My wife had her green card (by lottery) before she married me. Her argument is that she already has two passports (UK and Ireland) and she doesn’t need a third.
My argument will always be, but you don’t want to be deported, right?
Being an LPR is a lot like being middle class. You’re always three bad months away from being deported (homeless) but never *three good months away from being a citizen (billionaire).
*Depending on processing times, you could, if you’re lucky, be three good months away from being a citizen… but only if you apply.
That’s interesting. I came to Canada in 1968 and just used my original landed immigrant card for over 30 years. Then around 2000, the government decided that wasn’t good enough and I had to get a new photo immigration card that expired in five years. Getting it renewed was about as much trouble as becoming a citizen, so I did that. I’m not sure what would have happened if I didn’t do and never crossed the border. Would I have lost landed status? I dunno. Now I am very glad I did that.
IANAL but I’m pretty sure that speeding and jaywalking are not crimes. They are violations,
Yeah… well. About that. I’ve mentioned before, I have triple citizenship.
Zimbabwe doesn’t know anything
UK knows about South Africa
South Africa knows about Zimbabwe
I intend to keep it that way. It just simplifies life, in a bizarre manner.
If, by chance, I got US citizenship I would probably have to confess to the other three, your (the US) investigative power is really good.
But it would not be reported to UK, RSA or ZW, just another passport in my stash.
My husband is a Japanese citizen who has had a green card for around 50 years. He got it without any trickery, completely following the rules, renewing every 10 years as required (or however many years, I don’t think it was always 10 years). We are married and we own a home (minus the mortgage). He travels to Japan once a year (except during Covid) to visit his family for 3 weeks or less. It has now become routine that when he returns to the US he is taken off the line to a little room for an interview, where they badger him for a while about why isn’t he a citizen after all this time, or some other bullshit. He has plans to go again this October, and I am getting more fearful that they will manufacture some reason to refuse him re-entry. If not this year, then next. Especially after SCOTUS overturns their ruling requiring all states and the feds to recognize same sex marriages.
I have less and less confidence that CIS officials will bother even pretending to follow the law any more. Minor officials given any power at all are likely to become little monsters in their own jurisdiction.
A lot of Chinese take US citizenship and don’t formally give up their Chinese passport. Then they use the Chinese passport when travelling back to China.
THIS IS A VERY BAD IDEA
If a PRC citizen travels back into China on their Chinese passport, it doesn’t matter how many other passports/citizenship they have, the Chinese government considers them PRC citizens. And subject to the laws thereof. And the US or other governments are typically told to go pound sand.
A lot of people on business do this, then get into a business dispute in China, essentially kidnapped, and have to bribe their way out trouble.
Additional fun fact - co-worker many years ago described trying to travel with his grandmother, back when birth certificates were acceptable at the border. (needless to say, she had no driver’s license for ID). The customs guy says “it says here she was born in Fort Q’Appelle, Northwest Territories. That’s in Saskatchewan!”
“It was the Northwest Territory when she was born.”
Oddly, I was under the impression it was pretty straightforward to become a citizen, they have photogenic ceremonies eery Canada day and so on. But from what I’m reading now about the USA, it seems to be a tedious process that can take years?
Also, people who are in the country illegally who are trying to sort out their status and applying for residency or citizenship seem to be targeted for deportation. They need to deport X people a month, and the list of people registered for seeking status is a convenient target.
Plus, with all the tariff and strife issues in the last few months, I saw some suggestions the FIFA world cup should be moved out of the USA. One concern is that the visa process is getting more arduous (some visas are backlogged well over a year) and with the current civil service disrutptions, may get much worse. People from countries where soccer is actually watched may have difficulty getting into the USA.
Hell, they do this to Canadian citizens on Canadian passports!
In addition to speeding and jaywalking, underage drinking isn’t a crime in my state , and possessing less than 25 grams of marijuana wasn’t a crime even before the laws were changed. I’m sure everyone has broken a law- but not all violations of the law are crimes. Although I kind of wonder how someone in my position should answer - I did commit a crime that I wasn’t arrested for but a year or two later that law was found to be unconstitutional.
Again, IANAL, but if you had been arrested and convicted, you’d have to file for (I think it’s called a) declaratory judgement to have your conviction quashed. However, if you were never even arrested, I’d think you’d have to be safe to answer ‘no’. Not only is it the right answer as technically it was never a crime, but also there would seem to be no record on you.
Furthermore, even if the crime was never declared unconstitutional, you’re not guilty of a crime until convicted. So you could still answer ‘no’.
Now if they asked you (general you not you specifically) if you’d been arrested, I’d think you might have to say ‘yes’ even if the crime they arrested you for was later declared unconstitutional.
I’m wondering about that because apparently they ask if you have committed a crime which you weren’t arrested for.
I would plausibly interpret it - Have I ever committed a crime and then turned myself in w/o police involvement (needing to be arrested first) = No.
It’s a badly worded question and that’s a reasonable interpretation of it.
