Integrity Legal

Frequently on this blog the author tries to post information that may be of relevance to future visa seekers. Below is a schedule of the holidays quoted from the website of the US Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh:

2010 Mission Holiday Schedule Following is the Holiday Schedule for 2010 that will be observed by all U.S. Government agencies in Bangladesh.

HOLIDAYS		DATES MISSION CLOSED
New Year’s Day	American	December 31, 2009	Thursday
Martin Luther King’s Birthday	American	January 17	Sunday+
Washington’s Birthday	American	February 14	Sunday+
Martyr’s Day (Int’l Language Day)	Bangladeshi	February 21	Sunday
Bengali New Year’s Day	Bangladeshi	April 14	Wednesday
Buddha Purnima#	Bangladeshi	May 27	Thursday#
Memorial Day	American	May 30	Sunday+
Independence Day	American	July 4	Sunday
Shab-e-Barat*	Bangladeshi	July 28	Wednesday*
Labor Day	American	September 5	Sunday+
Shab-e-Quadr*	Bangladeshi	September 7	Tuesday*
Eid-ul-Fitr*	Bangladeshi	September 12	Sunday*
Columbus Day	American	October 10	Sunday+
Durga Puja#	Bangladeshi	October 17	Sunday#
Veterans Day	American	November 11	Thursday
Eid-ul-Azha*	Bangladeshi	November 17 & 18	Wednesday* & Thursday
Thanksgiving Day	American	November 25	Thursday
Victory Day	Bangladeshi	December 16	Thursday
Christmas Day	American	December 26	Sunday+

Please note that, although the Bangladesh Government observes more Bangladeshi holidays than those noted above, only these will be observed for purposes of closing the Embassy.

Notes:		(*) Date subject to appearance of the moon.
		(#) Date subject to change as the religious pundits select an auspicious date based the zodiac,  position of star, moon or other celestial bodies.

(+) American holidays that normally fall on Friday, Saturday or Monday will be observed on the following or preceding workday, due to Sunday-Thursday work week in Bangladesh.

For those with business at any US Embassy or US Consulate overseas it is prudent to note that local events on the ground can have a tremendous impact upon US Embassies and Consulates as staff are generally not required to come to the Post and the Post will cease operation under special circumstances. Therefore, those who must travel to a US Embassy to visit American Citizen Services or the Visa Unit are well advised to call-ahead in order to be certain that the Post is open.

In Consular Processing matters,  Consular closures can delay the visa process. That said, those who still have a case pending with USCIS need to be less concerned with the Embassy’s holiday closing schedule and more immediately concerned with the current USCIS processing times. As the US Family Visa process is bifurcated it is wise to note that three major agencies are involved in the adjudication of US visa cases: USCIS, the National Visa Center, and the US Embassy with appropriate jurisdiction over the Beneficiary. Therefore, those seeking answers as to why the process is delayed would be wise to note which agency is currently in possession of the petition or application.

With regard to processing of certain visa categories, recent Department of State fee increases could have an effect upon the overall immigration process. This is of special importance for those seeking a K1 visa or a K3 Visa.

For further related information please see: US Visa Thailand or US fiance visa.

On this blog, we regularly discuss the US Embassy in Bangkok, Thailand. However, we relatively rarely discuss the US Embassies and Consulates located throughout Southeastern Asia. There are many other American Diplomatic and Consular facilities in Southern Asia and one of those Posts is the US Embassy Jakarta. This Embassy is located in the capital city of Indonesia and routinely processes US visas such as the K1 visa, the K3 Visa, as well as the CR1 and IR1 visa categories. Just like any other US Consulate, the Consulate at the US Embassy in Jakarta is also tasked with adjudicating non-immigrant visa applications for categories such as the B1 visa, the B2 visa, the F1 visa, and the J1 visa (to name just a few).

Recently, this author came across an interesting statement from the US Embassy in Indonesia’s website which is quoted here:

The decision whether or not to hire a lawyer is yours alone.  We cannot tell you whether or not to obtain representation, nor can we recommend any specific lawyers.  If you do hire an attorney or other representative, that person may accompany you to your visa interview but may not/not answer questions on your behalf.  You, the applicant, must answer the consular officer’s questions.  If your case is complicated, or if you cannot devote the necessary care to properly prepare, then we encourage you to find a lawyer qualified in immigration law by visiting www.aila.org.

