International Marriage Broker Act of 2005

[Bruno]

You are correct about it being a bad law.

I cannot say that it is a bad law since the goal is protect foreign bride... but it is a bad writen law, make very fast after two incident in USA with foreign bride... the result can be the reverse of the desired effect... more easy for not honest one and more difficult for the good one...

 

[TigerPaws]

[color="#0000ff"][size="4"]Bruno,[/size][/color]  

[color="#0000ff"][size="4"] I am not so sure the IMBA is poorly  written but it is a bad law written by politicians who do not give a Damn about  the results, they simply point to the simple fact that they "did something".  Laws and or regulations in this arena are at best ill advised and in general a bad idea, I have little doubt our (American) court system will evidentially find  most if not all of the IMBA unconstitutional and the law will be thrown out. The  issue is what happens between the time this law goes into effect and it reaches  the attention of the courts, this will take many years and hundreds of thousands  of dollars. In the mean time business will be forced to leave the country or go  out of business, people will face prosecution and (mostly) men searching for a  lady from the FSU will most likely give up before they begin after seeing what  hoops they have to jump through or be forced to find creative ways around the  IMBA such as lying about how they met the lady or by using the K3. [/size][/color]

[BC]

Tiger,

Lying to a consular officer under oath?.. No I think I wouldn't sleep well afterwards.. Who knows what investigations may come up years down the road. IMHO life is somewhat like a washing machine.. the dirt always comes out in the end. 

What would be the difference with a K3?

The only thing I saw mentioned was "K" type visas..  If I also read correctly criminal record, marriage history and dv info would be reviewed at "interviews" including AOS interviews.

I think I'll wait for a while before getting in line

[TigerPaws]

[color="blue"][size="4"]BC,

 [/size][/color] [color="#0000ff"][size="4"]Lying under oath? Hells Bells 80% of all the lawyers in America could easily be  nailed for that if the truth were known and as for worring about someone coming  back years later, I would never loose a moment sleep worring about it.   [/size][/color]

 [color="#0000ff"][size="4"] As for the K3 visa, I believe if you  marry the girl in her home country or another country the IMBA would not apply,  but I could be wrong about that?[/size][/color]

[Kevin]

Hey guys,

 Even though my  agency is a Ukrainian corporation and isn't affected by the new law. I will  like to challenge it in court. I have an attorney in LA that is willing to take  it all the way up if needed. However I don't live in LA so I need a few guys  from the LA area who are willing to help me on this.
          If you live in the LA area and don't mind having your name  mention or give a deposition to get rid of the unlawful law please email me off  list.
  The point that we are fighting refer too: 
                  1. A law requiring US companies to have only US Clients.
2. A law that punish only certain agencies and not others.  (Yahoo, msn, aol. ect)
3. Right to Privacy (id theft protection).
 
      We've got enough to get this law remove before it ever becomes  a problem if we can get a few of the guys together.
           The attorney and myself are willing to do this for you. If  you are willing to help.
              Please contact me off list.   kevin@khersongirls.com 
              Thanks
Kevin Hayes
American "managed" Ukrainian Corporation Marriage agency.  :dude:

[Oosik]

While Shakespeare did say "First, Shoot all the lawyers", One cannot help but wonder if there might be enough lawyers active in the biggest forms that would be willing to get together to tackle this pro-bono. Could be a chance to argue before the supreme court!!! If the ACLU can get taxpayer money to sue the gov't, why not a bunch of MOBers?

[Warren]

Kevin:  You have nothing to worry about concerning the new international marriage broker act that becomes effective 6 March. It is simply a form that the U.S. man sends to the marriage agency and to his new lady as follows:

PREVIOUS MARRIAGES: (example) 1 marriage: divorced in 1999.

ARE YOU MARRIED CURRENTLY ?: no

CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF 18: none

CRIMINAL ARRESTS OR CONVICTIONS: no

DRUG OR ALCOHOL RELATED ARRESTS OR CONVICTIONS: no

PROSTITUTION-RELATED ARRESTS OR CONVICTIONS: no

ANY COURT ORDERS: no

The US Embassy can deny a finance visa to any lady from a marriage agency that does not conform. For those ladies from the personals ads need only show the form from his US guy during an interview.  So, it is no big deal.

  Warren

[Kevin]

Warren
What happens if the client answer Yes to any of these questions. I can't find any instructions on what to do.

