Integrity Legal

After the tragedy of 9/11 many changes were made with regard to Homeland Security. Specifically, a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created and many tasks previously undertaken by other agencies were brought under the jurisdiction of DHS. One example is the United States Customs Service which was reincorporated into the Department of Homeland Security as the Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service. This agency is responsible for patrolling the borders and ports of entry to the United States of America. They are also responsible for screening those who enter the United States of America either on a US passport, US visa, or US visa waiver. CBP plays an integral part in the US Immigration process.

Prior to this publication, there has been a rumor circulating that those who wish to enter the United States of America must fist obtain a vaccination for the H1N1 influenza vaccination. As a matter of fact, this is not true. Apparently this rumor is unfounded. AILA has provided a quote from a statement from the Customs and Border Protection Service:

“[United States] Customs and Border Protection would like to address rumors regarding U.S. entry requirements and the H1N1 virus: Travelers do NOT need to present proof that they received the H1N1 flu vaccine in order to enter the United States. No such vaccination requirement exists. Travelers are encouraged to visit the Department of Health and Human Services Flu Web site for current information on seasonal flu prevention, and the “Know Before You Go” section under the Travel tab of the CBP Web site for helpful traveler tips.”

For those seeking entry to the United States a flu vaccination is not required at this time.

In recent years CBP has been granted more and more authority to deal with real time situations. This leads many to wonder just how much authority CBP has. This is an interesting question as they are given major discretionary powers with regard to those seeking entry to the United States. For example, CBP is authorized to place foreign nationals into expedited removal (deportation) proceedings if they deem it necessary. One who has been removed through expedited removal could be barred from reentering the USA for as long as five years. That being said, this only seems to come up in the context of US Family Immigration when the loved one of a US Citizen is improperly using a US tourist visa for undisclosed immigration purposes. In situations such as this, CBP may feel it necessary to use expedited removal to send the subject back to their home country. Therefore it is usually wise to process things correctly and utilize the proper visa for a loved one traveling to the United States.

Tags: B2 Visa, CBP, Customs and Border Protection, Flu Vaccine, H1N1, Tourist Visa, US Immigration, US Immigration Thailand, US Tourist Visa, US Visa, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver
Posted in Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

There is some misunderstanding as to an attorney’s role at the Consular processing phase of the US visa process. The Consular processing phase is usually the final visa processing phase as it usually culminates in the issuance of a US visa. In cases involving legal grounds of inadmissibility this may not be the case (as such cases require the extra step of obtaining an I601 waiver), but in a routine family visa application, such as an application for a CR1, K3, or K1 visa, the visa is generally issued soon after the Embassy interview.

Many are under the mistaken impression that an attorney can be present at the visa interview. Although this may be true at some posts, the US Embassy in Bangkok does not permit this practice. Under the provisions of the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM), US Embassies and Consulates are entitled to set policy regarding attorney representation at the post:

“Each post has the discretion to establish its own policies regarding the extent to which attorneys and other representatives may have physical access to the Consulate or attend visa interviews, taking into consideration such factors as a particular consulate’s physical layout and any space limitations or special security concerns. Whatever policies are set must be consistent and applied equally to all.” [9 FAM 40.4 N12.4]

Although a post has wide discretion with regard to presence therein, the post is required to notify the attorney of record regarding the ultimate status of the application:

“The post must send a notification of the action taken at the time of the final immigrant visa appointment to the applicant’s attorney of record on a locally reproduced nonstandard form letter… If the immigrant visa is refused, you must hand a copy of the refusal letter, and a copy of Form OF-194, The Foreign Service of the United States of America Refusal Worksheet, attached to the form letter to the alien (making sure that the refusal worksheet is retained in the applicant’s visa file).” [9 FAM 40.4 N12.2]

The Foreign Affairs manual goes further by permitting direct correspondence between attorneys and Consular Officers:

“You may correspond directly with the applicant’s representative of record, even in cases where the applicant is physically present in the United States, unless the applicant requests otherwise.” [9 FAM 40.4 N12.1]

Importantly, the Foreign Affairs Manual requires that an attorney licensed in the US, but practicing abroad, be accorded those same courtesies granted to attorneys practicing in the USA:

“You must extend to a U.S. attorney who has been practicing abroad and is a member of a State bar association or to a local attorney-at-law, the same courtesies in correspondence that are extended to an attorney practicing in the United States…” [9 FAM 40.4 N12.3]

In this author’s experience, the US Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand diligently adheres to the rules in the Foreign Affairs Manual while exercising reasonable discretion in order to efficiently process a very large caseload. Although not permitted to be present at the visa interview, a US visa lawyer in Thailand can provide a great deal of insight into the final phases of the US visa process.

