How long does it take to Petition for an R-1 visa or Status?

In general, I tell people to expect about five months for an R-1 petition to be granted.   This number has stayed pretty much the same over the past number of years.  Sometimes it is taking longer, sometimes it goes more quickly, but usually not much quicker or much longer.   On the other hand, I have had some that have disappeared into the depths of the USCIS and have taken more than a year — but, fortunately, that seldom happens.  Sometimes, if the petitioner has had a large number of these petitions approved, it might go as quickly as two or three months, but that is rare — even if the petitioner is a frequent petitioner.   Just to be clear, there is no “category” known as “frequent petitioner”.  It is just that a petitioner who frequently gets R-1 petitions approved sometimes gets favorable consideration.

Now, remember that this is just five months from filing to approval.   This doesn’t count the time it takes to prepare an R petition — usually at least two weeks, and often three or four.  Also, if the USCIS sends out a Request for Evidence, that could stretch out the processing by up to three months or more.

Also, remember that this “about five months” is just until the approval of the petition.   If you are here in the US you will receive the R status at that time.  If you are out of the US, you will need to apply for an R-1 visa at your local embassy or consulate before you can come to the US.  At most embassies and consulates this only takes a few weeks, but at a busier location it could take longer.   If you are Canadian, you can simply come to the border with your petition approval notice, so there is no extra delay for Canadians.

Finally, remember that if the petitioner has had a successful site visit, your petition might qualify for “premium processing”.   If that goes well, you should have your approval in 15 days.   I will have more information about “Premium Processing” next week.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

 

BREAKING NEWS – IMPORTANT UPDATE FOR IMMMIGRANTS — INSURANCE REQUIREMENT TEMPORARILY BLOCKED

President Trump’s new requirement that immigrant must have health insurance has been temporarily enjoined (blocked) by the courts.   There is a hearing scheduled for November 22 to determine if President Trump’s requirement of health insurance will be allowed.

This, of course, somewhat changes what I had written below on October 25.   But it doesn’t remove the fact that the Embassies and Consulates, and maybe USCIS, seem to be taking a closer look at a visa applicant’s ability to pay their own way in the United States — and having insurance coverage is one thing they may look at even if they can’t “require” it.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

 

IMPORTANT UPDATE FOR IMMMIGRANTS — NEW FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Things are changing in regard to immigration and finances. The immigration law does not allow a person to immigrate or enter the US, even on a non-immigrant visa such as a tourist, student or r-ligious worker, if they will not be able to provide for themselves. This has always been true, but it is now becoming even more important.

There are two reasons for this requirement. The first reason, which related to most nonimmigrants, was the concern that if the visitor did not have enough money, they may try to work illegally while they are here. This has been the main issue in regard to most non-immigrants. It was not an issue for most immigrants because they are allowed to work. However, some immigrants, like r-ligious worker immigrants, may have had trouble in this regard if their missionary income was so low that there was a danger that they would need to pick up non-r-ligious work to pay their bills.

The other reason why finances have been important is the public charge issue. A person who entered the US and was unable to pay his bills could become a public charge. A public charge would be a person who depends on the government or society to support him. That is why both immigrants and non-immigrants are not supposed to be able to access welfare, especially cash assistance.

It was because of this public charge issue that the government developed the special Affidavit of Support for immigrants who come to the US through a family member. The family member has to fill out this Affidavit of Support to guarantee that the immigrant will not go on welfare. Other immigrants and long-term non-immigrants (like R-1 r-ligious workers or H-1b professionally workers) generally need to show that they have a job that will provide for their needs.

Well, up until now, these two financial issues have been important, but they were not overly strictly applied. Non-immigrants had to show that they had money to pay their way, but it was usually not overly difficult to show that. R-ligious workers often could get approval as long as they could show that they would be provided with room and food. Family-based immigrants needed to have the Affidavit of Support filled out, but as long as the sponsor met the basic minimum income level — 125% of the poverty level, there usually was no problem.

But it looks like things may be changing. President Trump has been putting much more emphasis on requiring immigrants and non-immigrants to show that they will not be a public charge. I expect that this could also result in more scrutiny regarding the first issue — whether or not a non-immigrant has enough money to pay his own way — because the basic financial questions are very similar. An alien who can’t pay his way may become a public charge unless he engages in illegal work.