Generally, each Consulate sets its own rules regarding participation by American attorneys in the Consular processing phase of the US Immigration process. Some posts refuse to allow anyone except the beneficiary into the Consulate on the date of interview (this policy is generally based upon space considerations) while others allow virtually unfettered participation by American attorneys. Many ask: which is the better approach? For the most part, there is no “best” approach to Consular processing as each country is unique and certain considerations in one country may lead to one type of policy while different circumstances in another country results in a different policy decision by the US Consulate in that country. Furthermore, circumstances are always fluid and policies can change. For this reason, it is always wise to frequently check the status of the regulations at any facility in which one’s visa petition or application is awaiting adjudication.

Recently discussed fee increases are likely to impact those processing through US Embassies and Consulates worldwide as the Department of State recently raised the fees associated with many visa categories most notably those visas categorized as K visas.

With the recently announced fee increases associated with K visa applications filed overseas, there are many who feel that serious thought should be given to the type of visa a couple should petition to obtain. In the past, many couples who were thinking of marriage opted to apply for a US fiance visa, also referred to as a K1 visa. That being said, it was recently announced that the application fee for all K visas sought overseas would be increased from $131 to $350. Apparently, the resources accrued are to be used in furtherance of fraud prevention measures as well as implementation of measures meant to streamline the overall visa process. As the fee increase was only recently announced, it remains to be seen how newly acquired fees will be used on the Consular level. With that in mind, it has also been recently announced that USCIS may be raising fees for Immigrant visa petitions. For those who are unfamiliar with this blog, it should be noted that for purposes of traveling to the USA, the K1 visa and the K3 Visa are considered to be immigrant visas even though they do not automatically confer lawful permanent residence to the bearer upon entry in the USA.

Those seeking a US visa would be prudent to seriously consider their options because the costs associated with the process of applying for and obtaining a CR1 visa or an IR1 visa may be lower in some cases when compared to the costs associated with the K1 visa process. When viewed from a long term perspective the CR1 visa, although more time consuming to obtain, confers lawful permanent residence to the bearer upon entry and thereby negates the necessity of adjustment of status which is necessary for those who travel to the US on a K1 visa with the intent to marry the Petitioner and remain in the USA permanently.

In most cases, those wishing to bring a spouse to the USA are wise to bear in mind the fact that K3 visa applications, once a popular travel document for bi-national married couples, are now being administratively closed by the National Visa Center if the underlying I-130 is approved prior to, or at the same time as, the I-129f application. This has lead to many instances of spouses being required by circumstance to process a CR1 or IR1 visa rather than a K3 visa because the NVC simply will not process the K3 application.

For those interested in further information about US Immigration please see: American Visa Thailand.

In a recent transcript from a news conference held by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) it was announced that USCIS may be increasing many of the fees associated with US Immigration petitions. The following is a direct quote from the aforementioned news conference transcript:

While we received appropriations from Congress, budget cuts of approximately $160 million have not bridged the remaining gap between costs and anticipated revenue. A fee adjustment, as detailed in the proposed rule, is therefore necessary to address that gap.

Although few seem to doubt the fact that USCIS has experienced a revenue shortfall, many seem to be perturbed by the announcement of fee increases. The following is quoted from the AILA Leadership blog:

Yesterday, due to lower than projected fee revenues, USCIS proposed a fee increase that will amount to an average increase of  10% across the board.  USCIS will issue the formal proposal on Friday and there will be a 45 day comment period.  This, in combination with the 66% fee increase that was implemented in 2007, constitutes a tremendous hit in the pocketbook for a variety of users of immigration services. For example, an I-130 petition for an alien relative will jump from $355 to $420, under this proposal, thus impacting those who want to be reunited with family members.  An I-131 application for a travel document goes up by $55, and an application for an employment authorization document increases by $40.  Adjustment of status fees will increase by $55.  Businesses will also bear some of the brunt, with I-140 petitions for immigrant workers increasing over $100, premium processing going up by $225 and a brand new fee of $6,230 to establish a Regional Center under the EB-5 program. And –perhaps the coup de grace—fees for filing I-290 Notices of Appeal will increase from $585 to $630, a $45 dollar increase that will allow us to continue to file appeals that take over 2 years to adjudicate and generally conclude with either a rubber stamping of the original decision, or as in a handful of recent AAO decisions, a tortured legal analysis resulting in increasingly restrictive interpretations of the law.

