Posted on 04/12/2006 10:36:09 PM PDT by goldstategop
When Sumathi Athuluri met the man she was destined to marry, it was love at first sight. She sensed at once that Jeevan Kumar, a young physician working on a World Health Organization project to eradicate polio in India, was someone special. And the more she learned about his lifestyle and values, she was telling me the other day by phone from Salem, Mass., where she now lives, "the more I felt he was the man I was looking for."
Jeevan was equally taken with Sumathi, a software engineer from Hyderabad who had moved to the United States on an H-1B work visa in 1999 and had become a legal permanent resident -- the holder of a green card -- in February 2002. The couple was married in India in August 2002, and for the first three months of their marriage they were virtually inseparable.
But green-card holders are not permitted to remain abroad indefinitely, and when the time came for Sumathi to return to the United States, she was a wreck. "It was so painful to leave him," she says. "I was crying in the plane all the way to the US."
Hoping to be quickly reunited with her husband, Sumathi filed a Form I-130, an application for an immigrant visa that would allow Jeevan to enter the United States. That was when she ran headlong into what has been called the most anti-family, anti-marriage, anti-immigrant aspect of American law: the prolonged and pointless separation of legal permanent residents from their spouses and children.
Sumathi's I-130 application for Jeevan was submitted more than three years ago; unless the law changes, it is likely to take at least two more years before his immigrant visa is finally approved. In the meantime, he is barred from entering the United States to visit his wife, even briefly. Because Sumathi has a green card -- because she is here lawfully and will soon be eligible for US citizenship -- her husband cannot get even a tourist visa to come see her.
Crazy? Yes, and it gets worse: If Sumathi had first gotten married and then applied for her green card, her husband would have been able to move here right away. Same thing if she had been here on a student visa, or had simply made no change in her status as the holder of a work visa. But becoming a legal permanent resident meant that anyone she subsequently married (and any child she gave birth to) outside the United States would have to languish on a waiting list for five or more years before being allowed to enter the country.
No policy aim is advanced by separating legal immigrants from their spouses and children -- especially when the only immigrants affected are those who have proclaimed their commitment to this country by becoming permanent residents. Congress didn't set out deliberately to put Sumathi and Jeevan and others like them through emotional torment. But by holding down the annual number of immigrant visas available to the spouses and kids of green-card holders, it unwittingly created a giant backlog.
Happily, the problem can be solved: Congress has only to remove the annual quota on visas for immediate relatives of legal permanent residents, thereby clearing up the backlog and eliminating the long wait. Legislation introduced by Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska would make that change. An alternative solution, offered by Representative Robert Andrews of New Jersey, would allow the spouse and minor children of green-card holders to enter the United States on a special "V visa," and to live here while waiting for their immigration petitions to be approved.
Unlike the illegal immigrants who have been raising such a ruckus across the country in recent days, green-card holders like Sumathi broke no laws to get here. Most of them are highly skilled professionals who eventually become US citizens, enriching their adopted country in the time-honored immigrant manner.
"I came here legally," says Sumathi, who develops speech recognition software for use in health care settings. "I'm making a contribution. I pay my taxes. I've never been a burden to the government. My husband is a doctor whose work on polio is saving lives. Why must we be separated like this?" She observes tartly that the United States lectures other countries about the importance of marriage and family. Yet "US immigration law is destroying my family life. I live alone, eat alone, sleep alone, cry alone, and suffer alone. . . . The only thing that keeps me going is my husband's photograph sitting next to me."
It is no virtue to split husbands from wives, or parents from young children. What is being done to immigrants like Sumathi Athuluri is both unjust and unwise. Above all, it is unworthy of a nation built by immigrants.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
BS alert!!!
Resident Aliens can stay out of the US as long as they need to, as long as they let BCIS know and obtain a reentry permit.
First off, she's not a US Citizen and she can stay in India with her husband as long as she wishes.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
I met a man last weekend who came here from Nigeria who is following the rules to establish citizenship and his wife cannot come here until he is sworn in. Makes no sense to me.
I know exactly why are legal immigration system is the way it is and comparing our legal system to criminals aliens is BS.
Actually, the "family reunification" aspect of immigration law should be ended. It is what allows these folks to multiply and multiply, because they sponsor their cousins, mothers, brothers, etc.
This case happens to be a terrible situation. Nevertheless, I really think "family reunification" aka chain migration has caused more problems than it has resolved.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie. Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
I agree. Kids and spouses only. Unfortunatly, the Catholic and other Churches will raise a stink about it.
Meanwhile, she and her hubby could meet up in Canada for acouple weeks vacation.
Also, citizenship does not necessarily have to follow a green card. You do not have to become a citizen so long as you are here legally. We intend to move back to Japan after I retire, so there's no need to screw up her real citizenship.
Someone mentioned a situation that was interesting. A boy is brought from another country at (no, not Mexico, or South America) illegally. It is on his parents, of course. They have a false birth cert. for him and everything. This was back in the '50s. He grows up, works,pays taxes, marries an American, has children. Perhaps later finds out his situation. A few months ago he finds out he has lung cancer and moving back to his country would be hard on his health. I am not for amnesty at all. This was a situation someone on another board is going through with her spouse. How should something like this be addressed?
Then he's eligable under the previous amnesty to stay in this country.
Horse manure. If she wants to be with her husband, she "could" have stayed back in India with him. She is NOT a citizen--she's a "green card holder".
WHY is it automatically assumed that relatives should be allowed into the US??
God help us.
Think about this law for a sec--the issue is that if we let in husbands after we let in wives, or vice versa, that'll create a black market immigrant spouse game. It'll also make far more likely that the married couple will create an anchor baby.
No, I'd much rather the "screwed-up" system STAY "screwed up" as it is. In fact, I'd prefer that American citizens and green card holders who marry non-citizens outside the country be made to remain with their spouses while waiting for a visa. It would quickly remove a large incentive for Americans to get into these visa marriages.
Re-entry permit is only for 2 years. Than you have to come back and suffer. You are eligible only for one Re-entry permit in general.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.