For more information on the Foreign Affairs Manual please see the US Department of State Website by clicking here.

Tags: CR1 Visa Thailand, FAM, Foreign Affairs Manual, K-1 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, K3 Visa Thailand, us embassy bangkok, us embassy thailand, US Immigration Lawyer Thailand, us visa lawyer thailand, US Visa Thailand
Posted in CR1 Visa, Fiance Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, US Consulate Chiang Mai, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Myanmar, US Embassy Rangoon, US Embassy Thailand, US Embassy Yangon, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

The passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (“IIRIRA”) has had ramifications that routinely affect immigrants and non-immigrant entrants attempting to enter the US even today. This legislation greatly changed United States Immigration law and procedure.  At the time, IIRIRA was intended to target illegal immigration to the USA. Unfortunately, many of the provisions contained in IIRIRAhave had a critical impact upon legal immigration to the US. This article will explain one of the major powers granted to Customs and Border Protection Officers under IIRIRA: Expedited Removal

When IIRAIRA was passed its provisions Amended section 235 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) to allow for the expedited deportation of foreign nationals who could be deemed inadmissible under either section 212(a)(6)(C) (fraud or misrepresentation) or section 212(a)(7) (lack of documentation) of the INA. The provisions do not call for the decision to be subject to appeal and as a result, a foreign national subjected to expedited removal does not enjoy the same level of due process that most American Citizens take for granted.

If one is subjected to expedited removal, then that alien cannot gain admission to the USA for a period of 5 years. If the alien is subsequently expeditiously removed, then they will be inadmissible to the USA for 20 years. If an alien is subjected to expedited removal, it may be possible for the alien to reenter the USA within their period of inadmissibility, but the alien must first apply for advance permission to reenter the USA, which is akin to an I-601 waiver in that the advance permission must be granted before the alien will be given leave to reenter the country.

Expedited removal should be of particular interest to those seeking to bring their Thai fiancee or spouse to the US on a tourist visa. It is a common misconception that tourist visas can be used to bring a significant other to the US to marry and apply for adjustment of status. Firstly, the US tourist visa is not a dual intent travel document. A tourist visa is intended strictly for those with non-immgrant intent. Therefore, it is unlawful for a foreign fiancee to travel to the USA with undisclosed immigrant intent. That being said, as a practical matter this does happen.  The Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service can use expedited removal to turn away those attempting to enter the US on a tourist visa if they suspect that the entrant has undisclosed immigrant intent pursuant to section 212(a)(7) of the INA.

This author, along with colleagues in Southeast Asia, has noticed a recent rise in the number of expedited removals of Thais initiated by CBP. In nearly every case, the Thai being removed was the significant other of a US citizen. The Thai nationals removed in these cases were traveling to the US on either a tourist visa or a student visa. Due to this seemingly new trend, it is now more imperative than ever for Thai fiancees and wives of Americans to use the proper K1 fiance visa, K3 marriage visa, or Immigrant visa to travel to the United States.

Tags: American Visa Thailand, expedited removal, IIRAIRA, Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, Tourist Visa, US Tourist Visa, US Visa Thailand
Posted in General Legal Information, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, Legal Opinion, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | 3 Comments »

The United States visa waiver program, not to be confused with an I-601 waiver, allows citizens from certain countries to enter the United States of American without obtaining a visa prior to arrival. In recent years the United States government has implemented ESTA, also known as: the Electronic System for Travel Authorization. ESTA requires that travelers wishing to enter the country on a visa waiver inform the US Immigration authorities prior to arrival so that a pre-screening can be conducted. The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection (CBP) Service is tasked with monitoring those seeking travel clearances using the ESTA system. Recently it has been reported by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) that 221g denials must be reported in the ESTA form, to quote AILA directly:

“CBP recently informed AILA that it, after consultation with the Department of State (DOS), is classifying all §221(g) actions on visa applications as visa “denials.” Thus, Visa Waiver Program (VWP) applicants, who are subject to INA §221(g) refusals, should answer affirmatively in their ESTA applications that they have been denied a visa. This suggestion applies even if the reason for the refusal is due to consular administrative processing. If VWP travelers do not disclose such a “denial” on their ESTA applications or provide an update regarding such “denials,” they may have their ESTA registration rejected or be sent to secondary inspection and potentially refused entry when they apply for admission to the United States.”