The tone of the above quote leaves some readers feeling as though the author is rather upset about the recently proposed fee increase. The following passages from the aforementioned post on the AILA Leadership blog leaves little to the imagination regarding some practitioners feelings with regard to the proposed fee increases:

Why do these fee increases feel like a punch in the stomach to immigration practitioners?  Because they come at a time when the quality of decision-making and the ability to correct even the simplest errors or address basic problems with USCIS are at an all-time low. A small sampling of the problems we have all experienced with alarming increased frequency over the past few years…Application of new extra-regulatory standards in case adjudication…Adjudication of issues not within the province of USCIS…A “pick and choose” attitude with respect to previously issued long-standing agency guidance…Lack of accessibility of agency officials and decision-makers…Lack of predictability in decision-making…Lack of respect for the role of counsel in various proceedings: Examples:  Practitioners report that they are sometimes not copied on RFE’s, and that district offices from time to time have barred attorneys from accompanying their clients to adjustment interviews.

Although USCIS adjudicates cases on an individual basis and no single practitioner can make a generalized statement about USCIS adjudication generally, there appears to be an increasingly common feeling among immigration practitioners that agencies associated with Immigration adjudication are becoming rather unpredictable.

Also of possible interest to those seeking certain family based visas such as the K1 visa and the K3 Visa is the fact that the US Department of State has recently raised the fees associated with such applications when adjudicated by US Consulates abroad. The previous fee for K visa applications was $131, but under the newly promulgated rules the K visa application fee has been raised to $350. Those seeking K3 visas are unlikely to be adversely impacted by the recent fee increase as K3 visa applications are currently being “administratively closed,” in many cases, by the National Visa Center. That said, those seeking a K1 Fiance Visa will likely be required to pay the increased fee in order to have their K1 visa application adjudicated.

A frequently discussed topic on this blog is that of LGBT immigration rights. Recently the United States Department of State made an announcement about new guidelines that will be implemented with regard to those seeking corrected passports and Consular Reports of Birth Abroad to reflect gender change. The following is a direct quote from the announcement:

The U.S. Department of State is pleased to use the occasion of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender Pride Month to announce its new policy guidelines regarding gender change in passports and Consular Reports of Birth Abroad. Beginning June 10, when a passport applicant presents a certification from an attending medical physician that the applicant has undergone appropriate clinical treatment for gender transition, the passport will reflect the new gender. The guidelines include detailed information about what information the certification must include. It is also possible to obtain a limited-validity passport if the physician’s statement shows the applicant is in the process of gender transition. No additional medical records are required. Sexual reassignment surgery is no longer a prerequisite for passport issuance. A Consular Report of Birth Abroad can also be amended with the new gender. As with all passport applicants, passport issuing officers at embassies and consulates abroad and domestic passport agencies and centers will only ask appropriate questions to obtain information necessary to determine citizenship and identity.

The new policy and procedures are based on standards and recommendations of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), recognized by the American Medical Association as the authority in this field.

Although this announcement marks a watershed moment for transgender rights, there are many who feel that a more pressing issue is that of US visa benefits for those couples in a bona fide LGBT relationship. At present, statutes such as the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) preclude Immigration benefits for bi-national same sex couples. Meanwhile, different sex couples enjoy immigration benefits notwithstanding the fact that same sex couples may have been married under exactly the same conditions as their different sex counterparts. Many feel that this disparity is unconstitutional and illegal. However, this assertion has yet to be fully analyzed by US Courts.

