Moving to another nation is perhaps life’s greatest occasion. Whether one is migrating to take up a transitory work task, or forever moving, one’s companion (or soul mate) is ordinarily fundamental for the situation and will frequently assume an indispensable supporting part all the while. It is, accordingly, fundamental to guarantee ahead of time that the movement laws of the country being referred to perceive this significant person as an appropriate “life partner” for migration or visa purposes.
The United States as of now takes a thin view on the meaning of a companion for movement purposes. The aftereffect of this is that companions and accomplices in numerous normal sorts of relationships and connections are qualified distinctly for restricted – if any – migration benefits. In this article, we survey the rules utilized by the United States government to decide if it will perceive a life partner for movement purposes, as well as how said rules applies to a few conjugal circumstances.
THE THREE PRONG TEST
US Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”) and the United States Department of State (“DOS”) both apply a three-prong test to survey the legitimacy of a marriage for movement purposes. The accompanying three-prong test is applied both in surveying qualification for a subsidiary non-foreigner visa (e.g., L2 visa, E2 visa, H4 visa, and so on) or a worker visa, as well as in issues of family-based sponsorship by a United States Citizen or Legal Permanent Resident:
Prong 1: Was the marriage legitimate in the spot of festivity?
USCIS and DOS both appointed authority the legitimacy of the marriage in light of the laws of the spot where the marriage was praised. A marriage that isn’t substantial where it was commended won’t be perceived as a marriage for the reasons for getting migration benefits.
Via model, a marriage in Thailand should be enlisted with the common recorder, the Amphur. A strict service alone doesn’t make a legitimate marriage in Thailand. Subsequently, albeit a strict function might be adequate to enroll a marriage in specific states in the United States, assuming the marriage that occurred in Thailand was just a strict service, without the Australia immigration common enlistment, the mate won’t be qualified for United States migration benefits because of the weakness of the marriage in Thailand.
On the other hand, casual and ancestral functions that wouldn’t ascend to the custom regularly expected to enroll a marriage in the United States might fit the bill for movement benefits assuming the services meet every one of the legitimate prerequisites to be substantial in the nation performed. This component comes up regularly with custom-based regulation relationships, which are examined later in additional detail.
There might be the valuable chance to fix an invalid marriage and acquire movement benefits. In an assessment by the General Counsel for the previous Immigration and Nationality Service, presently USCIS, an Iranian mosque marriage that was acted in Turkey was viewed not as legitimate under the laws of Turkey; nonetheless, an ensuing common marriage approved the marriage in Turkey, subsequently delivering the companion qualified for migration benefits. (See INS General Counsel Legal Opinion No. 91-58, File No. CO831 (July 25, 1991)). Relationships that were already ineligible for United States migration advantages might even be relieved by resulting regulations in the significant country that make the beforehand blemished relationships be perceived as legitimate in that country.
This approach likewise applies in deciding if an earlier separation was substantial; USCIS and DOS will shift focus over to whether the ensuing remarriage was viewed as legitimate in the ward where it occurred.