiting the approval of an adjustment application a sense of being in “limbo” can set in as the applicant does not yet have permanent residence and they cannot leave the United States without falling out of status and thereby, often inadvertently, causing the entire visa process to begin anew.
There is a way that a foreign national can keep from falling out of status and still leave the United States. If the foreign national petitions for, and obtains, advance parole, then they may leave the United States and preserve both their Fiance Visa and their adjustment application.
In the past, applications for advance parole were adjudicated by local USCIS offices. However, in a recent USCIS announcement distributed by AILA, this procedure is changing:
“WASHINGTON – U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) today announced revised filing instructions and addresses for applicants filing an Application for Travel Document (Form I-131). The change of filing location is part of an overall effort to transition the intake of some USCIS forms from USCIS local offices and Service Centers to USCIS Lockbox facilities. By Centralizing form and fee intake to a Lockbox environment, the agency can provide customers with more efficient and effective initial processing of applications and fees.”
“Beginning March 19, 2010 applicants will file their applications at the USCIS Vermont Service Center or at one of the USCIS Lockbox facilities. Detailed guidance can be found in updated Form I-131 instructions page at www.uscis.gov.”
Many people may already be asking themselves: What if I inadvertently filed my advance parole application at the wrong location because I was unaware of the change? Luckily, USCIS is dealing with this internally, at least for now:
“The USCIS Service Centers will forward incorrectly filed Form I-131 applications to the USCIS Lockbox facilities for 30 days, until Monday, April 19, 2010. After April 19, 2010, incorrectly filed applications will be returned to the applicant, with a note to send the application to the correct location.”
Since USCIS will discontinue forwarding incorrectly filed applications, those seeking advance parole should carefully study this issue before submitting an application as failure to do so could cause delays in being granted permission to leave the USA and preserve one’s status.
For further information about American Immigration from Thailand please see: US Visa Thailand.
30th March 2010
US Embassy in Bangkok and WebChat With Visa Seekers
Posted by : admin
It is common knowledge that many people seek United States travel documents from the US Embassy Thailand. However, are those who have complex questions regarding United States Tourist visas and in many cases, these questions can only be answered by either an attorney or a Foreign Service Officer. Thanks to the internet, there are more and more opportunities for those with sought out knowledge to communicate with those who need specific questions answered. The website Thaivisa.com is reporting that the US Embassy in Bangkok has initiated a live chat program to allow the public to interact directly with Embassy personnel online:
“U.S. Embassy Bangkok Non-Immigrant Visa Webchat
Interested in visiting the U.S. as a tourist? Looking to study in the U.S.? If you have questions about non-immigrant visas to the U.S. here is your chance to ask! The U.S. Embassy Bangkok Consular Section will be online to answer questions about non-immigrant visa services for Thai citizens and residents of Thailand. Join us for this special webchat!
Date: Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Time: 6:00-7:00pm (Bangkok time)
To participate:
1. Go to https://statedept.connectsolutions.com/bangkok
2. Enter as a Guest (Type your name)
3. Submit your questions (We accept questions and comments in advance of, and at any time during the program)
We look forward to chatting with you then!
Please Note: At this time questions can be submitted in English only.”
Although this chat session has already occurred one should note that this is a terrific resource for those interested in a tourist visa as it allows for an applicant to have their inquiries answered in real time by one who is knowledgeable about US visa matters. It is interesting to note that the Thaivisa.com posting only makes reference to the the US Tourist Visa and not other visa categories. This is probably due to the fact that employment based visas such as the E2 visa or the L1 visa are granted after an assessment of the unique set of facts and issues in a given case so it would be difficult to discuss such visas through the internet. That being said, tourist visa adjudications are based upon the facts in the case, but judging an applicant’s likelihood of obtaining a US visa is often easier, compared to employment based cases, due to section 214(b) of the US Immigration and Nationality Act. Family based visa applications for visas such as the K1 visa, the K3 Visa, the IR1 visa and the CR1 Visa are also adjudicated based upon the facts of the case and in many cases the likelihood of ultimate approval is not easy to determine unless one delves deeply into the details of the case. This could explain why these types of applications do not appear to be the intended topic of discussion in the aforementioned live chat session.
Hopefully, this will become a regular addition to the already quality service provided by the US Embassy in Bangkok.
28th March 2010
US Prenuptial Agreement Thailand: Professional Drafting Issues
Posted by : admin
For many Thai-American couples a prenuptial agreement is an effective method of ensuring that bot parties understand the rights, obligations, and responsibilities that marriage entails. The US Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand issues a large number of visas to the fiancees and spouses of American Citizens. As this is the case, one of the ancillary issues regarding US Immigration involves prenuptial agreements as many couples opt to have a Thai Prenuptial Agreement signed prior to a marriage which is used as a basis for a K3 Visa or a CR1 Visa or they opt to have a prenuptial agreement drafted prior to a Thai fiancee’s departure to the USA on a US fiance visa (also known as a K1 visa). That being said, having a prenuptial agreement properly drafted is extremely important as failure to properly draft such an important document could lead to unforeseen problems down the road.
