Ms. J had completed her final class before her Diversity visa interview, but had not received her high school diploma in time for the interview. The consular officer refused her for not having the equivalent of a high school education at the time of her interview. We pointed out that she had completed her high school education — that it was the education that satisfied the Lottery requirement, not the issuance of the diploma — and therefore satisfied the Lottery requirement at the time of her interview. Upon reconsideration, the consulate re-opened her case and issued to her an immigrant visa.
Notwithstanding the growing liberalization of laws relating to the recreational use and possession of certain drugs, the Immigration and Nationality Act provides little solace for those who have been convicted of or admit to committing a
The list of controlled substances can be found at this link. This inadmissibility provision does not consider whether the person participated knowingly in the
Similarly, an expungement of a
Because of the grave consequences, it is absolutely imperative to seek out immigration legal assistance when presented with charges for a controlled
Once this relief is granted, for example, in the form of a dismissal of cause nolle prosequi, then the decision of the consular officer can be challenged. We are one of the relatively few firms with successful experience in obtaining a writ of coram nobis and subsequently having a bar under 212(a)(2)(A)(i)(II) rescinded.
As one can see, this is a very complicated area of the law with potentially very dire results. Because it is a complicated area, consular officers may make a mistake in incorrectly applying it. There is particular hope for a nonimmigrant visa applicants with this problem: more than 40% of them who have been subjected to this bar receive nonimmigrant waivers or successfully challenge the decisions. Please contact us to find out how we can help you.