Over the recent past, President Trump has issued three new rules regarding this public charge issue. One of them, regarding health insurance, is still effective (or will become effective in a week — on November 3). The other two are parallel rules (one for the USCIS here in the US and one for the consulates) regarding determining if a person will be a public charge. These two parallel rules are not yet effective. The USCIS rule is held up by the courts and the consulate rule was temporarily withdrawn while the courts decide what to do with the USCIS rule. Although these two rules have been held up, they may come into play soon — and even now the reasoning behind these two rules may be affecting how visas are being issued.

HEALTH INSURANCE FOR IMMIGRANTS APPLYING AT CONSULATES: This first rule is in regard to health insurance. By its terms, it only applies to immigrants (not visitors or students or R-1 r-ligious workers) who are applying at a consulate overseas — it does not apply to people who are applying for Adjustment of Status. In order to get an immigrant visa, you need to establish that you have health insurance or can get health insurance within 30 days or that you have enough money to pay for any reasonably foreseeable medical bills. This is probably not too difficult — most people coming on employment visas will get insurance from their future employers, and there are all types of insurance available for purchase. However, the difficulty is that insurance can be expensive. Fortunately, it appears that you can qualify as long as your health insurance covers the major expenses. That type of insurance is cheaper than the type of insurance that covers every little visit to the doctor in addition to all the major expenses. You cannot qualify using the Obamacare insurance with the tax subsidies.

This new Health Insurance rule does not apply to non-immigrants and it doesn’t apply to people who are getting their green cards through Adjustment of Status. However, your still need to keep this rule in mind. Remember that the word is going out to the consulates and to the USCIS officers that the applicant’s financial situation is very important. Even if this rule doesn’t officially apply to non-immigrants and Adjustment of Status interviews, it doesn’t mean that the people at the embassies and consulates and at Adjustment of Status interviews aren’t looking at a person’s financial status more carefully now. If you have the money to get insurance, you may want to get it and bring evidence at the interview in case the interviewer should start asking probing questions about your financial situation. They may not ask, but they may. They may not ask about health insurance, but they may. I have already seen this increased emphasis on the applicant’s financial status at a client’s non-immigrant R-1 visa interview.

THE PUBLIC CHARGE RULES:

As I stated above, these rules are not yet effective, and they may never be effective, but that doesn’t mean that you can ignore them. You should be aware of what they say in case they should become effective. And, just because they are held up now doesn’t mean that the consulates and USCIS won’t find ways of implementing some of the principles any way. As I stated, even before the Consulate Rule had not even been announced, I saw some of the principles of that new rule used to deny a visa.

The important thing to know is that these rules really don’t change much. That is why the fact that they are held up is sort of unimportant. What they do is establish an attitude. The consular officers and the USCIS Adjustment of Status officers have always had discretion to determine whether a person would be a public charge — they could be lenient or they could be demanding. In the past, the practice had generally been to be relaxed in how they applied the rules. Now the word is that they are to be demanding. The new rules are held up, but the word to be demanding has gone out to all the embassies and consulates and USCIS offices. If they deny someone now, they won’t say that they are following the new rules, they will just say that they are exercising their discretion (freedom to make their own decision).

The new rules emphasize that using welfare as an adult — Medicaid, cash assistance, food stamps, subsidized or public housing, or SSI (Cash assistance for disabled or older people) will be heavily weighted against you. This is a change in that non-cash benefits were not supposed to be weighted against you in the past— but I was never confident of that. A family that can’t provide for itself presents a weaker picture when the officer is assessing their ability to survive here in the US. Under the new rules, if you don’t have work experience it will be heavily weighted against you. If you don’t have insurance it will be heavily weighted against you. On the other hand, if you can show that your income is 250% of the poverty level it will be heavily weighted in favor of you. If you have health insurance (not including subsidized Obamacare insurance) it will be heavily weighted in your favor.

The Affidavit of Support (required only for family-based immigrants) under the new rules is clearly not sufficient on its own — and the officer is directed to determine how likely he thinks it is that the Sponsor will actually carry through on his promise. This is different from past practice, but the officers always had the authorization to not solely rely on what is written in the Affidavit of Support.