Kevin

[Warren]

Kevin:  So far it looks fairly simple for your Agency. Just keep on file the AM's notarized statement for the lady to review.  If the AM and lady are already corresponding, just make sure after 6 March that she has received a copy from her AM friend. 

  Having worked for the U.S. Gov't, I would expect when the State Department gets a hold of this, they will make regulations for ALL the U.S. Embassies.  I would expect that they would deny a finace visa for ANY foreign lady not presenting the form during the interview.  If some of the criminal questions are shown "yes" then it is up to the lady to beware if the AM has not given a detailed explanation on the form. You, being an American, should read that particular form and help her decide. Simple drunk driving may show up in a number of cases. The severity is whether the AM still has his license. For the AM arrested as a 'John" with a "hooker", the foreign lady may ask for a sexual disease test of the AM. For court orders, the AM may have simply not paid a debt which case this will be inspected at the Embassy for minimum wage requirements or debt paid before issuance of the fiance visa.  As you can see, it opens a "can of worms".

        Warren

[Adel]

Would you post the link to this form, I would like to read it. Thanks

[TigerPaws]

Would you post the link to this form, I would like to read it. Thanks

[color="blue"][size="4"] I do not believe the "form" you are looking for exists yet but I am sure there are hundreds of taxpayer paid government employess working 8 hours a day 5 days a week to make them. Then they new "forms" will have directions and explanations written and printed all at taxpayer expense, plus I am sure someone within the "system" will decide there neede to be a fee for all of this. AW! Our government at work for our collective benifit. :yech:[/size][/color]

[Warren]

Adel:  There is no "official" form as yet.  What I have been quoting is the "question form" as put forward by Elena (www.elenasmodels.com).  She had an attorney look at the Act and this is what he came up with.  I do not think that the Gov't will generate a form, per se, but will have detailed information as to what must be included. Elena's form is a good start to eliminate a lot of guessing on our part.  I would expect the US Immigration Agency to have the detailed information soon after 6 March.    Warren 

[Warren]

Adel:  There is another contact who has reviewed the Act, an immigration attorney:  Gary Bala at his website

http://usaimmigrationattorney.com

warren

[Admin]

Adel: There is another contact who has reviewed the Act, an immigration attorney: Gary Bala at his website

http://usaimmigrationattorney.com

warren

You can also send Gary a PM here. He is a registered member.

- Dan

[RacerX]

What I am most interested in: is what the USCIS does about all of this.  If the petitioner or beneficiary is actually required to produce the biographical questionnaire at time of interview because they want to be perfectly honest about how they met [or maybe an more appropriate word is: stupid] is the CO supposed to check the background report against it?  For that matter wouldn't there need to be detailed procedures and training of CO's as to how they are to inform the fiancee about the report?

And speaking of these background reports, who exactly is going to do them (the FBI?) and what happens if the petitioner has a "hit?"  Would the NVC send it back to the petitioner asking for clarification on just forward it to the consulate?  And of course, the USCIS will have to come up with a fee structure for all of this, and publish it, etc.

I think It would be a miracle if Dept of State and  DHS could do this by March - at least March of 2006.  There should be enough time for someone to ask a Federal judge to issue an injunction so that the legal details could be examined.

[Warren]

RacerX:  Just go to atty. Bala's website:  http://usaimmigrationattorney.com and look under IMBRA. It will answer all your questions.   Warren

 

[RacerX]

Warren ~ thanks for the link, but I don't believe he answered any of my questions - mostly because other than pure speculation, he doesn't really know much more than we do.

[Journeyman]

Hey guys,

Even though my  agency is a Ukrainian corporation and isn't affected by the new law. I will  like to challenge it in court. I have an attorney in LA that is willing to take  it all the way up if needed. However I don't live in LA so I need a few guys  from the LA area who are willing to help me on this.
          If you live in the LA area and don't mind having your name  mention or give a deposition to get rid of the unlawful law please email me off  list.
  The point that we are fighting refer too:
                  1. A law requiring US companies to have only US Clients.
2. A law that punish only certain agencies and not others.  (Yahoo, msn, aol. ect)
3. Right to Privacy (id theft protection).

