Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One other question on my mind is if certain ports of entry are easier than others. For example San Francisco as opposed to Washington DC. I assume crossing the border from Windsor, Ontario to Detroit, Michigan might raise more questions for a person who is returning to LA than flying directly to California.
If they are flying in direct from Canada, depending on which airport, they most likely would have to go through US Immigration at the Canadian airport of departure, not at their flight destination in the US. i.e. a YYZ -> SFO flight, US immigration is done at YYZ.
Anyways, I doubt point of entry would make a difference in how US immigration law would be applied.
LPR who intend to reside outside the US for more then a year should have applied for an re-entry permit prior to their departure if they wished to maintain their status.
It can't be "renewed" from outside the country, you need to go to an ASC for the biometrics.
From my experience, flying from Canada, airlines seldom check anything beyond the validity of my passport, they ever looked at my green card. The airlines are much more strict when flying from Europe, in particular Germany, they had airline employees reviewing all my documents, and all details of my trip, including duration outside the US. I don't recall airline checking much when I flew back from Hong Kong.
If they are flying in direct from Canada, depending on which airport, they most likely would have to go through US Immigration at the Canadian airport of departure, not at their flight destination in the US. i.e. a YYZ -> SFO flight, US immigration is done at YYZ.
Anyways, I doubt point of entry would make a difference in how US immigration law would be applied.
LPR who intend to reside outside the US for more then a year should have applied for an re-entry permit prior to their departure if they wished to maintain their status.
It can't be "renewed" from outside the country, you need to go to an ASC for the biometrics.
From my experience, flying from Canada, airlines seldom check anything beyond the validity of my passport, they ever looked at my green card. The airlines are much more strict when flying from Europe, in particular Germany, they had airline employees reviewing all my documents, and all details of my trip, including duration outside the US. I don't recall airline checking much when I flew back from Hong Kong.
Airlines check for passengers having documents.
Customs at preclearance determine admissibility. Not the airlines.
Customs at preclearance determine admissibility. Not the airlines.
Yes, INS makes the admissibility decision.
But The Republic of Michigan question was
Quote:
believe airlines are starting to prevent people who have been out of the USA for more than a year from boarding the flight without a SB-1 visa. I am unsure if all airlines do this.
Airlines do check the existence & validity (mostly expiration dates) of documents since the airline are subject to a fine for allowing someone with invalid document to fly. They can deny someone without the correct documents to board. I believe the airline also incur the cost flying that person back if they are rejected by INS.
Airlines do check the existence & validity (mostly expiration dates) of documents since the airline are subject to a fine for allowing someone with invalid document to fly. They can deny someone without the correct documents to board. I believe the airline also incur the cost flying that person back if they are rejected by INS.
Again - how about official links your statements are based on?
Dual citizens have to leave/enter the respective country with the respective passport. You present one passport to board and another to immigration.
Again - how about official links your statements are based on?
Dual citizens have to leave/enter the respective country with the respective passport. You present one passport to board and another to immigration.
If you are dual citizen of country A & B, and country B requires citizen A to have a VISA. If the passenger uses passport of country A for boarding, the airline do check for that visa. What passport you choose to enter country B the airport don't care, as long as you have one valid one.
Rather or not the passenger or the airline incur the cost flight if passenger is denied entry depends on the terms of carriage of the specific airline.
Airlines do check the existence & validity (mostly expiration dates) of documents since the airline are subject to a fine for allowing someone with invalid document to fly. They can deny someone without the correct documents to board. I believe the airline also incur the cost flying that person back if they are rejected by INS.
INS doesn't exist anymore. Its USCIS.
Airlines do not determine admissibility. You are correct.
Again - how about official links your statements are based on?
Dual citizens have to leave/enter the respective country with the respective passport. You present one passport to board and another to immigration.
That creates a problem. All passenger and passport data is transmitted by the airlines to CBP. If the data shows a passport from a different country than what is presented on arrival, it can cause an issue.
That creates a problem. All passenger and passport data is transmitted by the airlines to CBP. If the data shows a passport from a different country than what is presented on arrival, it can cause an issue.
The only time it is an issue is if a US citizen presents a non-US passport and port of entry:>)
My friend's situation is very complicated. He is gay and obtained asylum in the USA and obtained a green card in 2007 after living in the USA for 7 years. At the end of 2009, he left to visit his mother which should have been a short trip. While there, his mother had stroke and he began to take care of her. He thought her condition would be temporary, but her situation continued to worsen. Her situation worsened as she developed alzheimer's. He stayed there to take care of her. He stayed until his sister moved to his city to take over. He now wants to come back. He couldn't leave her during this time and was afraid to leave the country and come back based on his asylum.
I know that people have been allowed to stay out of the country based on unforeseen circumstances or events which have a reasonable possibility of occurring within a short period of time to make the stay be considered temporary.
There have been people who have been allowed to stay out of the country for 5 years taking care of a parent
For example, in a case where an LPR stayed abroad 6 years to care for her mother’s illnesses before she died and another three years to care for her depressed father, the court determined that the LPR’s stay abroad wasn’t temporary because it wasn’t contingent on events that could reasonably be expected to occur within a relatively short period.
In another case, an LPR stayed abroad for five years to care for her mother who had been hospitalized for a perforated ulcer. At the end of the five years, the LPR’s sister separated from her husband and took charge of the care. The court opined that these events had a reasonable possibility of occurring within a relatively short period of time so the stay abroad was “temporary.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