In short, aside from a stronger negative emphasis on welfare usage, the only real change is that the new order is to be more demanding and strict in the enforcement of the public charge rules. That new strictness can be implemented even while the official rules are held up.

That is why you need to be aware of these new rules — the insurance rule and the two rules which have been held up. You need to know that when you go to an interview, you need to be prepared for stricter standards in regard to the public charge rule and proving that you won’t need to work illegally or go on welfare. You need to know that any welfare usage could come back to be a major problem in the future. You need to be thinking of ways to make it clear that you will be able to earn enough money to provide for you and your family. Finally, I recommend having insurance if you can afford it. I don’t think that you should expect them to implement everything in the new rules — but you need to be thinking of ways to present a stronger picture of your financial health in case it should become necessary.

SO HOW WILL THIS AFFECT YOU?

1) For everyone — it may be that nothing will change, but here are my thoughts regarding what you should be prepared for:
a. Use of Welfare: It is still my advice that you avoid using welfare in all its forms. The statute and the interpretations are ambiguous. If you really need to use food stamps or Medicaid at the current time you will probably be fine. But if you can do without, it will be better for you as you go through your immigration processes.
b. Insurance: I think, regardless of your visa status — it will be better for you if you can have at least health insurance coverage for major injuries and illnesses.
c. General financial status: Although the standards have not officially changed, be prepared for more and closer scrutiny of your ability to pay your own way in the United States.

2) R-1 R-ligious workers:
a. The income standards so far have been very lax for R-1s. I have historically had no problem getting approval for R-1 workers who make less than the poverty level. This may continue — but it may not. I have already had one person recently get an R-1 visa denied for financial reasons, and I am certain that a year or so earlier, the approval would have been easily granted.
b. The upshot is that the stronger you can make the financial situation in your R-1 applications, the better.
c. Under the statute, room and food is sufficient as “compensation” for R-1 status — but it may not be enough for the consulates, and it is possible that even the USCIS may start to require proof that the total value of the “compensation” is over the poverty level or, perhaps, even over 125% of the poverty level.

3) Special Immigrant R-ligious Workers (R-ligious Worker Green Cards) (whether going through a consulate/embassy or an Applicant for Adjustment of Status):
a. The income standards so far have been very lax for Special Immigrant R-ligious Workers. I have historically had no problem getting Green Cards for workers who make less than the poverty level. This may continue — but it may not.
b. The upshot is that the stronger you can make the financial situation in your petitions, the better.
c. Under the statute, room and food is sufficient as “compensation” for a Green Card — but it may not be enough for the consulates, and it is possible that even the USCIS may start to require proof that the total value of the “compensation” is over 125% of the poverty level.
d. It is clear that applicants for R-ligious Worker Green Cards who are processing through a consulate or embassy will need to demonstrate that they have or will be able to get health insurance.

4) Family-based Immigrants (whether going through a consulate/embassy or an Applicant for Adjustment of Status):
a. The only thing that is clear is that, if you are processing through a consulate or embassy, you will need to either have health insurance or prove that you can obtain it.
b. However, I think that you need to be prepared for more inquiry regarding your ability to stay off welfare when you enter the US. Up until now, as long as you could get an Affidavit of Support where the income totaled 125% of the poverty level, that was enough. That possibly will remain true. However, now, I don’t think you can be completely confident with such an Affidavit of Support. If there is any way that you can get an Affidavit of Support from someone with a higher level of income, that will be preferable. This is especially important for missionaries who often have lower incomes and are not looking to get “regular” work here in the US.
c. If there is any way that you or your spouse can arrange to get a job offer in the US with enough income to provide for your family at 125% of the poverty level, you should try to do that before your interview at the embassy or for Adjustment of Status.
d. Remember, these recommendations (other than the health Insurance for people processing through a consulate or embassy) are just recommendations — it is not at all clear what standards will be applied — the prior easier standards or new “unofficial” but tougher standards.

Remember, these are all just recommendations. Officially, nothing has changed (other than the health insurance requirement). However, it is clear that there are new expectations that the immigration and consular officers should be vigilant to make sure that people will be able to provide for themselves when they come. So, whatever you can do to strengthen your position in that regard may be helpful.

