IMBRA Confusion

[OsageDave]

I have a good friend who is an immigration attorney. I'm going to be talking to him this next week to ask him the same question I'm about to ask here. I'll post his advice after speaking with him.

William3rd's reply to a post I made on another thread caused me to dig deeper into my (mis)understanding of IMBRA, as well as, question my "plan of action". I thought that I had a very simple question I'd be able to find an answer to fairly quickly. I was wrong. I believe that IMBRA went way overboard just as everyone else does. I also believe that there is too much over spending by our government, and, hence, our taxes are higher than they could be. I believe that American pharmaceutical companies' lobbyists and our tort laws are inflating medical prices via bought congressman and litigation. I believe many things aren't as they could be, or should be, but I still have to find a way to work with those things if I want to do or use something they affect.

So .... I have decided that I will go the route of using LatinAmericanCupid, ColombianCupid, and other sites like them to meet my (hopefully) future wife. I might use Introductions by Consuelo, but I don't believe I will consider any other agency. When it comes to using an agency, it's very easy to determine whether they have complied: Did they, or did they not, ask for my background info then supply that to the woman/women I would like to meet? With online personals sites, that determination becomes difficult. They don't ask for that kind of info, and certainly don't supply any background info to women I contact. Given that, it would seem to me that I am running the risk of having a K-1 visa denied right off the bat. I'm not sure about marrying a woman overseas to get around requesting a fiancee visa. I'd kind of like to get her here to be certain she wants to do this first. So, if I want to go the fiancee route, I am concerned right out of the starting block.

My question(s), that I can't seem to find an answer to, is this: If I use personals web sites to meet women, how can I keep myself from jeopardizing a future fiancee visa if the site does not do a background check on me and supply that to women I contact? Is there some kind of info I can supply personally that will keep me within IMBRA compliance, or some government agency I can register with that will "certify" me as being a good guy or something?

Thanks for your input!

[mudd]

from what i have read, using dating sites like yahoo personals, match.com , latinamerican cupid ect are pretty much exempt from the IMBRA law, you can thank their big $$$ lobbyist for getting around the law when it was written. i looked into Intros by Consuelo, they are not IMBRA compliant, unless they fall into some loophole being that they are in a foreign country, but i don't know how well it would go over in the embassy interview, if you told them thats where you met your fiancee, and then they ask your fiancee for the information packet they were supposed to give her before you two had a meeting.

[Ray]

Whether or not the agency/intro-site asks for your background info and does a background check on you, that info will most likely come out at her visa interview anyway.

The government will run its own background check on you when they process your petition and you can count on the results being passed on to your fiancée at her interview. Also count on the interviewing officer asking your fiancée details about your life, any former marriages/divorces, etc.

What you can and should do is to fully inform her of any related convictions for IMBRA specified offenses that potentially will come up during the interview. Make sure she is aware of any and all past marriages, including details of any divorce decrees and what they mean. Make sure that she knows at least a little about any ex-wife, like name, present location, etc. Also make sure she knows details about any children you may have.

I would also give her advance copies of any divorce decrees, a copy of your fiancée petition, biographical data form, and any other documents you submitted with your petition because those items will be subject to possible discussion during her visa interview.

Showing solid evidence of a genuine relationship is likely to remain the most important factor in your visa approval/denial.

An agency not complying with IMBRA will be subject to possible legal consequences but you and your fiancée “probably” won’t be penalized because of the agency’s non-compliance if you have made a full disclosure of all pertinent facts to your fiancée and she understands what all that means. But I agree that you should avoid taking that risk if possible by investigating the agencies and checking for IMBRA compliance in advance of your search.

And please do post a follow up with your attorney friend’s ideas on these topics.

Ray

[Shadow_mas]

The 'escape clause' in IMBRA has been more or less overlooked in the debate about compliance.

Any IMB that has more non-US clients as US clients, and charges equal fees to them can consider themselves exempt. As it would be rather hard to get the complete client data for non-US based companies, they *could* consider themselves safe, provided that they can show marketing and efforts are not directed mainly towards getting US clients.

If you use a dating site, it might be useful to check out where they are located, and from which countries most of the paying male profiles are. That is, if you are really planning on getting around IMBRA.