This is important to note for those originating from a country participating in the US visa waiver program. For example, if the foreign fiancee of a US Citizen has been issued a 221g with regard to a K1 visa application, then that 221g must be disclosed as a denial on the ESTA form if said fiancee intends to visit the US and the foreign fiancee’s home country participates in this program.

As AILA’s article went on to point out, the Department of State does not even consider 221(g)’s to be outright denials,

Technically, the Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) classifies a §221(g) action as a visa “refusal,” but DOS explicitly retains authority to “reactivate” the visa application upon receipt of required documents or completion of a government mandated administrative clearance. See 9 FAM 41.121 N2.4.

This situation is a classic example of two different government agencies taking a differing view of the same situation. The Department of State seems to view 221g refusals as administrative refusals to issue a visa without further documentation while the Department of Homeland Security seems to view such refusals as US visa denials that could be viewed as grounds for denying a person’s subsequent entry into the USA.

This issue will likely not be particularly problematic in the Kingdom of Thailand as Thailand is not a country participating in the visa waiver program, but for others around the world this issue could lead to problems entering the USA.

For those in this situation, it is always advisable to be honest, but it may be possible to explain the situation by answering “yes” to the question: Have you ever been denied a U.S. visa or entry? After answering in the affirmative there should be space to explain. Therefore, the applicant probably should note that the denial was: a 221(g), at the Embassy or Consulate (example: US Embassy Bangkok, US Consulate Chiang Mia, US Embassy Burma, etc.),  and the reason for the “denial” (example: Embassy conducted administrative processing, Consulate requested further documentation, etc).

Tags: 221 (g), 221g, AILA, CBP, Customs and Border Protection, ESTA, I601 Waiver, us visa denial, US visa denials, US Visa Waiver, Visa Waiver, Visa Waiver Program
Posted in Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, Legal Opinion, US Consulate Chiang Mai, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Thailand, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

As reported previously on this blog, HIV is to be taken off of the list of communicable diseases which can cause an Immigrant to be deemed inadmissible to the United States of America. At the time of this writing, anyone who has HIV (Human Immunodeficiency Virus) is not admissible to the United States. This means that those infected with the virus must obtain an I-601 waiver of inadmissibility before they will be allowed to enter the United States. Under the new rule, this will no longer be the case.

To quote a document, provided courtesy of AILA, promulgated by the Department of Health and Human Services:

As a result of this final rule, aliens will no longer be inadmissible into the United States based solely on the ground they are infected with HIV, and they will not be required to undergo HIV testing as part of the required medical examination for U.S. immigration.

As a result of this rule change, it is highly likely that Embassy mandated medical examinations will be greatly altered as it will no longer be necessary for the Embassy-approved doctors (sometimes referred to as civil surgeons) to test prospective immigrants for HIV.

This rule change reflects the new policy of the United States government regarding HIV. Basically the Center for Disease Control and the authorities at the Department of Homeland Security no longer consider HIV a “communicable” disease as defined in the relevant provisions of  Immigration and Nationality Act. To further quote the aforementioned document:

While HIV infection is a serious health condition, it is not a communicable disease that is a significant public health risk for introduction, transmission, and spread to the U.S. population through casual contact.

Please note that this rule has not taken effect and until it does HIV is still considered a communicable disease in cases involving inadmissibility.

Although many laud the promulgation of this rule, there are those, particularly in the LGBT community who feel that the current Administration is not doing enough to provide immigration benefits to same sex couples. Many view this rule change as a “half measure” designed to placate advocates for gay rights as HIV has a major impact upon the gay and lesbian community.

Although this rule change will effect those with HIV who wish to enter the USA, it does not effect same-sex bi-national couples who cannot obtain US Immigration benefits for a foreign partner based upon the current federal laws which do not recognize same-sex marriage. There are many who feel that the rescission of this rule regarding HIV infected immigrants falls short of full immigration equality for all.