      We've got enough to get this law remove before it ever becomes  a problem if we can get a few of the guys together.
           The attorney and myself are willing to do this for you. If  you are willing to help.
              Please contact me off list.  kevin@khersongirls.com
              Thanks
Kevin Hayes
American "managed" Ukrainian Corporation Marriage agency.  :dude:

Kevin,

Just a thought, but why don't you ask your attorney whether you might be able to shape your complaint in such a way that you could have your challenge to this new law denied on the basis of lack of standing?  I'm not quite sure how that all might work, but perhaps you could sort of immunize yourself from that law by having a court tell you, effecively, that it doesn't apply to you by, first, denying you a the right to pursue your claim in the first place.  As I understand it, there are also other legal theories, like that of "standing", that you might try to rely on to get your own business immunized.  I know you think you are in the clear already, but, that isn't certain yet.  This way, you could possibly force the court to first declare that you are (effectively) "immune," or, if not, still pursue your claim as you wish.  Just trying to help.  Good luck.

Journeyman

[Adel]

Thanks Dan & Warren,

I wonder what will happen come March 7th for the women who have their interviews 

[LTS]

Question::noidea:

Anybody want to speculate a little on the visa interview changes, because the MOB part does not apply to me. The interview will of course,

As I read the wording of the law...this part specifically:

(b) Visa and Adjustment Interviews-(A) provide information in the primary language of the visa applicant, on protection orders or criminal convictions collected under subsection (a)(5)(A)(iii);

It sounds like the major changes will be to the MOB Agencys. All of the increases to disclosure and the penalties for failure to disclose fall on the poor MOB operator. The wording of the above exerpt as I understand it means that in the interview process, they will review and advise her in her native language, of any pertinent information from the already mandatory background checks (including DV protection orders and such) but that at the interview, the domestic history of marriages and divorces is not presented to her, just interrogation about the MOB agency disclosing these things to her, along with a pamphlet on how the US government makes it easy to stick it to your new husband. Independence is just a phone call away...

JUST MY OPINION::seething:

This may sound like knit-picking, but I am about to enter the Visa process, and having  met through an agency last September, the agency ruling segment is N/A. We are to be married next month (March) in the Ukraine, and apply for the K3 visa shortly after. I have a real problem with the US government thinking that they have the right to warn MY WIFE that I have been married x amount of times and that x amount of protection orders have been filed against me, and that my criminal record is xxx, all to protect her from (at this point) HER HUSBAND? We have spent 6 weeks together and talk daily, neither one of us is concerned with the past, only the future (she is 39-hardly an irresponsible child). When I explained to her the new requirements and that It will probably add time to the already ridiculous process that we are about to undertake, I almost fell on the floor laughing because she automatically assumed it was required of her...not me. Try to explain to a citizen of a previously oppressed society that the United States government can actualy demand this FROM A CITIZEN in good standing! She asked me how this affects our national security, which is what the whole Visa process is there for, right? As A future citizen, she is disturbed that the government in a FREE society has the right to intrude into my/our personal lives like this. She stated that in even in the FSU, where they are very private about personal matters, her government would not request such information. I cannot explain to her the reasoning behind it, since no matter how ugly my past could be, I am already a citizen!!!!! And my past hardly constitutes a matter of national security, which is the whole basis for the INS and Homeland Security right? I dread the day when she learns about all of the other "privacy infringements" she is about to encounter in the USA the land of the free... sad thing is, she is happy in the Ukraine, just couldn't find a man she wanted to spend her life with. It was a hard to talk her into moving here, and the more she learns the less she wants to be here. Education can be a dangerous thing...  

Maybe somebody could help me to say (in Russian) That a Lesbian, Man-hating, Democratic Bitch in Congress sticks it to the Men in FFA (Formerly Free America)? My dictionary just can't say it right...  

[RacerX]

LTS, as I understand the timelines, it appears the I-130s are being approved about as fast as the I-129f's which means you could just apply [or in fact,  just wait] for her CR-1 visa instead. 

One nice loophole is the law doesn't appear to apply to CR-1s and the time to get one seems reasonable - check VisaJourney.com to vertify this.  Although greatest benefit is she will already have her conditional green card which will save you endless hours of document prep and money!

As far as the translation goes, just ask any FSUW who has lived her more than a year 

[TigerPaws]

[color="blue"][size="4"]I just received an e-mail regarding the IMBA which I have copied below.[/size][/color]
[align=left][font="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"][size="+2"]New    US Law regulating international romance. Act now![/size][/font][/align] [font="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif"][size="5"]All American men    are labeled abusers until proven otherwise.[/size][/font]
 On January 5, 2006 President Bush signed into law an "International Marriage    Broker Regulations Act of 2005 (IMBRA)".