There are some American legislators who are attempting to deal with this perceived inequality through passage of legislation such as the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA). Some hope that so-called Comprehensive Immigration Reform will include some provision for same sex bi-national couples hoping to obtain same sex visa benefits.

หัวข้อที่ถกเถียงกันบ่อยบนบอร์ดนี้ก็คือ หัวข้อวีซ่าท่องเที่ยว สถานทูตสหรัฐอเมริกาประจำกรุงเทพมหานครจะออกวีซ่าท่องเที่ยวเป็นจำนวนมากในแต่ละแ ในอดีต คำร้องขอวีซ่าชั่วคราวจะต้องมีการยื่นแบบ DS-156 แต่ไม่นานมานี้ กระทรวงต่างประเทศได้ประกาศว่าไม่ให้ใช้ฟอร์ม DS-156 กับการขอวีซ่าท่องเที่ยว บีทู (B2)อีกต่อไป

ฟอร์ม DS-160 แบบใหม่ เป็นฟอร์มคำขอวีซ่าชั่วคราวแบบอิเล็กทรอนิกส์ เป็นฟอร์มออนไลน์ที่ใช้บันทึกข้อมูลที่จำเป็นของผู้ขอวีซ่าชั่วคราว ฟอร์ม DS-160 นี้สามารถยื่นผ่านระบบอินเตอร์เนตไปยังกระทรวงต่างประเทศของสหรัฐโดยตรง เจ้าหน้าที่กงสุลจะอาศัยข้อมูลจากฟอร์ม DS-160 ที่ยื่นเพื่อใช้ประกอบการพิจารณาคำขอวีซ่า ประกอบกับการสัมภาษณ์แบบตัวต่อตัว เพื่อตัดสินว่าผู้ยื่นขอมีคุณสมบัติได้รับวีซ่าชั่วคราวหรือไม่

เห็นได้ชัดว่า ฟอร์ม DS-160 ได้ถูกนำมาใช้เพื่อรวบรัดขั้นตอนการขอวีซ่าของผู้ต้องการขอวีซ่าชั่วคราวเพื่อเข้าประเทศสหรัฐอเมริกา ผู้เขียนได้ตัดตอนข้อความที่ประกาศไว้มาให้อ่านกันดังต่อไปนี้

สถานทูตของสหรัฐอเมริกาและกงสุลทั้งหมดที่ดำเนินการคำขอวีซ่าชั่วคราวให้ใช้แบบฟอร์มออนไลน์ DS-160 แบบใหม่ ดังนั้นผู้ขอวีซ่าจะต้องใช้แบบฟอร์ม DS-160 ออนไลน์นี้กับการขอวีซ่าชั่วคราวเกือบทุกประเภท แต่ไม่ทั้งหมด โปรดดูหมวด ถาม-ตอบของกระทรวงการต่างประเทศ สำหรับข้อยกเว้นและเพื่อให้ทราบว่าวีซ่าชั่วคราวประเภทใดบ้างที่ยังคงใช้แบบฟอร์ม DS-156 ในขณะนี้

มีหลายๆคนที่กังวลว่าการเปลี่ยนแปลงที่เพิ่งเกิดขึ้นนี้จะส่งผลกระทบกับคำขอวีซ่าประเภทอื่นๆ ความกังวลนี้มักจะเกิดขึ้นกับผู้ที่จะขอวีซ่า K1 หรือ K3 สำหรับคู่หมั้นหรือคู่สมรสต่างชาติ นั่นหมายความว่าคุณอาจจะต้องปรึกษากับที่ปรึกษาชาวอเมริกันที่เชี่ยวชาญเสียก่อนว่าคุณควรจะยื่นแบบฟอร์มประเภทอะไรจึงจะเหมาะกับวีซ่าประเภทที่คุณต้องการยื่นขอ และเช่นเคย คุณควรหมายเหตุไว้ว่าทนายความอเมริกันที่มีใบอนุญาตเท่านั้นที่จะสามารถให้ความช่วยเหลือด้านกฎหมายคนเข้าเมืองอเมริกันได้อย่างถูกกฎหมาย หลายๆคนอาจจะเห็นว่าการขอวีซ่าท่องเที่ยวไม่ต้องอาศัยความช่วยเหลือจากทนายอเมริกัน เนื่องจากจะทำให้เสียค่าใช้จ่ายมากขึ้นปล่าวๆ อย่างไรก็ตาม คำขอวีซ่าสำหรับบุคคลในครอบครัวของชาวอเมริกันบางประเภทนั้น การขอความช่วยเหลือจากทนายอาจจะเป็นประโยชน์มากทีเดียว

