Pursuit of Happiness

[HKG]

The phrase "pursuit of happiness" appeared in the 1967 Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute. Chief Justice Warren wrote:

 

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

 

When I applied for this Visa, I did not agree to give up any of my birth rights or legal rights, so how does the Consulate in China, think otherwise.

 

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness " is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence. These three aspects are listed among the "inalienable rights" of man.

[rebeleagle]

The phrase "pursuit of happiness" appeared in the 1967 Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute. Chief Justice Warren wrote:

 

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

 

When I applied for this Visa, I did not agree to give up any of my birth rights or legal rights, so how does the Consulate in China, think otherwise.

 

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness " is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence. These three aspects are listed among the "inalienable rights" of man.

Our government thinks it has to control every aspect of our lives. The Chinese government does that and they are called "communists" aren't we?

[splinterman]

HKG, nobody will argue with you that you do have the right to marry. Certainly, Guangzhou is not trying to prevent you from marrying-they cannot control that. You're free to do that with whomever you like and the consulate will not try to interfere with it. But the matter of obtaining a visa for your fiancee or spouse (and also stepchildren) so you can physically be together is a much more complicated issue and, one that Guangzhou does have a lot of control over.

 

I think that everyone who has been shot down by Guangzhou with the white slip initially feels as you do now. I know I did when my SO got the white slip. But there is a separability of issues here that you must recognize before you can move on to formulate a Plan B. And developing a Plan B is now your next step. You already know the result you wish to achieve, now you must decide how best for you to get there. There are many wonderful and helpful people here who will help you along your way. We are all sensitive to how you are feeling right now-many of us are in the same boat as you are, so you're not alone.

 

Endless waiting seems to be a large part of this process and there are things you can at least try while you are waiting until the time is right for you to begin the process of putting a Plan B into effect. Guangzhou has already capsized your Plan A and nothing is going to get them to change that. But now it's time to move on to your next shot at bringing you and your SO together. Seek advice here and use it to formulate your next step. Be persistent and above all, be patient. Good things will come to those who wait!

[Richard & Li]

Well said splinterman.

 

One other thing: If marrying and bringing a foreign spouse to America was an inalienable right, there would be no reason for the visa approval process to exist.

 

Although I think the system could be improved, I don't think it should be abolished.

[griz326]

splinterman has the correct attitude, just like all the Stepford Wives. (No offense intended, splinterman)

 

I'm with you in spirit, HKG, I'd like to skin all of the bureaucrats alive and am not worried about skinning a few good ones all in the name of efficiency.

 

HOWEVER, splinterman is giving you better advice that me.

 

Richard, are you a Stepford Wife too?

Edited January 7, 2009 by griz326 (see edit history)

[Richard & Li]

Stepford Wife??? Griz, you got me on that one: I had to Google it.

 

No, I don't think most slightly overweight, bearded, grizzled, guys (who's secretaries need to remind them when to get a haircut) fall into that category.

[HKG]

HKG, nobody will argue with you that you do have the right to marry. Certainly, Guangzhou is not trying to prevent you from marrying-they cannot control that. You're free to do that with whomever you like and the consulate will not try to interfere with it. But the matter of obtaining a visa for your fiancee or spouse (and also stepchildren) so you can physically be together is a much more complicated issue and, one that Guangzhou does have a lot of control over.

 

I think that everyone who has been shot down by Guangzhou with the white slip initially feels as you do now. I know I did when my SO got the white slip. But there is a separability of issues here that you must recognize before you can move on to formulate a Plan B. And developing a Plan B is now your next step. You already know the result you wish to achieve, now you must decide how best for you to get there. There are many wonderful and helpful people here who will help you along your way. We are all sensitive to how you are feeling right now-many of us are in the same boat as you are, so you're not alone.

 

Endless waiting seems to be a large part of this process and there are things you can at least try while you are waiting until the time is right for you to begin the process of putting a Plan B into effect. Guangzhou has already capsized your Plan A and nothing is going to get them to change that. But now it's time to move on to your next shot at bringing you and your SO together. Seek advice here and use it to formulate your next step. Be persistent and above all, be patient. Good things will come to those who wait!

Your point is well taken.. But knowledge can be power, possibly by exposing the non-bonafide fraud being committed by these Consulates

as opposed to what is right may help someone, someday. I may have to deal again with these people in the future, one person at the Consulate has denied a US citizen of a fundamental right, but please do not go off telling me they denied her, they denied, Us. So I will beat my drum, many people read this board, maybe someone can make a difference.