Tags: 601 Waiver, gay visa, HIV ban, HIV inadmissibility, I-601, I-601 Waiver, I601, I601 Waiver, Inadmissibility, lgbt immigration, Same Sex Immigration, Same Sex Marriage, same sex visa, waiver of inadmissibility
Posted in General Legal Information, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | 1 Comment »

Recently the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) announced that a revised form has been issued for those who wish to file for an I-601 Waiver. An I-601 waiver is a waiver of legal grounds of inadmissibility under the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. An alien is found inadmissible if they meet the elements of inadmissibility under the act. Common grounds of inadmissibility among applicants in Thailand are overstay, prostitution, Crimes involving moral turpitude, and health related grounds. If a finding that one of these grounds exists is made by the Consular or Immigration officers, then the applicant must seek an I-601 waiver before they will be entitled to enter the United State lawfully.

In recent days, USCIS has been revising some of the forms that they will accept in connection with certain immigration matters. For example, USCIS recently announced that they will only be accepting an updated version of the G28 Notice of Attorney Appearance. Those who have already filed applications for Immigration benefits before this update comes into effect will not need to submit any new forms as the service will continue to recognize the old forms in an effort to seamlessly transition from the old forms to the new. These efforts seem to be an attempt to streamline the, somewhat complicated, administrative aspects of the US Immigration application process. To quote directly from the USCIS press release:

USCIS has revised Form I-601, Application for Waiver of Grounds of Inadmissibility (Revision Date 04/06/09 N, OMB Expiration Date 04/30/11) to make it easier for applicants to complete. Applicants may now select from a list of grounds of inadmissibility on the form itself and mark all which apply to them in order to request a waiver. In addition to the list, the form includes a section where applicants can describe, in their own words, why they believe they are inadmissible. In the previous edition of Form I-601, information about grounds of inadmissibility could only be found of the form’s instructions.

We applaud the efforts on the part of the Service to make this process less complicated and more straightforward. For those interested in submitting a successful I-601 waiver application, it should be remembered that in most cases involving an I-601 waiver, the applicant(s) must show that to deny the waiver would result in an “extreme hardship” to a United States Citizen or Lawful Permanent Resident. This can be a difficult legal obstacle to overcome which is why it may be wise to retain an immigration lawyer to assist with the preparation and submission of such a petition.

Unlike the United States Embassy in Bangkok, which only has jurisdiction ovr the Kingdom of Thailand. The local USCIS office in Bangkok has administrative jurisdiction over most of Asia. Therefore, I-601 waiver applications filed in connection with a K1 visa, K3 visa, or CR1 visa sought from Asia could be submitted at USCIS Bangkok.

Tags: 601 Waiver, I-601, I-601 Waiver, I601, I601 Waiver, Immigration Lawyer, Immigration Lawyer Bangkok, US Immigration Lawyer Bangkok, US Immigration Lawyer Thailand, us visa bangkok, US Visa Burma, US Visa Myanmar, US Visa Thailand, USCIS Bangkok, USCIS Thailand
Posted in Fiance Visa Thailand, General Legal Information, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Burma, US Embassy Thailand, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, Visa Waiver | 1 Comment »

Every year, many people from all over the world enter the United States of America and remain temporarily. As previously mentioned on this blog and on this website, there are many different types of non-immigrant visas for those who wish to go to the United States and remain for a short period of time or for a particular endeavor which has a definitive chronological endpoint.

United States Tourist visas are a prime example of a non-immigrant category visa that can grant the applicant a long duration of stay. This type of visa is meant for those entering the USA for recreational purposes who intend to leave after their vacation has ended. US Student visas are meant for those who are traveling to the United States to engage in a course of study. Finally American Exchange visitor visas are designed for those who wish to travel to America to live and/or work in a travel exchange program.

With any of the aforementioned visa categories the underlying visa’s validity has an end date. When the non-immigrant visa’s expiration date arrives, the applicant must either depart the United States or seek an extension. An US visa extension is similar to a Thai visa extension in that the applicant must apply for the extension while in the country and if granted, the applicant may remain for longer than the initial visa’s validity.

Those who do not depart or extend are considered in violation of their visa as they are overstaying its validity. In US Immigration circles, the alien is deemed to be in the United States “on overstay.” The longer a violator remains in the United States the higher the probability that the violator will be caught and either removed from the country or given the option to voluntarily depart.