ยังควรหมายเหตุไว้อีกว่าผู้ขอวีซ่าหลายๆคนถูกปฏิเสธวีซ่าจากเจ้าหน้าที่กงสุลอาศัยเหตุตาม พระราชบัญญัติคนเข้าเมืองและสัญชาติของอเมริกา มาตรา 214(b) ซึ่งหมายความว่าผู้ขอวีซ่าไม่สามารถพิสูจน์ความสัมพันธ์อันแน่นแฟ้นกับประเทศบ้านเกิด และความสัมพันธ์ที่เปราะบางกับสหรัฐอเมริกา ผู้ที่ขอวีซ่าไปสหรัฐอเมริกาควรจำไว้ว่าหากว่าการอพยพเป็นเป้าหมายสุดท้ายของคุณแล้วละก็ การขอวีซ่าท่องเที่ยวอาจจะไม่ใช่วีซ่าประเภทที่เหมาะกับคุณ แม้ว่าวีซ่าจะได้รับการอนุมัติโดยกงสุลสหรัฐอเมริกาในต่างประเทศ แต่บุคคลต่างด้าวมีสิทธิที่จะถูกส่งตัวกลับเมื่อไปถึงด่านตรวจคนเข้าเมืองในสหรัฐอเมริกา หากว่า เจ้าหน้าที่ด่านตรวจคนเข้าเมืองและศุลกากรมีเหตุผลให้เชื่อได้ว่าผู้ขอวีซ่านั้นเป็นผู้ที่แฝงไปด้วยเจตนาอพยพเข้าสหรัฐอเมริกาเป็นการถาวร

A frequently discussed topic on this blog is the US Tourist Visa. The US Embassy Bangkok processes a significant number of US Tourist Visa applications each year. In the past, most non-immigrant visa applications required the submission of form DS-156. Recently, the US State Department announced that the DS-156 should no longer be used  by those seeking a US B2 Tourist Visa:

The new DS-160, Nonimmigrant Visa Electronic Application, is a fully integrated online application form that is used to collect the necessary application information from a person seeking a nonimmigrant visa. The DS-160 is submitted electronically to the Department of State via the Internet. Consular Officers use the information entered on the DS-160 to process the visa application and, combined with a personal interview, determine an applicant’s eligibility for a nonimmigrant visa.

Apparently, the DS-160 has been introduced in an effort to streamline the visa process for those seeking non-immigrant visas outside of the United States of America. To quote the above announcement further:

All U.S. Embassies and Consulates that process nonimmigrant visas now use the new online DS-160. Therefore, visa applicants will need to apply using the online DS-160 for most, but not all, nonimmigrant visa categories. Review the [State Department] FAQs for exceptions and to find out which nonimmigrant categories continue to use the DS-156 at this time.

There are many who worry that these recent changes will impact other types of applications. This worry seems to be most prevalently felt by those seeking K1 visa benefits or K3 Visa benefits for a foreign fiancee or spouse. That said, consultation with an American legal professional may be necessary in order to determine which forms should be used when filing for certain visa categories. As always, it should be noted that only a licensed American attorney is entitled to assist in American Immigration matters. That said, many find that applying for a US Tourist Visa does not require the assistance of an American lawyer as such assistance would likely add little value to such an application. However, many applicants for US family immigration benefits find that attorney assistance is beneficial.