[william3rd]

easier just to comply since most of the clientele is american in most countries except perhaps in thailand since the Brits and Aussies outnumber us by far. There is also another exception available to USC and their fiancees who have dealt with an non compliant agency so I dont see the ultimate penalty of an IMBRA denial being imposed on the couple

[OsageDave]

easier just to comply since most of the clientele is american in most countries except perhaps in thailand since the Brits and Aussies outnumber us by far. There is also another exception available to USC and their fiancees who have dealt with an non compliant agency so I dont see the ultimate penalty of an IMBRA denial being imposed on the couple

Is there something I can do to ensure that I and my future Mrs don't have her visa K-1 denied? Most of these businesses seem to be noncompliant. If I only utilize those that follow IMBRA to the letter, I am limiting my ability to search drastically.

[william3rd]

you are probably worrying too much about it. Some guys have resorted to self-compliance- being ready to drop a dime on the evil agencies and their false statements and being ready to show their efforts to inform and being ready to give testimony for the government if need be. Hasnt been an issue thus far. 

[Researcher]

         In my wife's interview at the embassy they did ask how we met.Then at the AOS interview they asked how we met and what kind of information the IMB asked for.


 Researcher

[william3rd]

         In my wife's interview at the embassy they did ask how we met.Then at the AOS interview they asked how we met and what kind of information the IMB asked for.


 Researcher

Standard question on a fiancee/aos interview is how you met. If the two of you cant get that one right, God help you.


 The AOS question about the IMB is interesting but being asked at the wrong interview. Shows that they are working up the IMBRA stuff, though.

[Researcher]

Standard question on a fiancee/aos interview is how you met. If the two of you cant get that one right, God help you.


 The AOS question about the IMB is interesting but being asked at the wrong interview. Shows that they are working up the IMBRA stuff, though.

        Seemed strange to me also but they can ask anything they want.

[bcc_1_2]

I have a good friend who is an immigration attorney. I'm going to be talking to him this next week to ask him the same question I'm about to ask here. I'll post his advice after speaking with him.

William3rd's reply to a post I made on another thread caused me to dig deeper into my (mis)understanding of IMBRA, as well as, question my "plan of action". I thought that I had a very simple question I'd be able to find an answer to fairly quickly. I was wrong. I believe that IMBRA went way overboard just as everyone else does. I also believe that there is too much over spending by our government, and, hence, our taxes are higher than they could be. I believe that American pharmaceutical companies' lobbyists and our tort laws are inflating medical prices via bought congressman and litigation. I believe many things aren't as they could be, or should be, but I still have to find a way to work with those things if I want to do or use something they affect.

good idea speaking to the attorney. The IMBRA law seems very divided on party lines. Just seeing the rant you went on that goes way off course from why IMBRA is wrong would seem to make it that much harder to get the law changed. IMBRA is screwed up for several reasons. If you try and get a K1 they are going to background check you... and her anyways. Plus I can meet some girl on craigslist in Dubuque and not have to comply with some jacked up background check to do it (plus guys abuse and kill women from that site too). Plus 99.99999999999% of marriage brokers are male clients meeting females so clearly the law also discriminates due to gender.

Why not go with a rational argument that's on point with the issue?

Anyways I don't see this legislation changing anytime soon. Considering the popularity of the republican party the only way it goes down is if it ends up at the Supreme Court IMO.

All the more reason you might as well just plan on doing everything you can to ensure you comply and the agency... dating site complies.

The real way around IMBRA... social networking sites. Or free personal sites like freepersonals.ru. They need that for Latin America and asia.

[OsageDave]

Just seeing the rant you went on that goes way off course from why IMBRA is wrong would seem to make it that much harder to get the law changed.

Why not go with a rational argument that's on point with the issue?

All the more reason you might as well just plan on doing everything you can to ensure you comply and the agency... dating site complies.

What off-point, irrational rant are you talking about?  .... and, the entire point of my thread topic was to find out what I can do to be compliant with IMBRA when I am faced with a multitude of avenues (agencies and personals sites) to meet women that are not being compliant with IMBRA.

[bcc_1_2]

What off-point, irrational rant are you talking about?  ....

Seriously? Everything after I also believe is a rant that has nothing to do with IMBRA.

[Dan]

What off-point, irrational rant are you talking about?  .... and, the entire point of my thread topic was to find out what I can do to be compliant with IMBRA when I am faced with a multitude of avenues (agencies and personals sites) to meet women that are not being compliant with IMBRA.

Your post was fine - no problem at all.