In previous posting on this blog, this author has discussed the importance of having a licensed US attorney act as a representative in US Immigration matters as “visa companies,” “visa agents” and fly by night operations claiming to be either lawyers, attorneys, or both cannot represent clients before the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS). With regard to a Thai prenup, one should retain a licensed American attorney to draft a prenuptial agreement if for not other reason than the fact that they are trained in the working of United States law as well as the common law system in general. Unfortunately, those falsely claiming legal credentials are often drafting documents that are insufficient to ensure the security of one’s assets.
The obvious question that many people in Thailand have is: how can I be sure that the person drafting my prenuptial agreement is a lawyer? As with United States Immigration matters, the best way to verify an individual’s credentials is to ask for either a State Supreme Court License, a State Bar Association Membership Card, or a Federal license to practice law in a US Federal jurisdiction. After receiving the individual’s credentials, it may be necessary to check with the Supreme Court or Bar Association to be certain that the individual is an attorney in that jurisdiction.
Prenuptial Agreements are very important documents and they should be carefully drafted by someone with legal acumen. Entrusting something so important to those without credentials is a risky endeavor that will likely not be recognized until long after correspondence with the drafter has terminated.
For further information please see: Prenuptial Agreement Thailand.
27th March 2010
Department of State Discusses Fee Increases for Consular Services
Posted by : admin
In a few recent blog posts, this author has discussed the proposed fee increases for services offered at US Diplomatic and Consular Posts abroad. Apparently, the Department of State will be increasing the fees associated with Passport procurement. Also, those who wish to obtain new pages in their passport will no longer be able to have pages added free of charge. Finally, although on a slightly different topic, the fees for non-immigrant family based visas is to be raised as well. For those who are unfamiliar with the details of US Immigration the US Fiance Visa (also called the K1 visa) and the Non-Immigrant US Marriage visa (Also called a K3 Visa) are issued at American Embassies overseas.
The Department of State issued some statements in a supplement regarding the proposed rule that would increase the fees for Consular Services:
“The Department of State (“Department”) published two proposed rules in the Federal Register on December 14, 2009 (74 FR 66076, Public Notice 6851, RIN 1400-AC57), and on February 9, 2010 (75 FR 6321, Public Notice 6887, RIN 1400-AC58), proposing to amend sections of part 22 of Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the Schedule of Fees for Consular Services. The Department’s proposed rules solicited comments, and a number of comments requested additional detail on the Consular Services Cost of Service Study (CoSS) as well as time to comment on that detail. In response, the Department is providing the additional written detail below.”
The Department of State should be commended for taking the time to explain to the public the policy reasons for a fee increase. In many ways, a fee increase is periodically necessary as each US Embassy and/or US Consulate must serve the needs of the Americans using the post while at the same time stay within a budget. Balancing these two objectives can be difficult at times. The statement went further in describing the reasons behind the increase in fees, but used an analogy to make the point:
“Example: Imagine a government agency that has a single facility it uses to prepare and issue a single product–a driver’s license. In this simple scenario, every cost associated with that facility (the salaries of employees, the electricity to power the computer terminals, the cost of a blank driver’s license, etc.) can be attributed directly to the cost of producing that single item. If that agency wants to ensure that it is charging a “self- sustaining” price for driver’s licenses, it only has to divide its total costs for a given time period by an estimate of the number of driver’s licenses to be produced during that same time period.”
As this analogy points out, if an organization is just producing one product, then determining the cost of the product is relatively easy:
“However, if that agency issues multiple products (driver’s licenses, non-driver ID cards, etc.), has employees that work on other activities besides licenses (for example, accepting payment for traffic tickets), and operates out of multiple facilities it shares with other agencies, it becomes much more complex for the agency to determine exactly how much it costs to produce any single product. In those instances, the agency would need to know what percent of time its employees spend on each service and how much of its overhead (rent, utilities, facilities maintenance, etc.) are consumed in delivering each service to determine the cost of producing each of its various products–the driver’s license, the non-driver ID card, etc. Using an ABC model would allow the agency to develop those costs.”
Apparently, the Department of State, through use of modeling, has discovered the true cost of their services and is attempting to adjust their fees accordingly. It remains to be seen how thee changes will impact expats and Americans using United States Consular Posts abroad. In Thailand, it is this author’s opinion, that this fee increase will have the biggest impact upon the American Citizen Services Unit of the US Embassy Bangkok and the US Consulate Chiang Mai as those respective units deal with issues like new passport issuance on a regular basis.
