UW to be deported for marrying different man

[Cold Warrior]

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama (AP) – A Ukrainian woman who came to the United States to marry an Alabama man faces deportation after marrying a different man.

Natasha Olinova and husband Larry Russo are fighting the Immigration and Naturalization Service to keep her in the United States.

“We’re living with a gun at our head, not knowing what’s going to happen,” said Russo, a musician.

Olinova traveled to Birmingham in June 1999 with plans to marry a man she met through an international dating service. The 90‑day visa she received was to be replaced with U.S. citizenship for her and her teenage daughter, Anya, after the wedding.

Instead, the engagement was broken off.

Olinova, 40, later met and fell in love with Russo, and the two wed in March 2000. But she is now long past the 90‑day stay allowed by her original visa.

An INS deportation hearing for Olinova was announced in April, although no date has been set.

Congress in 1970 addressed the issue of women using phony romances to enter the United States on temporary visas, dumping the husband‑to‑be and obtaining papers to remain in the county anyway, said David Ray of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, a nonprofit watchdog group in Washington.

Olinova said that she was not trying to deceive the government. Her fiance visited her in Ukraine three times, she said, but the relationship did not work when she came to the States.

Olinova has settled into life in Alabama.

She started the Natasha Russo Dance Arts Studio in Trussville, where she teaches classical ballet, Ukrainian dance and creative dance. Anya, now 16, is winning awards for her artwork at Vestavia Hills High School.

Olinova and Russo say they don’t understand how the government can be so heartless.

“We just seemed to be meant for each other,” Olinova said.

[wsbill]

... in response to UW to be deported for marrying different..., posted by Cold Warrior on Sep 11, 2002

She knowingly decieved the laws of the USA and should be deported, no execptions.

She knows full well in order to get US Citizenship she must marry a man or wait 10 years for typical waviers.

"Olinova said that she was not trying to deceive the government"

[Charles]

... in response to Re: should have gone back, no exceptions..., posted by wsbill on Sep 11, 2002

I agree with Bill.  The K-1 visa is limited to the person that you met.  If we start allowing exceptions, even where good faith is involved as may be the case here, we open the door to more scams to allow people to enter the country illegally.  If this woman really loves this man, now that they are married she can go back to Ukraine and start the process over based on her marriage.  They should have thought about this before they got married.

[Charles]

... in response to Re: should have gone back, no exceptions..., posted by wsbill on Sep 11, 2002

I agree with Bill.  The K-1 visa is limited to the person that you met.  If we start allowing exceptions, even where good faith is involved as may be the case here, we open the door to more scams to allow people to enter the country illegally.  If this woman really loves this man, now that they are married she can go back to Ukraine and start the process over based on her marriage.  They should have thought about this before they got married.

[BarryM]

... in response to Re: should have gone back, no exceptions..., posted by wsbill on Sep 11, 2002

The woman did marry a US citizen just not the one she originally intended to. If she came over on a different visa such as a tourist or student visa, she would be allowed to stay. The K-1 is the only one, as far as I know, that has such tight restrictions. One of the reasons that tourist visas are so difficult for Russians to obtain is the fact that there are so many loopholes to immigration law that will allow them to gain permanent residency.

-blm

[Michael B]

... in response to I disagree...., posted by BarryM on Sep 12, 2002

I'd kick her out in a heart beat, right after I stamped "FRAUD, re-admission not allowed" on her folder and all the papers inside it.

She came for ninety days to marry a particular person, not for as long as it took for her to marry just anybody.

Let's look at your logic: You say a tourist visa is hard to get because of so many loopholes to let them stay if they do get it....how about considering that a K-1 visa is realativly EASY to get BECAUSE of these restricions?

[oldbutspry]

... in response to I disagree with your disagree, posted by Michael B on Sep 12, 2002

N/T

[BarryM]

... in response to I disagree with your disagree, posted by Michael B on Sep 12, 2002

How do you know by whose choice was it not to get married? It's a 2-way street. I'd call a fraud a woman who decides to get married, falsely claims abuse on her husband, then files for both divorce and residency simultaneously.

I would say that if a woman decides the situation is not right and she declines marriage she is being honest. The fiancee is obliged to provide air-fare home. What if he was a jerk and didn't? Sure there are a few scammers who will want a 90 day free vacation in the US. It has happened a few times. There are some scammers on Jack's site that purportedly did this. I don't think the situation reported above is one of those cases. The woman did marry a US citizen and has established a good productive life here. She certainly deserves to stay.

I'm an advocate for educated productive immigrants even though some of them may compete for jobs with me. Those folks contribute to the US economy. I all for barring and forcebly deporting all of the unskilled uneducated illegal immigrants that are currently draining our welfare, legal, and education systems like parasites. I say make our southern border with Mexico a military reservation and train our troops there. That would stop a lot of illegals from south of the border.

Lets let the educated immigrants from Eastern Europe come here and prosper. All of us will benefit from it in the future.

-blm

[chuck12]

... in response to How can you judge a fraud?, posted by BarryM on Sep 12, 2002

Barry, though you are giving her the benefit of the doubt, under K-1 she was required to return back to her home country. (period, end of discussion).  Immigration sets laws and restrictions for particular reasons, we can aruge and give our holy opinion, but then if you change the law, then you change it for everyone and "exceptions" or special circumstances shouldn't apply.

Now, if you let her stay for marrying a different man, how many Ukranians, or other European women would jump at ANY man bringing them over on a K-1 Visa, knowing that they can scout around for 3 months and pick up a better, more suitable husband? Magnify this by 100, the case load by a 1000, what impact do you think this would have on western men searching for european companions??

[Michael B]

... in response to How can you judge a fraud?, posted by BarryM on Sep 12, 2002

I didn't say who's choice it was not to get married. I don't know, don't think the news story said. But that doesn't matter. She was granted a visa for a specific purpose, she didn't perform that purpose but she's still here. So she's violated the terms of her visa. If she wanted to marry Mr. Russo, she should have gone back home and waited for HIM to sponsor her. But she didn't, so now she has to leave....it's really that simple and has nothing to do with what you think she 'deserves'.

[thesearch]

... in response to By reading the facts of the case, posted by Michael B on Sep 12, 2002

sdf

[MarkInTx]

... in response to By reading the facts of the case, posted by Michael B on Sep 12, 2002

Someone posted this link about a week ago.

I can't understand why anyone would be upset about this...

Yes, she does have the right to change her mind.

However, the K-1 Visa is VERY specific. And, she does need to "go home" while she waits for her "new" fiance to go through the process.

The K-1 Visa is not a "come over and marry anyone you want in the next 90 days" visa. It is specific. She knew that when she filed it (or should have known it, anyway...)

I wouldn't go so far as to say she was a fraud, and was never allowed re-entry.

But clearly, she needs to leave the country and get a valid Visa.

I don't understand what the fuss is about... This seems cut and dry to me...

[John F]

... in response to UW to be deported for marrying different..., posted by Cold Warrior on Sep 11, 2002

She used the poor first guy to enter the US, ran, and in 10 months married a different guy.

If she gets deported I say she gets what she deserved.  I also think the first guy should be allowed to file a lawsuit against her and her current husband to recover the thousands of dollars he lost in bringing her here.

My two pennies worth.

[thesearch]

... in response to Re: UW to be deported for marrying diffe..., posted by John F on Sep 11, 2002

Only if what happened is what you think happened.

[Stevo]

... in response to Re: Re: UW to be deported for marrying d..., posted by thesearch on Sep 11, 2002

ggg