  Here is the exact text    of the law.
 I had hard time believing myself that such a law, severely limiting American    men's ability to date and marry foreign brides, could pass Congress. For some    time I thought it was a hoax, but turned out to be true. Main provisions of    the new law come into effect on March 5, 2006, less than a month away. This    will drastically change the international romance scene.
 The main provisions of IMBRA place limits on number of "K" visa petitions    a man may file for his potential bride in a certain time period, and also (most    importantly) require that a man discloses all his past criminal history, visa    petition history, past marital and divorce history, ages of children under age    18 to the lady BEFORE he can get her contact information or otherwise communicate    with her. The agency must collect this information, then check the National    Sex Offender public registry and state public registry for each man, provide    all this information to the lady, and secure a signed and written consent from    the lady to release her contact information to that particular man.
 There are many things wrong with this law, but the most unconstitutional is    to require men to disclose such personal information to somebody they have not    met or even communicated with. When you see her on our website all you know    about her is her first name, some bio information, and a pretty picture. Now    government says that for the privilege just to say "Hi" you must disclose    all this very personal information to her.
  Significant additional requirements and costs passed on to the agencies (men's    background checks and securing a written consent from the lady) will drive many    agencies either abroad or out of business.
 We need to act now all together in order to oppose this unjust law. Feminists,    who wrote and pushed this law, disguising their intentions by a pretty cause    of protecting women, in fact are eliminating competition by effectively precluding    those same women from coming to the US.
 I want to make it very clear, nobody is against protecting women. Yes, those    women coming to the US on "fiancee" visas should be protected from    abusers, and informed in the best way possible. That's why it's not at all a    bad idea to do background checks on both men and women when they apply for her    "fiancee" visa. That means they are getting serious about their relationship.    That's a good time to make sure he is not repeated abuser, and if he is, inform    the woman about it and let her decide. But requiring men to disclose his background    information before they even say "Hi" will turn off a lot of guys    and drive a lot of international introduction agencies out of business. This    will effectively make the process of finding love overseas so much harder.
 To stand up for your rights, please sign the following 2 petitions to oppose    this law. We have gathered over 1,000 signatures already.
  Sign Petition    #1
 Sign    Petition #2

