Has your visa been denied by a consular officer under Section 214(b) of the Immigration and Nationality Act? Millions of visas are denied each year under this section of law. If this is your scenario, you may be confused and wondering what that means and if there is any way to get around it. U.S. immigration law is set up where the burden falls on the visa applicant to demonstrate that they do not intend to stay permanently in the United States and meet the requirements to receive the visa. The “presumption of immigrant intent” is a major hurdle you may face if you received a 214(b) visa denial. Much like being guilty until proven innocent, you will have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that your intentions are honest and not to overstay the authorized length of the visa you receive. While some visa ineligibilities can be overcome, and the Department of Homeland Security can authorize a waiver, that is not the case for all immigration cases. Common Denial Reasons Under Section 214(b) Below are some possible reasons your visa may have been denied under Section 214(b):
It is necessary to mention that if you are reapplying for your visa after receiving a 214(b) denial, you will be responsible for paying the application fees again. They are non-refundable whether or not that visa is approved. You will also need to have an interview with a consular officer again. Always prepare for the interview process with your lawyer to anticipate any questions that may arise in light of the new information you are providing for your case. The verbal answers you provide during the interview with the immigration official will weigh heavy on the decision. Always be polite to immigration officials and if you do not understand a question, ask them to clarify. Frequently Asked Questions about INA 214(b)
Read more here: https://www.immi-usa.com/214b-visa-denial/ Every year, the U.S. sets aside permanent resident cards, known as “green cards,” including 226,000 family-preference green cards for immediate relatives of U.S. citizens, 140,000 employment-based green cards and 50,000 diversity green cards.
But the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, plus the Trump administration’s gutting of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, have slowed the processing of all green cards. And if they aren’t processed by the end of a fiscal year, these green cards — typically, tens of thousands of them — go unused and disappear. This bureaucratic vanishing act only exacerbates the bloated green card application backlog of around 5 million and counting. That backlog is made worse by per-country caps, which create decades-long waits for immigrants from countries such as India and China. Our nation’s immigration “system” — system being an overstatement here — does not meet the 21st-century opportunities and threats we face today. But now, Congress’ budget reconciliation negotiation presents an opportunity to recapture unused green cards and begin to bring our immigration system into the 2000s. President Joe Biden’s latest reconciliation plan includes a proposal that would recapture hundreds of thousands of green cards that have gone unused over several decades and make “them available for immigrants who are currently caught up in the backlog.” It’s a smart approach. While the Senate parliamentarian, a nonpartisan adviser on procedural issues, has not ruled on whether green card recapture can be included in a budget reconciliation measure, there’s precedent: A similar measure was passed by a Republican-controlled Senate in 2005. Although the provisions were not included in the final budget, no challenge was raised on procedural grounds. The New York Times reported that at the time, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) supported “recapturing unused visas for high-skilled workers in a reconciliation package as a way to ‘keep jobs here in America, rather than export them to places like India and China.’” In 2021, this is no longer just a matter of keeping jobs in the U.S. Relief from deportation and green cards for those waiting in backlogs could be part of a reconciliation bill if the Senate parliamentarian agrees. The current state of play has confused analysts and lawmakers alike, not to mention those directly affected by what Congress might do on immigration.
Background: In September 2021, Democrats asked the Senate parliamentarian to review a package of reforms that would have granted lawful permanent residence to millions of individuals currently without legal status. The parliamentarian rejected those reforms as outside the scope of a reconciliation bill. “Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, a former immigration lawyer, shut down the possibility of granting 8 million people the right to apply for legal permanent residency, determining in a Sunday opinion that it did not meet the Senate's rules for the budget reconciliation package because it was a policy change that went well beyond the budget,” reported The Hill. “The decision is critical because under Senate rules the filibuster cannot be used to block a reconciliation package, meaning policy changes included in the massive package can become law if Democrats can secure 50 votes from their own caucus in the Senate. While MacDonough's ruling nixes the possibility of an easy legalization process for specific subgroups of immigrants, advocates are confident their backup pitches will sway MacDonough.” The “backup pitch” to the parliamentarian was to change the registry date, an action that would have benefited people both in and out of legal status, such as Dreamers (individuals who came to America without legal status before age 18) and people in TPS (Temporary Protected Status). A report by FWD.us estimated that moving the registry date from January 1, 1972, to January 1, 2011, would permit approximately 6.7 million people to be eligible for permanent residence. Souce:https://www.forbes.com/sites/stuartanderson/2021/10/12/immigrants-and-green-cards-immigration-in-a-reconciliation-bill/ |