It should be noted that many applicants find their application for a visa denied pursuant to the Consular Officer’s application of Section 214(b) of the United States Immigration and Nationality Act. Such a finding basically means that the applicant was unable to show requisite “strong ties” to their home country and “weak ties” to the United States. Those seeking a visa to the USA should be advised that if immigration is the ultimate goal, then a tourist visa is not the proper travel document. Even if a visa application is approved by a US Consulate overseas, the foreign national could still be placed in expedited removal proceeding upon arrival at the port of entry in the USA if the Customs and Border Protection officers have reason to believe that the applicant is an undisclosed intending immigrant attempting to enter the USA.

In a recent press release it was announced that the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has the capability and resources to implement a program that will check 100% of the domestic airline passengers traveling in the United States  against terrorist watchlists.  To quote the press release directly:

Washington, D.C.—Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Janet Napolitano today announced that 100 percent of passengers traveling within the United States and its territories are now being checked against terrorist watchlists through the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Secure Flight program—a major step in fulfilling a key 9/11 Commission recommendation.

Before Secure Flight, airlines conducted passenger watchlist checking. “Secure Flight fulfills a key recommendation of the of the 9/11 Commission Report, enabling TSA to screen passengers directly against government watchlists using passenger name, date of birth, and gender before a boarding pass is issued,” said Secretary Napolitano. “This program is one of our many layers of security—coordinated with our partners in the airline industry and governments around the world—that we leverage to protect the traveling public against threats of terrorism.”

Under Secure Flight, TSA prescreens passenger name, date of birth and gender against government watchlists for domestic and international flights. In addition to facilitating secure travel for all passengers, the program helps prevent the misidentification of passengers who have names similar to individuals on government watchlists.
“We are quite pleased to see the positive outcome from the collaborative work that ATA, its member airlines and TSA have invested in the development of the Secure Flight program,” said Air Transport Association (ATA) President and CEO James C. May. “We are especially pleased that TSA phased program implementation to ensure that commercial airline travelers experience a seamless transition.”

99 percent of passengers will be cleared by Secure Flight to print boarding passes at home by providing their date of birth, gender and name as it appears on the government ID they plan to use when traveling when booking airline tickets. Individuals found to match watchlist parameters will be subjected to secondary screening, a law enforcement interview or prohibition from boarding an aircraft, depending on the specific case.

The Transportation Security Administration began implementing Secure Flight in late 2009 and expects all international carriers with direct flights to the U.S. to begin using Secure Flight by the end of 2010.

This author must applaud the efficiency of both the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the DHS in their efforts to track all domestic air travelers in the United States of America. Although this is unlikely to have a major impact upon foreign nationals traveling to the USA as first time immigrants, it should be noted that when American  security agencies focus their efforts the results can be rather astonishing. This is particularly true in the current information age as DHS and TSA have proven that they can use all of the tools at their disposal to more effectively  implement policies that conform to their mandate.  There are likely many domestic air travelers in the USA who feel reassured by the American government’s constant efforts to increase security.

For related information please see: US Immigration.

A frequent topic on this blog is same sex marriage and the intersection of that issue with US Immigration law. Currently, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) effectively prevents Federal recognition of Same Sex Marriages when adjudicating US Immigration petitions. Therefore, different sex couples who are validly married in a jurisdiction in the United States can petition for Immigration benefits if one of the partners is foreign national. This is not the case for same sex couples as same sex partners are currently barred from obtaining US Immigration benefits based upon a bona fide same sex marriage. This issue is being widely discussed in US Immigration circles. An example of this discussion can be found in the most recent edition of The Voice, a publication promulgated by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA). The following is an excerpt from a recent article discussing LGBT immigration issues:

“At present, gay and lesbian marriages are recognized in 10 countries. The Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Canada, South Africa, Norway, and Sweden recognize marriage equality uniformly throughout their territories.5 Same-sex marriages
also are recognized in some parts of Argentina and Mexico.6 However, DOMA closes the door to same-sex marriage recognition under any federal law, including the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). So for those couples who have united legally in one of the many countries stated above, DOMA would keep federal immigration laws from legally recognizing those unions upon their immigration to the United States.