I also urge you to call your Congressman and complain about this law. The system    works, we just have to be active. Please do not think "let others do it,    I am too busy, what difference one call would make". If each and every    one of us who feels that this law is outrageous calls his Congressmen, they    WILL do something about it.
 And please sign the petitions above. Send this to your friends, and ask them    to sign. We are 10,000 strong on this mailing list, if everyone gets his 2 buddies    to sign, we'll have 30,000 signatures.
 The agency owners and the most active citizens are now forming an accosiation,    called Citizens Against Dating Discrimination (CADD). If you intereted in joining,    please email me directly We will    be fighting this law on different levels, creating public awareness, attracting    attention of media, there are even talks of challenging the law in court.
  Read below the explanation of the law by Gary    Bala, the Immigration Attorney with 24 years experience, who has been helping    this cause from the very beginning. We appreciate very much all the time he    has donated and the great help that he has provided.
 -Art Gratchev
 CEO
 1st International Marriage Network
~~~~~~~~~~~~
 From Gary Bala:
 WHAT EXACTLY ARE SOME OF THE PROVISIONS?
  Some highlights of the new law:
 1. NEW PETITION FORMS: New I-129F Fiancee and Spousal Visa petitions will require    that the petitioner provide information on his criminal convictions for specified    crimes, including violent offenses, domestic abuse and sexual assualt.
 2. LIMIT ON NUMBER OF PETITIONS: Some petitioners will need to wait before    they can successfully file for a fiancee visa. For example, if you filed two    (2) or more fiancee visa petitions in the past, and at least one of them was    approved, you must wait two (2) years from the filing date of the last approved    petition before you can be successfully approved for another fiancee visa petition.    (Exception: Under some circumstances, a petitioner may be able to obtain a "waiver".)
 3. MULTIPLE VISA PETITION DATABASE: Any person approved for a second visa petition    or filing a third visa petition will be notified by Immigration that their case    has been put into a special visa petition database which will track multiple    petition filers and help identify those who might be abusing the system.
 4. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PAMPHLET BROCHURE: Homeland Security will develop and    make available on USCIS, State Department and Embassy websites a domestic violence    pamphlet brochure in 14 languages and revised every 2 years which discusses    the visa process, adjustment of status, conditional residency, marriage and    visa fraud, domestic violence abuse rights, where and how to get help and other    warnings and notifications.
 5. CONSULAR INTERVIEW: The Consular Officer at interview will provide the visa    applicant with a copy of the fiancee or spousal petition, and information and    documents in her native language on any past marital and divorce history, past    criminal history and past domestic violence history of the petitioner. The Consular    Officer will also answer any questions about the domestic violence pamphlet    brochure. The Consular Officer will also ask the visa applicant if the relationship    was facilitated by an International Marriage Broker and , if so, confirm that    the broker provided the applicant with information or documents about the petitioner's    background.
 6. REGULATION OF INTERNATIONAL MARRIAGE BROKERS (IMBs): IMBs are required to    check the National Sex Offender public registry and state public registry for    each specific U.S. client, and to gather mandatory background information and    documents on that particular U.S. client's past criminal history, including    prostitution offenses, past domestic violence history, past marital and divorce    history, past visa petition history, ages of any children under age 18, and    all states and countries where the U.S. client lived since age 18. IMBs must    then provide that information to the foreign client lady in her native language    and secure a signed, written consent from her before releasing her personal    contact information to that specific U.S. client. The law imposes stiff civil    and criminal penalties of up to $25,000 and up to 5 years in federal prison    for each broker violation.
 WHEN DOES THE LAW GO INTO EFFECT? WHAT SHOULD I DO?
  Most of the new law's provisions go into effect in sixty (60) days after date    of enactment, which is March 06, 2006. The bottom line for gentlemen and foreign    ladies with an international romance and courtship is, if possible, to finalize    their engagement and file their visa petitions as soon as possible.
 WHAT IF I DISAGREE WITH THIS LAW? HOW DO I COMPLAIN ABOUT IT?
 Many gentlemen value their rights of privacy. Many gentlemen feel that this    new law might unduly impinge on their rights of free speech and free association    as U.S. citizens. Perhaps, the law may also intrude on equal protection rights    of U.S. citizens who are required to provide extensive background data for foreign    romances but not for domestic dating. If you wish to register and voice your    concerns and complaints about this law, please contact your federal Senator's    or local Congressman's office.
 SEE THIS LINK FOR HELP:
 Contacting the Congress
 WHAT NEXT?
 Needless to say, this new law mandates a significant change in the way the    fiancee and spousal visa process will take place. It poses new challenges to    brokers, U.S. clients and foreign clients alike in the international romance    field. In the coming days and weeks, we will together monitor and follow the    roll-out of this new law. Your comments, suggestions and ideas are welcome.
 Good luck to all,
 Gary Bala
USA Immigration Attorney
Pennsylvania USA
Web: www.garybala.com
E-Mail: gb@garybala.com
Tel: 610-446-VISA (8472)

  Need more information ? How does this law apply in your situation?Here    are Gary Bala's answers to some actual questions, and his IMBRA Blog.

[Bruce]

Thanks Tiger, I signed the petition and urge everyone else to do so as well .

[Noyrt]

Well said Bruce,   I think now our government has just successfully informed every RW that they can easily divorce their new husband upon arrival to the US for the reason of DV! 

Ok,,  IMO  they should have included a paragrah saying in short, "Ok, now you know the man you married  because we have provided you with all his backround info, so you are not allowed to file for DV against your new 'good' husband! 

In that respect I think this law might have helped the governmnet side of DV.  However I think they have just opened a door for more reports to be filed by women of alternate intent and Green card marriages.

MY 2 cents. Noyrt   

---- 

Stupid people make stupid laws.  Somehow, we men need to do something to stand up for ourselves and change things in our country.   It is easy for me to vote for other people, but it seems so what with this bills passing.  The trip to "hell in a hand basket" for men in this country has now quickened.  

[Warren]

Kevin:  The FSU Angelika network of agencies has interpreted this Law as forbiding the Marriage Agency from doing business with both US and non-US clients.  This is restraint of trade ! As a results, one of the Marriage agencies is selling off his non-US client lists and business for $600k.  He is keeping his U.S. client business.   Another marriage agency has stated that he expects to see his FSU listings dwindle due to the requirement that the lady come to the office to review the AM's new document and sign before releasing her address, etc. to the AM.  This would be a hardship on those gals who live many km. away from the agency, particularly, if she has to come to the office many times for the different AM.

 YES, BY ALL MEANS, SIGN THE ANTI-LAW PETITIONS.

Kevin: please  Email me at w.d.reynolds@att.net, I have more info for you.