 

It is quite possible that a non-bonafide relation ruling is running afoul of this Supreme Court ruling. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute.

Edited January 7, 2009 by HKG (see edit history)

[shushuweiwei]

HKG, nobody will argue with you that you do have the right to marry. Certainly, Guangzhou is not trying to prevent you from marrying-they cannot control that. You're free to do that with whomever you like and the consulate will not try to interfere with it. But the matter of obtaining a visa for your fiancee or spouse (and also stepchildren) so you can physically be together is a much more complicated issue and, one that Guangzhou does have a lot of control over.

 

I think that everyone who has been shot down by Guangzhou with the white slip initially feels as you do now. I know I did when my SO got the white slip. But there is a separability of issues here that you must recognize before you can move on to formulate a Plan B. And developing a Plan B is now your next step. You already know the result you wish to achieve, now you must decide how best for you to get there. There are many wonderful and helpful people here who will help you along your way. We are all sensitive to how you are feeling right now-many of us are in the same boat as you are, so you're not alone.

 

Endless waiting seems to be a large part of this process and there are things you can at least try while you are waiting until the time is right for you to begin the process of putting a Plan B into effect. Guangzhou has already capsized your Plan A and nothing is going to get them to change that. But now it's time to move on to your next shot at bringing you and your SO together. Seek advice here and use it to formulate your next step. Be persistent and above all, be patient. Good things will come to those who wait!

Your point is well taken.. But knowledge can be power, possibly by exposing the nonbona-fide fraud being commited by these Consulates

as opposed to what is right may help someone, someday. I may have to deal again with these people in the future, one person at the Consualte has denied a US citizen of a fundamental right, but please do not go off telling me they denied her, they denied, Us. So I will beat my drum, many people read this board, maybe someone can make a difference.

 

I think I can understand the emotion. I occasionally allow myself to feel how I'd feel in the denial scenario for about 1 second and then I'm overwhelmed, so I stop. Beating the drum is great, but I think that you need to beat the right drum to hear the tune you want.

 

Splinterman is correct that you have a constitutional right to leave the US to pursue happiness and she has no protections under our constitution as a foreign national. So no one is ever going to buy the argument that any right of yours was infringed. Certainly you know that not every foreign spouse/fiance/e has positive intentions and I'm sure you aren't suggesting the doors should be flung open to everyone who convinces a US citizen to marry them.

 

But then you talk of the problems with the not a bona fide relationship excuse. I think you are right that it gives the state dept an easy out when they wish to refuse a visa without sufficient cause or based on vague suspicion.

 

IMHO, the drum to beat is accountability and not rights. Our govt needs to be transparent and accountable to we the people. If the rules were changed in favor of accountability and state knew they would need to defend their decisions in court, there would be less (but never 0) bad denials. Of course, there is always a price to pay and that would come, most likely, from an increase in fees to cover the govts costs in lawyers, etc.

 

I think accountability is a subject that will be heard by the incoming administration and may be a more effective drum to beat. Since one of my Senators will soon be Sec of State, I'm writing to her now to ask that she give the matter of accountability in family visa processing some attention.

[splinterman]

LOL, no offense taken Griz. But it did give me a chuckle!!!

 

HKG, I can agree with you that Guangzhou is way outside of the processing guidelines, directives, memorandums, policy statements, etc. for approval/disapproval of visa petitions. I don't really think that anyone here in CFL will disagree on that, except maybe those folks who got the pink on their very first attempt. But also consider that ANY administrative process regardless of what 'business' it is in, always takes on a path of it's own and morphs into something that it was not intended, or regulated, to be. And when you're talking about a government function, well, underline and underscore that!!!! Government is the King of Bastardized Processes!!!!

 

What you are going to find is exactly what I found:nobody can reverse, second-guess or cause review of a decision by Guangzhou. Not even your congressman, and if he/she is honest with you they will tell you that. About the only thing that can cause a 'review' of a consular officer's decision is that officer's conduct during the interview in which the decision was rendered.

 

Nobody is trying to dissuade you from pursuing your line of attack. Maybe just trying to help you move on to another more fruitful and expedient method of bringing your SO to be with you. I myself am trying different things while I wait for my next step in implementing my Plan B, so I know and understand where you're coming from.

 

The old saying "If at first you don't succeed, try, try again!" is like a bible verse here. But it doesn't mean that if you try one method and it doesn't work that you keep trying that same method. If the frontal attack doesn't work, go around and try a flanking maneuver. Change direction.

 

Become a good Stepford Wife! LOLOL!