Many courts have found that the language of DOMA is clear and unambiguous. But can DOMA be struck down? In addition to suits filed in Massachusetts,8 at least one other high-profile case in California, Perry v. Schwarzenegger, D.Ct.N.D.Cal. case 3:2009cv02292 (filed May 22, 2009), is currently challenging the constitutionality of discrimination against same-sex marriages more generally. If such a case were successful, it might lead courts to strike down DOMA and all anti-gay state marriage amendments, presumably resulting in the clear recognition of all bona fide same sex marriages in the United States.”

Although there are many legal obstacles in the path of equal Immigration rights for same sex couples, there may be a light at the end of the tunnel as a repeal of DOMA would create an opening that could be exploited by advocates for same ex immigration. To quote the aforementioned article:

“In a world without DOMA, U.S. immigration law would clearly recognize the same-sex marriage of a couple residing in a U.S. state that recognizes the marriage. It is also highly likely that the marriages would be recognized for residents of other states with no laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.”

Although repeal of DOMA may not be a perfect legal solution from an Immigration standpoint, a repeal of DOMA in conjunction with the adoption of a statute such as the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) would likely be an optimal solution to the current legal impasse.

For more information please see: Same Sex Visa.

In previous postings on this blog, we have discussed the naturalization process and the various ways in which individuals can become Citizens of the United States of America. Many believe, erroneously, that once a person is naturalized to US Citizenship, they cannot lose their citizenship. Unfortunately for some, this is not necessarily the case. US law provides for denaturalization under certain circumstances. Generally, denaturalization only occurs in siutuations where the applicant for naturalization was dishonest in their application for US Citizenship. The following is a quote from a recent presss release promulgated by the American Justice Department:

A former member of the Bosnian Serb Army has left the United States to return to Serbia after a federal judge ordered his denaturalization based on concealment during his application for U.S. citizenship that he served in the military during the Bosnian war, announced Assistant Attorney General Lanny A. Breuer of the Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Brian Albritton of the Middle District of Florida and Assistant Secretary John Morton of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Jadranko Gostic, 47 , a former resident of St. Petersburg, Fla., departed the United States on June 1 , 2010. U.S. District Court Judge James Moody in Tampa, Fla., ordered his denaturalization on May 26, 2010. Gostic was indicted in December 2006 on one count of unlawful procurement of citizenship and one count of making false statements. In January 2010, a civil complaint was filed against Gostic alleging illegal procurement of U.S. citizenship and requesting his denaturalization. Court documents allege that Gostic served in the Zvornik Infantry Brigade of the Bosnian Serb Army from April 1992 until December 1995. According to court documents, international tribunals have found that some units of the Zvornik Brigade engaged in war crimes and crimes against humanity , and that they participated in the July 1995 action against the Srebrenica enclave during which some 8,000 Muslim men and boys were executed.

Gostic entered the United States in 1999, received lawful permanent residence status in 2002 and was naturalized in 2004. According to court documents, at each stage of the immigration and naturalization process Gostic concealed his service in the Zvornik Brigade, even when specifically asked about his prior military service.

Gostic agreed to admit to the allegations against him, to be denaturalized, to surrender his lawful permanent resident status and to depart the United States. Gostic fulfilled the requirements of this agreement and departed the United States. As a result of his cooperation, the criminal charges against Gostic will be dismissed.

This case was investigated by the ICE Tampa Special-Agent-in-Charge Office and was prosecuted by Senior Trial Attorney William Kenety in the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section (HRSP) and Assistant U.S. Attorney Donald Hansen of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida.

The Criminal Division announced the formation of HRSP on March 30, 2010, as part of the U.S. government’s efforts to bring human rights violators to justice and deny those violators safe haven in the United States. The new section represents a merger of the Criminal Division’s Domestic Security Section (DSS) and the Office of Special Investigations (OSI).

As can be gathered from the above press release, Denaturalization proceedings are not taken lightly by the American government nor is it a matter that is taken lightly by the US Courts. That said, in certain situations, denaturalization is warranted if the naturalized American’s actions require the implementation of such a measure. This is one more prime example of why honesty is the best policy when it comes to US Immigration as dishonesty can “unravel” one’s lawful status in the United States, even if that status is US Citizenship.

For related information please see:  US Visa Thailand or Child Citizenship Act.