I hope this is interesting and helpful. Remember that this is not legal advice. It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation. I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

How to Petition to Bring Someone to the U.S.as an R-1 R*ligious Worker

In my last post I wrote out the requirements to be an R-1 petitioner.   Now I will describe the petitioning process. It is a very complex process.  I strongly recommend hiring an attorney to help you — there are a lot of aspects which seem obvious, but are not.  Remember that only the employer can petition.

You start with the I-129 Petition.   The I-129 petition is designed to support a variety of types of non-immigrant worker visas.   The first section of the form will relate to almost all of the visas.  Then, the second part of the form has various parts that are specific to the various types of visas.   You will only fill out the part relating to the R-1.

Then you will need supporting documentation.    You need documentation establishing that you qualify as a R-1 petitioner.  This would involve establishing that you exist, that you have a r*ligious purpose and function, that you have a need to hire an R-1 worker, and that you have the income and ability to pay the offered wage.    Organizational documents, deeds and leases, IRS tax exemption documentation, website pages, brochures, pictures of the ministry and the location, membership lists, IRS Form 990, budgets and income/expense statements are all examples of useful documentation.

The second area where you will need documentation is to show that the job is a r*ligious job.   Job descriptions, a letter from the employer, denominational documents describing the position, and a sample weekly schedule are examples of relevant documents for this issue.

You will need to show that the job applicant qualifies for the position and the status.   First off, you will need to show that he has been a member of the r*ligious denomination for two years.   Membership rolls, letters from prior churches, baptism certificates can all be helpful here.  Next, depending on the requirements of the position, you may need a resume, college transcripts and diplomas, and letters from previous employers.

If this is an extension and the applicant is currently here in R-1 status, you will want to include tax returns and W-2 forms and pay records.

Finally, you will also need to include evidence that the applicant is currently in status (if he is here in the US) and also show that he has been in legal status if he was in the US before.

A couple of other points to remember.   The check for the filing fees should come from the employer.   It is best if the employer pays for the attorney and pays the filing fee.   There is no specific prohibition (at least no written prohibition) on the applicant paying both the attorney fees and the filing fee, but I recommend against it.  They will sometimes ask who paid the filing fee (and maybe who paid the attorneys fee) if they do a site visit.

It generally takes five to six months to get an R petition approved.   If the petitioner has already had a site visit by the USCIS the petitioner can request Premium Processing for an extra $1,410.   If the Premium Processing Request is approved, they will adjudicate the R-1 petition in 15 days (they will either approve it, deny it or ask for more evidence).    Often, they will deny the Premium Processing Request, which just means that they return the check and the Premium Processing Request and then use the regular 6-month process to adjudicate the R petition.   Just so you know, I have experienced a number of Premium Processing Request refusals — stating that there is no valid site visit, when there clearly was one.  I don’t know if their records are incomplete — or if the reviewing officer entered the name or address incorrectly, or they are too busy and just are looking for an excuse to reject the request.  Sometimes, if they do a site visit during the process, I have submitted Premium Processing Requests after the site visit and those requests have been successful.

Once the petition is approved, the USCIS will send the approval notice to the petitioner.  If the applicant is in the US, the approval notice will include an I-94 form authorizing the job applicant to stay here in R status.  If he is not in the US, the petition approval notice will have a portion on the bottom which the job applicant can take to his local US consulate/embassy and request the issuance of an R-1 visa.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

 

The Requirements to be an R-1 petitioner

Who can file to bring a person to the U.S. to work as an R-1 temporary Religious Worker?   The requirements are quite narrow.    You need to be a religious organization.    You don’t need to be a church.   Other organizations can also file if they are religious.   The organization needs to have a religious purpose and carry out religious activities.   A church is one obvious example.    A mission organization or evangelistic organization would satisfy this definition.  A school could satisfy this if it is clearly a religious school that has a religious purpose.