After departing the United States due to overstay, the alien may be deemed inadmissible depending upon the duration of the overstay. Further, the duration of the bar on reentry depends upon how long the violator overstayed. The alien could be subjected to a 10 year bar if he remained in the US without lawful status for a long enough period of time.

In cases involving inadmissibility based upon overstay it may be possible to obtain a waiver of the inadmissibility. The applicant will need to file an I-601 waiver in order to clear up the overstay issue because if the waiver is granted the applicant will be allowed to reenter the country on either an immigrant or non-immigrant visa.

If the alien was removed from the United States because of an overstay, it may be necessary to file an I-212 application for permission to apply for reentry. That being said, either application is approved only at the discretion of the adjudicating officer at the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service.

Tags: American Visa Thailand, I-601, I-601 Waiver, I601, I601 Waiver, Inadmissibility, overstay, US Student Visa, US Tourist Visa, US Visa Thailand, US Visa Waiver
Posted in F1 Visa Thailand, J1 Visa Thailand, Legal Opinion, Miscellaneous, Thailand Visa, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

On this website, there is a great deal of information regarding I-601 waivers and grounds of inadmissibility.  However, there are other situations where a foreign national can be barred from reentering the United States of America. For example, where an alien has been deported or removed from the United States, they are usually subject to a reentry ban for a statutorily specified period of time. If a foreign national has been previously deported or removed from the United States, then that person must submit an I-212 application to reapply for admission to the United States (also known as advance permission to reenter).

Deportation and removal are technically the same thing as the terms can be used interchangeably. That being said, forms of removal from the United States should be looked at on a kind of legal spectrum. What is commonly referred to as “Deportation” occurs after a finding by an Immigration Judge that a person should be removed from the United States of America. Another form of removal is known as “expedited removal” this commonly occurs at a port of entry in the United States where a Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) Officer finds that an applicant for admission is not fit for entry under one or more of the  provisions of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. In many situations, a Border Patrol Officer will allow an applicant for admission to voluntarily withdraw their application and return to the point of origin. In this situation, which is akin to voluntary departure, the applicant’s US Immigration record is not adversely affected. However, it is within the officer’s discretion to place the alien in expedited deportation proceedings and thereby have them removed from the United States.

When an alien is removed from the United States through the use of expedited deportation, that alien is barred from reentering the United States without first receiving approval of the aforementioned statutorily mandated I-212 petition. These applications are somewhat similar to I-601 waivers in that the applicant must show something  like extreme hardship to a United States Citizen would occur if the application were denied and the applicant remained inadmissible.

Avoiding expedited deportation at a port of entry (and the consequences arising therefrom) is just another reason why visa seekers should apply for a visa which comports with their intent. One who is viewed as using a United States tourist visa improperly (hiding their intention to marry in the US and adjust status) could be placed in expedited deportation proceedings. If removed, then a great deal of time and resources would need to be expended to deal with the inadmissibility. Therefore, it is not only ethically incumbent upon all applicants to be honest in their immigration endeavors, but it is also practical because avoiding expedited deportation is a great benefit from a long term perspective.

For the above described reasons, those wishing to bring a Thai loved one to the United States for the purpose of marriage are encouraged to utilize a K1 visa for this purpose as a fiance visa is the appropriate travel document reflecting the couple’s true intentions. For those already married, a CR1 visa or a K 3 visa is preferable to a tourist visa if adjustment of status is the ultimate goal.

Tags: CBP, deportation, expedited removal, I-212, I-601, I212, I601, Inadmissibility, K1 Visa, K1 Visa Thailand, K3 Visa, removal, Tourist Visa, Waiver
Posted in Fiance Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Thailand, US Tourist Visa, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, USCIS, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

On this blog, we often mention, quote, or write about the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association (AILA). Some readers have become curious as to what this organization does and what they represent. Further, some people do not understand what membership means.

In other countries such as the United Kingdom and Australia, there exist what are known as registered Migration Consultants or OISC registered immigration advisers. In the United Kingdom, the organizations purposes is well articulated on their homepage which states that the OISC, “is responsible for regulating immigration advisers by ensuring they are fit and competent and act in the best interest of their clients.”

In the United States of America an attorney licensed and in good standing with either the United States Supreme Court or the highest court of at least on state is entitled to practice United States Immigration Law. However, unlike other countries with a history of common law, the United States does not have one singular regulatory body designed to monitor the activities of those who primarily act as a US Immigration lawyer.

