271–280 of 527 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
In cases such as mine, where I am no longer the citizen of any other country except the USA, what would revocation of naturalized citizenship mean?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So this is not legal advice and I'm not an immigration lawyer. And I'm not explaining how the law is likely to be applied. Instead, I'm explaining how an aggressive government prosecutor could plausibly seek to apply it. The wording of 8 USC 1451(a) is not limited to particular questions on visa or green-card applications. The statute refers to how the "order and certificate of naturalization were ... procured" which…
Great points. The whole doc is vague and filled with trap doors. Best to get a citizenship asap
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Canadian woman put in chains, detained by ICE after entering San Diego border > She said the officer refused to allow her to go back to Mexico and ordered her to be detained. She was kept in a cold room at the border by CBP before being arrested by ICE, who placed her at the Otay Mesa Detention Center. Mooney claimed in the middle of the night she, along with a group of 30 other women, was rounded up to get transfe…
If you believe that's the entire story - walked across the border was arrested - then I have a bridge to sell you...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm an American and I was annoyed at how aggressive and militarized the southern border is. I was on a big road trip across the country visiting national parks. I went to Organ Pipe Nat. Monument in Arizona which literally touches the Mexican border. On my way there I drove through a border patrol checkpoint 10 miles north of the border inside the US. They don't check southbound traffic, only northbound. I never ente…
> Okay, you can go but you should carry your passport Funny, since half of U.S. citizens don't have a passport.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you believe that's the entire story - walked across the border was arrested - then I have a bridge to sell you...
If you were right, they could easily clear the record by actually charging her. In several of the cases, they held people for extended periods rather than letting them leave the country which they really shouldn’t be doing if they don’t have enough evidence for at least one charge.
For all we know, the US was coordinating extradition or release into their home country. A person attempting to illegally crossing the border (such as the two in the article) have committed a crime and could be held on that alone - yet they were released back to their home country. Seems like a pretty good ending for them, unless you are advocating they should be charged and imprisoned here for longer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
She crossed overland. Imagine you do pre-clearance out of a Canadian airport. Can they kidnap you out of country and ship you to a US detention center?
She crossed overland from Mexico for some reason, not from Canada. The linked article says: "Then they came back and told her that, because they were denying her, that they have to send her back to Canada." Is there a policy that requires that people denied entry be returned to the country they are citizens of?
They have her in their system, and she has no rights.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's BS. Random tourists aren't being "disappeared for no good reason". A "tourist" that overstayed by 2 years without applying for a Visa and/or started working here are being deported back to their home nation - in accordance with the law. There's a tremendous amount of scaremongering, fearmongering, and misinformation being thrown about currently. Majority of it is very much over stated hyperbole.
> Canadian woman put in chains, detained by ICE after entering San Diego border > She said the officer refused to allow her to go back to Mexico and ordered her to be detained. She was kept in a cold room at the border by CBP before being arrested by ICE, who placed her at the Otay Mesa Detention Center. Mooney claimed in the middle of the night she, along with a group of 30 other women, was rounded up to get transfe…
[edit] Found an article with more info "[her US friend] told CNN that her German friend was joining her in Los Angeles to tattoo her. She speculated that immigration officials may have misinterpreted Brösche’s statements about the project as a declaration that she’d come to the US to work." https://edition.cnn.com/2025/03/04/world/german-detained-ice...
As an IT worker I'm worried of cause because my 'gear' is a laptop and I usually travel with a laptop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should read the actual questions on an I-485, they don't rely on declarations that any given organization is "terrorist" or anything like that. Now, I think you're right that the statements are only required to be true at the time they were made. That said, if I can get you to look at the I-485 which one fills out to get a green card, and focus on the questions in Item Numbers 43.b. - 43.e, which cover what is es…
Good points. Thanks for sharing the link. Yikes! It looks like all of part 9 is in play. Ie one had better be absolutely truthful - or self decline, who would ever do that? Also, the problem with the legal definition of “a disqualification requirement” is it can be vague and subject to change. Would I be correct in saying that a strict adherence to USA law is mandatory?
I've heard it said by lawyers that you're not qualified to know whether or not you've committed a federal crime and some of those are quite broad - see this illustration for a few ideas in that vein: https://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=1008 - but even then, one "out" is that my understanding is that you have to actually commit fraud here.
So maybe if you violated some incredibly broad provision, but were never charged or convicted and literally didn't even know it was a law, you could defend yourself by pointing that out and arguing that because of that, you haven't committed actual "fraud" even if your answer was wrong.
But in general, yes, you should be honest on all the forms and engage with a legal professional if you're ever in trouble. I've heard that this area of law is all that well tested, so we'll have to see what the courts do with it. In fact, we suffered some significant delays in our immigration journey due to being honest, but I don't regret that one bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I rarely find the pre-clearance process to be all that nice when compared to internal clearance. When I traveled a lot to NYC I far preferred to fly out of Toronto island and do immigration at Newark vs flying out of Pearson. The tone was entirely different. I personally am not sure that pre-clearance should even continue given current diplomatic tensions. Having an armed foreign police force from a country whose off…
It varies. In recent years (last decade or so) YVR has been pretty good. Historically there were ups and downs. I doubt a few immigration officers with handguns (can't say for sure they even carry them or carry them out of the airport) are going to take over BC.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most people go the EB1C green card route after they are in the U.S. in L-1A status but that's not required; the entire green card process can be done while the applicant is outside the U.S. and not yet employed by the U.S. company.
Is it recommended or not? I've heard anecdotally that going through the Consular services to obtain EB1C is not recommended - because you can get denied easily without any protections you might get from being in the US.