The second major requirement is that your organization needs to have an Income Tax Exemption letter from the Internal Revenue Service.   There are two areas of misunderstanding that come up here.   The first is that, under US law, a church can be tax exempt without a letter from the IRS.    But, the IRS doesn’t care about that.   If you don’t have a letter from the IRS, they will not let you be an R-1 petitioner.   The second area of misunderstanding here is that a lot of people have a “non-profit” certificate from their local or state government.   This is not what the USCIS is looking for.   They will only accept the IRS letter.

The requirement of an IRS letter means that a for-profit organization cannot bring over a religious worker, even if the “for-profit” organization really operates for a religious purpose.   For example, I know of some Christian radio stations that decided to be “for-profit” to avoid the restrictions of being “non-profit”.   Unfortunately, they would not be able to petition for an R-1 even though they really are religious.  I also know of businesses that hire chaplains or religious counselors.   They could not bring over an R-1 to be a chaplain or counselor because they are not religious organizations.

The petitioner also has to satisfy the USCIS that they are a real organization.   There has been a lot of fraud with this program —- with people claiming that their house is a church so that they can bring over a family member.   That is why the USCIS requires an IRS letter.   But, they also want proof that this “organization” really exists.   The USCIS will want to see evidence of bills and brochures and pictures and other documents that show that this organization really exists and does the normal things that organizations do, such as pay rent and electricity and have a building and have meetings.

The Petitioner will need to satisfy the USCIS that they can really pay the compensation for the R-1 worker.   If he will be paid a monetary salary, the USCIS will want to see proof that you have the money to pay him.   They will want to see that you had enough excess income last year so that you can say that there is room in the budget to pay him.   Or, if you have enough cash in the bank to pay his salary for 2 ½ years, that will also normally satisfy the USCIS.   What will not satisfy them is the statement that we expect additional income next year and we will use that to pay the new R-1 worker.   The USCIS will not accept that.   If you are going to pay the R-1 by providing room and board, I like to show pictures of the housing and the cafeteria that you have available for your staff.

Finally, the Petitioner will need to satisfy the USCIS that they really need this new R-1 employee.  If you have only thirty people in your church, and you already have a pastor, the USCIS will probably doubt that you really need this person.   The reason for this is that they are concerned that you don’t really intend to hire him and don’t have enough work for him, and that instead he will just go get a “secular” job while he is here on his R-1.

Well, that is an overview of what is required to be a petitioner.  I hope this is interesting and helpful.   There are more and more detailed aspects to these requirements.  Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consult an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

 

 

Expedited Citizenship for Missionaries

Don’t forget that there are special citizenship provisions for spouses of US missionaries.  It is much easier than many people realize.   It can be obtained with no required residence in the US.  You will need to get a green card first, but then, if you satisfy the requirements, you can immediately apply for citizenship.   This allows you to enter the US at any time with peace of mind.  Please let me know if you have any questions.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

 

What if you don’t have two years in the denomination as required for R-1 status?

As discussed previously, in order to qualify for an R-1, you need to have two years in the denomination immediately before the petition is filed.   A lot of people think that just means that they have been a member of the denomination for two years at some point in the past.   Actually, it needs to be the 24 months immediately before the petition is filed.  If the petition is filed in October 2017, you need to have been a member of the denomination from October 2015 until October 2017.

What does it mean to be a member of a denomination?  The first question is, “What is a denomination?”.   The USCIS purposely left this a vague definition.  It can be a regular denomination, like the Presbyterian Ch-rch in America or the United Methodist Ch-rch.   It can be a single ch-rch.   I have successfully done R-1s where the membership has been with a r-ligious employer or a m-ssion organization.   In many of these cases, the R-1 job applicant was with the denomination or ch-rch or m-ssion organization for two years.    But, what if he was not with that specific denomination or ch-rch for two years, what can be done?

As I said, the definition of “denomination” was left loose to accommodate this situation.   The law was written to help m-ssionaries come here.   The authors of the law were aware that there are many non-denominational ch-rches or organizations that send or bring m-ssionaries to the US.  And, even if it is a standard denomination, the foreign denomination might not be actually associated with the US denomination.   For example, there are foreign Presbyterian churches which are part of a US Presbyterian denomination.   But there are also foreign Presbyterian denominations which are similar, but not connected with, a US denomination.   What do you do there?

