10

I travelled to the US with my mum when I was 6 we overstayed and returned to my native country when I was 13. I recently applied for a tourist visa with my husband and concealed information about my overstay in the US in the past. I told the consular officer that I have not visited the US. I figured this information wouldn't be important because I was a minor when I was there and did not want to complicate it as I was not previously told reasons of our departure He denied my application based on 212 (a) (6)(I) misinterpretation. My question is, is this a permanent ban? What steps can I take to rectify this situation and reapply? And will it affect my husband and kids? My husband visits the US often.

  • 19
    The vote to close this question in favor of Expatriates is incorrect. This question is not about long-term immigration, but rather about an application for a tourist visa. – phoog Nov 27 '18 at 8:14
  • 6
    @greatone Please don't answer questions in the comment section, as it states when you try to write one. All that long comment thread bickering would have been avoided if you did, and the policy is in place because of that. – pipe Nov 27 '18 at 12:36
  • 2
    How would a small child understand whether she had overstayed? The blanket exemption for minors is there for a reason, not only because they have no choice, but also because the minor child couldn't possibly be expected to know anything about immigration law. – Harper Nov 27 '18 at 16:22
  • 1
    I have deleted the comments which are now to be found in the chat room. – Willeke Nov 27 '18 at 16:35
  • 4
    @Harper A minor is not responsible for their overstay for exactly the reasons they state, but a full-grown adult is responsible for lying to immigration officials when applying for a visa. It's inconceivable that the asker wasn't aware, aged 13, that they were living in the USA, which means that they knew that the statement that they'd never visited the USA was false. – David Richerby Nov 27 '18 at 19:40
20

I think you meant 212(a)(6)(C)(i), at which concerns misrepresentation (not misinterpretation), codified at 8 USC 1182(a)(6)(C)(i):

Any alien who, by fraud or willfully misrepresenting a material fact, seeks to procure (or has sought to procure or has procured) a visa, other documentation, or admission into the United States or other benefit provided under this chapter is inadmissible.

The inadmissibility is not limited in time, but there is a waiver available. The application fee is high (currently $930), and the fee is lost if the application is unsuccessful.

You are unlikely to overcome this without professional legal help. You should try to find an immigration lawyer who has experience helping clients with misrepresentation bans.

  • I don't think there is a fee to apply for an INA 212(d)(3)(A) nonimmigrant waiver. – user102008 Nov 27 '18 at 15:50
4

And will it affect my husband and kids? My husband visits the US often.

Nobody can answer definitively if it will. It should not. The policy manual does not state nor imply anywhere a person becomes inadmissible or should their visa be denied because a spouse committed an immigration offense. Although married you are two different adults and your applications will be evaluated separately.

Unfortunately however consular officers are human beings with wide latitude to approve or deny nonimmigrant visa applications without appeal and your misrepresentation could prejudice him against your husband.

  • 2
    That is a low quality answer without any substance. It has two sentences both of which contain should or could. – greatone Nov 27 '18 at 9:24
  • 1
    Is there a source that you have relied on your answer: nobody knows? No answer would have been better than having should and could without any basis. – greatone Nov 27 '18 at 9:55
  • Does the manual call for refusing a persons nonimmigrant application solely because a spouse committed an immigration offense? – Honorary World Citizen Nov 27 '18 at 10:07
  • 4
    It's not my answer, it's yours. You bring the proofs. Simply saying could or should is not an acceptable answer. – greatone Nov 27 '18 at 10:34
  • 3
    @greatone I don't think it's necessary to offer authoritative support for the assertion that consular officers are human beings or that their decisions may be biased by factors they're not supposed to consider. I would be surprised, though, if evidence concerning the spouse were really supposed to be excluded from evaluation of immigrant intent. I don't see the relevant section of the manual, however. – phoog Nov 27 '18 at 14:00

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.