[splinterman]

Well said, Shushuweiwei. Accountability and transparency of the process are exactly what must be incorporated into any reform of this visa process. If and when that happens I believe there will be many less 'frivolous' or subjective denials. For a while, anyway.

 

There have already been several successful challenges and overcomes to the consular-imposed requirement of 'not a bona fide relationship' but I think there have been far too few as of yet to really get the steam engine rolling on removing this from the tactics book of Guangzhou and the other consulates who use it with callous disregard to the USC and the beneficiary.

 

But heed the warning; once this particular landmine of denying visa petitions has been disarmed, all consulate officers will search for and develop a new method to proceed with denials, until THAT method is challenged, overcome and removed from the process. And so on and so on.

[Stepbrow]

Yes the ConOff did violate your legal rights and your wife's legal rights. The ConOff also violated US statutes: The INA, and the LIFE Act, The ConOff also violated the CFR and the FAM.

[shushuweiwei]

Yes the ConOff did violate your legal rights and your wife's legal rights. The ConOff also violated US statutes: The INA, and the LIFE Act, The ConOff also violated the CFR and the FAM.

 

Stepbrow,

I'm not a lawyer and my reference was to whether a constitutional right was violated (per OP) but it is certainly possible that some law was broken. I tried to research the above but the references are too general. Can you say what specific aspects of the statutes were violated. It would probably be helpful to the OP.

 

The Code of Federal Regulation is pretty huge. Do you know what section to look for for immigration statutes and what aspect of the federal code was violated?

 

The INA's section on granting visas seem to hinge on an early paragraph that says these protections apply to the "bona fide spouse" of a USC. It would seem to nullify any other of its sections once they decide you are "non bona fide". Is there another section that offers protection prior to attaining "bona fide" staus?

 

The Life Act or a succession of Life Acts, seem to deal mainly with asylum and allowing K and V visa holders to enter and adjust status rather than wait out the whole process in their country. Again, if you know which section, I would really appreciate it. Thanks.

 

You stated that both rights and statutes were violated. What rights do you see as having been violated? Do you mean rights afforded by our constitution or laws or do you mean just things that should be rights?

[HKG]

I think one should consider the 1967 Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute. This Court case declared prohibitions of marriage between different races, racist and found those prohibitions as unconstitutional and did go further and defined once against the pursuit of happiness. So, what is one to think, when you receive a a non-bonafide judgment with nothing substantial for reason of its issue, and you have knowledge of this Supreme Court ruling, I believe the word to consider here is "anti-miscegenation" and how it may apply to these non-bonafide, rulings with their implications of fraud on the couples they are given to. So my thoughts, these non-bonafide findings may be racist in nature and a smoke screen around the 1967 Supreme Court ruling on anti-miscegenation.

Edited January 7, 2009 by HKG (see edit history)

[Yuanyang]

I think one should consider the 1967 Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute. This Court case declared prohibitions of marriage between different races, racist and found those prohibitions as unconstitutional and did go further and defined once against the pursuit of happiness. So, what is one to think, when you receive a a non-bonafide judgment with nothing substantial for reason of its issue, and you have knowledge of this Supreme Court ruling, I believe the word to consider here is "anti-miscegenation" and how it may apply to these non-bonafide, rulings with their implications of fraud on the couples they are given to. So my thoughts, these non-bonafide findings may be racist in nature and a smoke screen around the 1967 Supreme Court ruling on anti-miscegenation.

Nice try. If you've got a lot of money file suit that USCIS/US State Dept. policies are racist towards Chinese. Otherwise I'd pursue the reasons behind the white slip. Edited January 7, 2009 by Yuanyang (see edit history)

[Dave&Hong]

The phrase "pursuit of happiness" appeared in the 1967 Supreme Court case, Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-miscegenation statute. Chief Justice Warren wrote:

 

The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

 

When I applied for this Visa, I did not agree to give up any of my birth rights or legal rights, so how does the Consulate in China, think otherwise.

 

"Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness " is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence. These three aspects are listed among the "inalienable rights" of man.

 

Every American citizen has that right. Unfortunately your wife (and mine) isn't an American citizen. Someone who isn't a citizen of the US does not have the right to come live here just because they married a citizen. If our government did let anyone who married a citizen come to our country unchecked many people that you and I do not want for neighbors would try to find an American to marry so that they could move here. The system is not perfect, but anyone who enters into this needs to be aware that they may be denied for reasons they don't understand and they need to be prepared to make other plans should they receive bad news. My heart aches everytime I see someone from these boards get a blue or white slip. I know when Hong and I have our turn we may get something other than pink and our hearts will break, but we have made plans for that should it happen.