In a way, the American Immigration Lawyer’s Association has come in to fill the breach regarding some of the duties inherent to a professional organization. The American Immigration Lawyers Association provides advice and mentoring for new attorneys practicing in the field of American Immigration. AILA also acts as a mechanism for advocacy on Capitol Hill. The American Immigration Lawyers Association disseminates information regarding pending legislation and provides resources regarding where interested parties can go to show their support for upcoming legislative initiatives.

One aspect of AILA that is particularly beneficial to the public at large is their campaign to eradicate so-called “notarios” and “Immigration consultants.” The American Immigration Lawyers Association provides information about where disaffected parties can go in order to lodge complaints against unscrupulous operators who prey on helpless victims who unwittingly retain their services believing they are real attorneys. In the United States this phenomenon is particularly common in the Latino communities. Oftentimes people are adversely affected by the activites of the notarios who offer either purposely malicious or incorrect advice.

It should be noted that membership in AILA is not necessarily indicative of one who can practice immigration law. Any attorney who is licensed and in good standing in at least one state can provide immigration advice. However, regular AILA members must have a license to practice law.  Therefore, AILA membership is indicative of an ability to practice before USCIS.

Some “fly by night” operations in Thailand and throughout the world falsely make claims to membership in AILA. In order to verify if an operator is AILA approved, check the website and search for the attorney in question.

For more on US Immigration from Thailand please see:

K1 fiance visa

K3 marriage visa or,

US tourist visa

Tags: AILA, American Lawyer Thailand, K1 Visa, US Immigration Attorney Thailand, US Immigration Lawyer Thailand, US Visa Thailand
Posted in F1 Visa Thailand, J1 Visa Thailand, K-3 Visa Thailand, K1 Visa Thailand, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | No Comments »

There is some confusion regarding the American State Department’s estimates regarding visa denials from around the world. There are some who are under the mistaken impression that the State Department’s numbers are the definitive source for information regarding waivers of inadmissibility. In fact, any numbers published by the United States Department of State regarding I-601 waivers should be taken with a grain of salt because the American Department of State is not the agency tasked with handling the adjudication of I-601 waiver applications after the a United States Consular Officer at an Embassy or Consulate General has made a finding that a legal ground of inadmissibility exists in a particular Immigration case.

The United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) has the authority to grant waivers of inadmissibility under United States Immigration law. Therefore, USCIS’s internal statistics would be the proper government source to consult regarding the number waivers of inadmissibility applied for and ultimately granted. That being said, USCIS does not keep categorical statistics according to the Agenda of the USCIS National Stakeholder Meeting on January 27, 2009:

“Although we track the total number of Forms I-601 processed, USCIS International Operations does not have a system to track the specific grounds of inadmissibility that applicants seek to waive.”

The document that is causing the confusion regarding visa denials can be found at the following url. The first major cause of confusion in this document is the seemingly small number of findings of legal inadmissibility under section 212 (a)(2)(D)(i) for engaging in acts of prostitution or deriving profits from activities that are presumed to be prostitution. According to the table there were only 2 non-immigrant visa waivers granted in 2008 under section 212 (a)(2)(D)(i) of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). I find this number difficult to believe as this author has recently discussed the prostitution ground of legal inadmissibility with two highly experienced United States Immigration attorneys and between the two of them, they had applied for and obtained more than 2 non-immigrant visa waivers in 2008. Further, I believe it is highly likely that other prospective US Immigrants and non-immigrants were granted waivers of this ground of inadmissibility because I doubt that only two United States attorneys handled all of the waivers granted under this section of the INA in 2008; particularly if one takes into account not only other immigration attorneys, but I-601 waiver applications filed pro se as well.

For more on US Visas Please See: K-1 Visa or K-3 Visa

(This document is not intended as a source of legal advice, but for educational purposes. For legal advice contact an Attorney. No Lawyer-Client relationship should be deemed to exist between the writer and reader of this blog post.)

Tags: American Visa Thailand, us embassy bangkok, us embassy thailand, us visa denial, US Visa Denied, US Visa Thailand, US Visa Waiver
Posted in US Consulate Chiang Mai, us embassy bangkok, US Embassy Thailand, US Visa and Immigration, US Visa Thailand, Visa Waiver | No Comments »