What you do is look at the similarities.   Is there a similar statement of faith?   Is the w-rship style similar?  Is the ch-rch government similar?  Do the two organizations (the one in the US and the one abroad) have previously established connections?  All of these things can be used to show that, although the two ch-rches/denominations are not really one denomination, they are close enough that, for the purposes of immigration law, they can be viewed as one denomination.

It is important to understand that we are not trying to do something deceitful.   We are not trying to create a “denomination” where there is not one.    I have had people in m-ssion organizations or non-denominational/independent ch-rches protest that they are “not a denomination”.  And, it is true, they are not.     But this is “law”.   We are not trying to pretend that they are a denomination.   We are trying to fit them into a legal definition that was intentionally written broadly to intentionally include m-ssion organizations and independent non-denominational ch-rches.

The other question is, what does it mean to be a member.  This can be a tough question.   I generally read it to mean “affiliated” with.    Many ch-rches no longer keep a specific membership roll.   The USCIS seems to understand this and rarely requests a membership roll.    But there needs to be some real ties to the organization, or it will be difficult to satisfy this requirement.   As long as the p-stor is willing to write a letter affirming membership for two years, the USCIS is generally willing to accept this.  But, one or two contacts over the past two years does not constitute membership.   In my opinion, there needs to be regular contact and participation to support the claim that you have been a member.

If you have two years (the past 24 months) of membership in one ch-rch or denomination or m-ssion organization, or if you can establish that, over the past 24 months you were a member of two or more than one groups which can be shown to fit the definition of “denomination”, then you can potentially qualify for an R-1 (provided, of course, that all the other requirements are also filled).

I will add one last thing.   Although the “denomination” definition is broad, it is no guarantee that the USCIS will accept the “denomination” that you are proposing.  I have never had the USCIS refuse to accept a denomination that I proposed, but, often, they did ask for significant evidence that there really were genuine similarities/ties between the two different ch-rches/organizations.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

 

What is R-ligious Work for an R-1?

Two weeks ago on this blog I gave an overview of the requirements for obtaining R-1 status.    In regard to the work to be performed, I stated the following:

The job itself has to be r-ligious.  For example, you probably will not be able to get an R-1 to be an accountant, even if you will be serving at a ch-rch.  On the other hand, you need to look at the essential characteristics of the job — I have obtained R status for gardeners and auto-mechanics, because they weren’t really gardeners and auto-mechanics — they were people who were using their gardening and work as auto-mechanics to disciple younger believers.  And discipleship is a r-ligious activity.

Today I wanted to elaborate on this idea.   The regulations relating to this subject are quite complex — although sometimes complexity just creates more opportunity.   The first requirement is that the position itself be viewed by the petitioning denomination (which can be just one ch-rch or one r-ligious organization) as a r-ligious occupation.   In other words, it is not enough that a ch-rch wants to hire someone, they have to view that position as “religious”.   So, normally, it would be impossible to get an R visa for an accountant or a gardener or janitor.   These are not normally viewed as r-ligious, and, in fact, are specifically excluded by the regulations.  I have clients tell me that they have been told by other attorneys that teachers cannot get R status, or, for example, a ch-rch musician cannot get R status.  You will hear that only p-stors and m-ssionaries can get R status, but that is not true.    In my opinion, it is even possible to get R status for a janitor, or, perhaps, even an accountant or secretary or computer technician, but, only under certain circumstances.

The key is, what is the position, and how is it viewed by the petitioning organization.  A p-stor or regular m-ssionary is easy.  A w-rship leader or musician or teacher is still quite workable, but you need to show that the ch-rch or petitioner views those positions as inherently r-ligious — that the ch-rch created those positions with an intent to advance its r-ligious purpose.  Now, you can’t get an R visa for an accountant or computer geek or janitor. But, think about a monastery where the monks spend their time doing manual labor.  They probably satisfy this part of the requirement for an R visa.  Why?  Because they are not manual laborers; they are monks who do manual labor.   I think that there is a reasonable chance that a monk could satisfy this part of the requirements for an R visa even if he did computer work or janitorial work — because, again, he would not be a computer geek or janitor, he would be a monk who did those things.