Unfortunately, non-citizens in the US are not in a good position to try and rules lawyer USCIS when it comes to questions about naturalization, immigration, and making false or misleading statements in an attempt to obtain some form of benefit under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
And attorneys who try and rules lawyer for their non-citizen clients do so at their clients’ peril. In general, an immigration attorney won’t try to rules lawyer USCIS unless there is no other option (in which case, the question has to be, why file an N-400 in the first place?).
For the record, the full question at issue, on the current version of the N-400 is:
Have you EVER committed, agreed to commit, asked someone else to commit, helped commit, or tried to commit a crime or offense for which you were NOT arrested?
Emphasis in the original. If you think a “reasonable interpretation” of that question is that it’s asking for some very special case where you committed a crime and just decided “heck, I’ll turn myself in without getting arrested or charged” and take that to your naturalization interview, you’d be opening yourself up to a charge of perjury (the interview is under oath), because there is no way that is actually a reasonable interpretation of the question and people have actually ended up in denaturalization proceedings precisely because they (1) were engaged in illegal activity, (2) didn’t admit it on the N-400 and were naturalized, (3) got arrested and convicted later for the pre-naturalization illegal activity, which the government then knows about the illegal activity despite the failure to disclose it.
…so, the thing is, marijuana possession is still a federal crime. Which is why I said “don’t even get me started.” The state can choose to decriminalize it, but that has no effect on federal law.
Got it. I would be screwed then. I think the original question did not make sense to me because it just says crime (that occurred anywhere in the world). That question is insane to me. And the actual one is worse. I imagine you’d definitely need a lawyer for this process because that’s literally asking 10 separate questions into 1 question about every possible crime in the world. I really hate these types of vague brute force questions because I really overthink it.
Probably just wants to know who is a truth teller and who is not. Much less about the crime. Being a liar today is worse than any petty crime you did in the past.
No, it really does want to know about the crime. Or at least, that’s the official story, and commensurate with that, there could be serious consequences for marking “Yes.” So much so, that I’ve never seen or heard of anyone actually doing so (albeit I haven’t been practicing for that long in the grand scheme of things). And yet, at the same time, I strongly suspect that just about everyone (citizen or not) has committed some crime that they haven’t been arrested for at some point in there past. Meaning that, with a thorough enough investigation, I suspect that the vast majority of naturalized US citizens could be denaturalized if someone in a position of power had a will to pursue such an investigation no matter the cost. It’s one of the reasons why the increasing politicization and weaponization of the immigration (and removal) system is so disconcerting: no one who has ever been an immigrant can really be secure in their status. Anyone who wasn’t born in the US (and, if this administration gets its way, an increasing number of people born in the US as well) could be subject to deportation if they run afoul of a certain high office holder.
The problem is, the naturalization process has gotten more and more intrusive over the years as laws are written exclusively by people who have become accustomed to demanding that people live up to laws that they themselves expect to be exempted from. The bar to becoming a naturalized citizen is both higher by law and in practice than the bar to becoming an elected representative in this country.
Remember that Soviet sailor who jumped ship in the US and tried to get asylum? Yeah, he’d be screwed over, too. Of course he’d have to answer yes to that inane question.
It’s a trap!
Appreciate your responses and also the work you do. Sincerely. None of the below is asking you anything.
I am now completed fascinated by question 15a on the 14-page form N-400. For anyone interested, here is the complete question (emphasis in original):
Include all the crimes and offenses in the United States or anywhere in the world (including domestic violence, driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and crimes and offenses while you were under 18 years of age) which you EVER: committed, agreed to commit, asked someone else to commit, helped commit, or tried to commit a crime or offense for which you were NOT arrested?
Two things.
One, I can’t make sense of this (I think it’s now 20 separate questions loaded into 1 question)…Is this asking the applicant to pretend (only) US law applies around the world, and if you ever did anything in your life that would have violated US law (but were never arrested) no matter where it actually occurred, to mark Yes? Or, and this is an order of a magnitude more insane, is asking the applicant if they ever violated any other countries laws (not just US law), and were never arrested, to mark Yes?
Two, regardless of the above, it seems to me, the best way to help someone would be to not help them at all to understand this question. Just let them read it and answer it on their own. If they were to ask me for help, I’d just tell them use their best judgment, repeat the question, and mark yes or no. But never actually help them understand nor appreciate how broad this question is.
And I don’t care what anyone calls it or how they do it, we’re all getting to “No” on that question in some way, shape, or form.
I’m pretty sure I’ve blasphemed the Prophet (pbuh) a few times in my life. That’s totes illegal in half a dozen countries. So obviously, I would have to answer “Yes”. Although the racist bubbas that incited this question would probably pat me on the back for that, like the Group W Bench guys.
I mean, why? It is illegal to hold dual citizenship in my native Zimbabwe. So far so good. I just don’t tell them about my RSA and UK citizenship.
The Chinese government should not have access to US databases. I routinely travel using which ever comes to hand on departure, then whichever has no VISA needs on arrival.
Technically, I have never been to Indonesia, Botswawa, Swaziland, Malaysia, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, UK from reading my RSA passort.
Technically, I am still in ZW from reading my Zimbabwean passport.
Technically… well. We can see the techniques break down.