21st March 2010
US Visa Thailand: What If My Thai Fiancee or Wife Worked In a Bar?
Posted by : admin
Although delicate, the issue of prostitution in Thailand and the impact upon United States Immigration is something that an American Immigration attorney in Thailand should discuss, if for no other reason than the fact that there is a great deal of misinformation about this topic throughout the internet.
First, the relevant law: The United States Immigration and Nationality Act §212(a)(2)(D) has the following to say on the topic of inadmissibility and prostitution:
(D) Prostitution and commercialized vice
Any alien who—
(i) is coming to the United States solely, principally, or incidentally to engage in prostitution, or has engaged in prostitution within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status,
(ii) directly or indirectly procures or attempts to procure, or (within 10 years of the date of application for a visa, admission, or adjustment of status) procured or attempted to procure or to import, prostitutes or persons for the purpose of prostitution, or receives or (within such 10-year period) received, in whole or in part, the proceeds of prostitution, or
(iii) is coming to the United States to engage in any other unlawful commercialized vice, whether or not related to prostitution,
is inadmissible.
It should be noted that legality is not an issue when it comes to prostitution as even a legal act of prostitution is a legal ground of inadmissibility from the United States of America. In the US State of Nevada, prostitution is legal provided the brothel has a license and comports to certain regulatory rules with regard to health and advertising. However, the act of prostitution itself is not illegal under in Nevada so long as the prostitute works in a licensed establishment. Regardless of the fact that the act may be legal, the Immigration and Nationality Act still makes the act a legal grounds of inadmissibility if it occurred within 10 years of the application for admission to the United States of America.
This seemingly glaring disjunction is the result of the American doctrine of Federalism. In the US, there is one sovereign in the form of the Federal government and 50 sovereigns in the form of the 50 US states. It is possible that State and Federal law will occasionally conflict. For Immigration purposes, the Federal regulations and statutes are controlling over state law. Therefore, regardless of the fact that an act of prostitution may be legal in a US state, it may still be a legal grounds of inadmissibility if it occurred within 10 years of an application for admission to the USA.
In Thailand this is important to note because prostitution is only vaguely defined in criminal statutes. Under the provisions of the Thai Prevention and Suppression of Prostitution Act of 1996 the definition of prostitution is defined as:
“‘prostitution’ means sexual intercourse, or any other act, or the commission of any other act in order to gratify the sexual desire of another person in a promiscuous manner in return for money or any other benefit, irrespective of whether the person who accepts the act and the person who commits the act are of the same sex or not…”
The obvious problem with this definition is the phrase “in a promiscuous manner.” Authorities in Thailand seem to operate under the assumption that acts of prostitution occurring in private are not promiscuous and therefore do not meet the legal definition of prostitution. The United States immigration authorities do not take this view and their view of prostitution falls in line with the more traditional definition which mandates finding of previous engagement in acts of prostitution if the individual in question was paid in exchange for providing sexual gratification.
If a Consular Officer at a US Embassy or US Consulate abroad finds an alien inadmissible because the alien has engaged in prostitution within 10 years of filing an application for a US visa, then the alien will not be able to obtain a US visa, nor will they be allowed to enter the United States of America. This decision is not subject to appeal.
What is the solution if an alien is found inadmissible based upon a finding that they have engaged in prostitution within 10 years of applying for a US visa? Fortunately, the Immigration and Nationality Act provides a remedy for those who are found inadmissible under these circumstances. An I-601 waiver may be filed with USCIS and if approved, the alien will be able to seek admission to the United States of America.
Throughout the internet there are those who claim that the best way to avoid this issue is to lie to a Consular Officer or “omit certain facts.” This practice is highly inadvisable. First, it is illegal and in some cases punishable by five years in a federal penitentiary and a $250,000 fine. Second, it could lead to further problems for an alien because lying to a Consular Officer could result in a finding that the alien had engaged in fraud and misrepresentation which is a separate ground of inadmissibility. Third, such advice is highly unethical and reflects adversely upon anyone who advises a client to lie to a Consular Officer or in a visa application. Run, don’t walk, away from anyone who gives this kind of advice as it is unethical, illegal, and could result in a permanent bar to entering the United States.
Our firm’s policy is to disclose all legally relevant facts and deal with the legal consequences in a straightforward manner.
For More Information Please See: US Visa Thailand.
The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely on advertisement. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience. The information presented on this site should not be construed to be formal legal advice nor the formation of a lawyer/client relationship.
Thailand Call: 02-266 3698
USA Call: 1-(316)-974-0454