Ok Wait, damn... Edit: I answered your post above, with my post above it, adding some clarification -- the cross posting weirdness skewed the order I guess.
Whew, that was a welcome break. Thanks, Coby, you're a gentleman! Mixz1 wrote: Too much familiarity with INS, in situations where it really mattered, coupled with lining the retirement nest of lawyers, could give anybody an attitude, Mixz1. It's easy to find apparent unfairness in lots of the ways immigration is handled. But, I'm glad it's still the consensus opinion in America that, on balance, welcoming immigrants to our shores is a good thing. There's a vocal minority of "descendants of immigrants" who think otherwise, though. At least, in the end, you were successful, in your wife's case. Based on all you now know, was there another approach available at the time that might have gotten you to the same end point, but somehow been more straightforward or- Heaven Forbid, the lawyers in unison cry- cheaper?
To answer your second point first; No. There was no less expensive nor straightforward way of getting my wife's citizenship, other than going to law school and becoming an immigration lawyer myself. In the end, had I not called in a couple of favors from a person I knew at State, she might still be waiting. Currently, it is even more expensive, as Homeland Security's fees have risen each year, the statutes are even more convoluted, and the lawyers continue to circle much as sharks circled downed airmen in the Pacific. As to your first point, both my parents' (and my) families were fractured because of the restrictive immigration rules that were in existence in 1939, with siblings winding up in England, Shanghai, China and the US. Most died at the hands of the Nazis waiting for the US visas that were applied for but never issued. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
In the face of the sad history of those times, there is no comment that can be fully appropriate. I'm sorry things like that happen to anybody, ever. I'm sorry things like that happened to your family, in particular, M.
I moved to cancun in 2003 and was married in 2004. My wife obtained a tourist visa relatively easy and we then had two children. In the fall of 2006 my company disbanded the ex patriot worker program which meant I got a killer severance package. I negotiated the lawyers for my wife to gain the proper status. The proper method was to apply for status while in Mexico which could have taken up to 18 months. Well as I had to take a new job in the states in 4 months this was not so great. Our lawyer advised we could enter as a tourist then do a readjustment upon entering. the risk to this was that it could be construed as fraud (we were married thus she obviously wanted to immigrate) secondly it was unclear if she could leave and come back. Thus she was prisoner for nearly 15 months in the u.s. and the visa took about 18 months. our policy is pure lunacy......
"THE LAW IS AN ASS" Here's the irony, John, as I understand it. If you and your wife had not married, but simply lived together, and you had then gone back to the U.S. to take up your new position, your wife and your children would have been able to immigrate, using the fiance visa process- and not suffered such a long wait, and the uncertainty of the process your being married forced you in to. These kinds of twists and bends in the law, and procedure, are hard for anybody to get their head around. I'm glad things worked out as they did for you, in the end, and that that chapter, the dealing with immigration chapter, is behind you.
SWEATY PALMS Coby, it looks like John's is another case in which the wait for a visa was not as long as I would have predicted, though it was long enough; and, the story he told fits my understanding about the decision being discretionary, and therefore somewhat risky. (But then, there's also uncertainty in the outcome of an application for a K-1 visa, as you've already pointed out.) I've gone through immigration processes dozens of times (as many of the posters to this forum have), if you count renewals, and it never fails to make me nervous. I died a thousand little deaths waiting in the offices of INM, here in Cancun, for example, constantly having to remind myself to stay positive- patient with the process, and the people involved. It's not easy.
Re: SWEATY PALMS Going the tourist visa --> AOS is definitely risky. To start, having a tourist visa isn't even a guarantee to enter the country. Being turned around at the port of entry would derail the loop hole plans quickly. Perhaps one of the reasons I've not heard of a case of the USCIS pursuing fraud in this kind of marriage (other than it's a big world) is that it's actually harder to get a Tourist visa than to get approved for a K1; I can't say that is definitively true, but if I recall correctly, our lawyer said something to the effect of less than 7% of tourist visa applications (originating from Mexico) get approved. Take that speculation with a grain of salt, of course.
TOURIST VS FIANCE VISA You must be right, Coby, about how hard it is for a Mexican National to get a tourist visa to the U.S., and this may account for the success enjoyed by those who managed to get in, and marry, then obtain a visa to immigrate, as you spoke of, earlier. But, it seems to me that to choose to apply for a tourist visa first- when the facts would support a fiance visa- would risk not only having it denied, but could prejudice any subsequent application for a fiance visa for the same applicant, by suggesting that applicant was desperate to get to the U.S.; and, was, therefore, more likely to be engaged in a fraudulent effort to obtain a fiance visa, having first failed to get a tourist visa.
Re: TOURIST VS FIANCE VISA The angle I was coming from is if the person already has a tourist visa. If the person in question doesn't already have the tourist visa, it only makes sense to apply for the K1 visa I would think.