- Dan

[Ray]

good idea speaking to the attorney. The IMBRA law seems very divided on party lines. Just seeing the rant you went on that goes way off course from why IMBRA is wrong would seem to make it that much harder to get the law changed. IMBRA is screwed up for several reasons. If you try and get a K1 they are going to background check you... and her anyways. Plus I can meet some girl on craigslist in Dubuque and not have to comply with some jacked up background check to do it (plus guys abuse and kill women from that site too). Plus 99.99999999999% of marriage brokers are male clients meeting females so clearly the law also discriminates due to gender.

Why not go with a rational argument that's on point with the issue?

Anyways I don't see this legislation changing anytime soon. Considering the popularity of the republican party the only way it goes down is if it ends up at the Supreme Court IMO.

All the more reason you might as well just plan on doing everything you can to ensure you comply and the agency... dating site complies.

The real way around IMBRA... social networking sites. Or free personal sites like freepersonals.ru. They need that for Latin America and asia.

IMBRA is a partisan political issue only in the minds of uninformed, naïve political zealots. YOUR rant is full of misinformation.

Reality Check:

IMBRA was sponsored by a Democrat (Maria Cantwell) but co-sponsored by a Republican (Sam Brownback).

The bill it was attached to, The Violence Against Women Act of 2005, was introduced by a Democrat (Joe Biden), but also co-sponsored by 8 Republicans. It passed the Senate with unanimous consent.

The House bill that enacted IMBRA was introduced by a Republican (James Sensenbrenner), passed the House with a vote of 413 to 4.

The final bill containing IMBRA was signed into law by a smiling George Bush (Republican).

Ray

[OsageDave]

Seriously? Everything after I also believe is a rant that has nothing to do with IMBRA.

Reread the post. The whole point of the first paragraph, is that there are many things in this world I/we do not like but have to deal with them. IMBRA is one of them.

[bcc_1_2]

IMBRA is a partisan political issue only in the minds of uninformed, naïve political zealots. YOUR rant is full of misinformation.

Reality Check:

IMBRA was sponsored by a Democrat (Maria Cantwell) but co-sponsored by a Republican (Sam Brownback).

The bill it was attached to, The Violence Against Women Act of 2005, was introduced by a Democrat (Joe Biden), but also co-sponsored by 8 Republicans. It passed the Senate with unanimous consent.

The House bill that enacted IMBRA was introduced by a Republican (James Sensenbrenner), passed the House with a vote of 413 to 4.

The final bill containing IMBRA was signed into law by a smiling George Bush (Republican).

Ray

all true. However the only network I've seen question the law or come out against it in any way is Fox News.

[Brazilophile]

IMBRA is a partisan political issue only in the minds of uninformed, naïve political zealots. YOUR rant is full of misinformation.

Reality Check:

IMBRA was sponsored by a Democrat (Maria Cantwell) but co-sponsored by a Republican (Sam Brownback).

The bill it was attached to, The Violence Against Women Act of 2005, was introduced by a Democrat (Joe Biden), but also co-sponsored by 8 Republicans. It passed the Senate with unanimous consent.

The House bill that enacted IMBRA was introduced by a Republican (James Sensenbrenner), passed the House with a vote of 413 to 4.

The final bill containing IMBRA was signed into law by a smiling George Bush (Republican).

Ray

While true and correct, it is incomplete.  You didn't mention that IMBRA FAILED to pass when it was first introduced to Congress as a stand alone bill.  It passed in 2005 ONLY after it was piggy-backed onto the VAWA without any debate or evidence presented to Congress in its support.  I don't think any Representative or Senator read the contents of IMBRA.  I doubt that even their aides read it or thought it important enough to bring to anyone's attention.

You should read about the Tahiri Justice Center and what it and other women's rights supporters (ie some former district attorneys) did to get this bill attached to VAWA and suppress any debate and discussion.  It was special interest politics at its finest.

[bcc_1_2]

Yep I can assure you the only way you get democrats behind eliminating IMBRA is by pointing out the sexism and discrimination. That's the argument that works with liberals. How can you support gay marriage and not getting rid of a law that is directed to single men at an almost if not 100% rate (and only those who date foreign women vs. domestic)? Eventually they'd agree with you after Bill O'Reilly and fox news made a big enough stink about it.

Don't count on Rush Limbaugh though I can't imagine him going there ever since he got busted coming back from the Dominican Republic with Viagra and no perscription.