But there is a second part of the requirement that also needs to be fulfilled, and, in my opinion, this second part, although it is limiting, gives a lot of room for imaginative arguments.   Not only does the position need to be a “r-ligious” position, as we just discussed, but the work itself also needs to be “r-ligious”.   Let’s take a teacher.   Even if the church views it as a “r-ligious” position, if she is just teaching math, then it will not satisfy the requirements for R status.   But, if she is expected to take time to pr-y with the students and to talk with them about G-d and the B-ble, and if she uses the study of math to talk about how G-d is a G-d or order, and things like that, then you have a good argument that the work itself is r-ligious.    You can’t get an R visa to be a janitor.   But if you are a sp-ritual mentor who uses a mop and a scrub brush as a means to teach young b-lievers how to honor G-d with their work, you could qualify for an R visa.    I think it is even possible that such things as being an accountant or a computer geek could qualify if you could show that what you were doing was a ministry, or, like a monk, an act of worship.   But, I will be honest, you will have an uphill battle with those two types of service.  They are different because, at least it seems to me, the work mostly involves you and a computer screen — and it is harder to show how you really are ministering.   But even here, a well framed argument could work.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

 

R-ligious Worker Green Card Statute to Expire September 30, 3017

Once again we are at the place where we are looking at the possible expiration of the R-ligious Worker Green Card Statute.  Unless it is extended, it will expire on September 30, 2017.   PLEASE NOTE:  I am NOT talking about the R-1 program.  That will continue past September 30, 2017 without any problems.  Also, the R-ligious Worker Green Card Program for M-nisters will NOT expire on September 30.  The possible expiration will ONLY affect green card applicants who are NOT m-nisters.

If you already have your green card,this will not affect you.  But if you have applied for a green card and have not yet been approved, this could affect you.  If the statute is not extended, and if you have not received your final approval before September 30, 2017, then you will not receive your green card.  It is not enough to have your I-360 approved by September 30, 2017, you also need to complete the entire process.  If you are here in the United States, you need to have your I-360 approved and then file for and be approved for Adjustment of Status before September 30, 2017.  If you are outside of the United States, you need to have your I-360 approved and then file for an immigrant visa, have your interview and then enter the US with your immigrant visa before September 30, 2017.

On a more encouraging note, this has happened several times before, and it has always been extended.  However, as always, there is no guarantee.  So, if you have filed for a r-ligious worker green card, or if you believe that this program is beneficial to the advancement of the k-ngdom of G-d, then I encourage you to pr-y for G-d’s favor for this program.  I will try my best to keep you updated.  The last time this was extended, I got so busy that I never had time to tell people that it was extended.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.

Gunnar Armstrong

Requirements for obtaining R-1 Status in the U.S.

The R-1 is a temporary Visa/status that allows a r-ligious worker to come and work in the United States for up to five years.  There are a number of requirements to satisfy in order to obtain this visa.  These requirements relate to the petition, the petitioner, the job, and the beneficiary.

First off, the R-1 requires a petition.  You cannot simply go to a consulate and apply for an R-1 visa.  Also, the alien cannot file the petition, the petition can only be filed by the prospective employer.  Nothing specifically says that the employer needs to pay the filing fee, but I think it is best if the employer pays the fee.  Once the USCIS approves the petition, then the alien can go to a consulate and apply for an R visa.

The employer needs to be a r-ligious employer.  The employer doesn’t need to be a ch-rch, but it needs to be r-ligios and have r-ligious purposes.  The employer needs to have a 501c3 (Tax Exempt) letter from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in order to file a petition.  In the United States, a ch-rch can be tax exempt without getting a 501c3 letter, but the USCIS doesn’t care — they will not accept a petition if the employer doesn’t have that 501c3 letter.

The job itself has to be r-ligious.  For example, you probably will not be able to get an R-1 to be an accountant, even if you will be serving at a ch-rch.  On the other hand, you need to look at the essential characteristics of the job — I have obtained R status for gardeners and auto-mechanics, because they weren’t really gardeners and auto-mechanics — they were people who were using their gardening and work as auto-mechanics to disciple younger believers.  And discipleship is a r-ligious activity.

As the alien, you need to show that you have satisfied all of the requirements of the position — if the position requires a college degree, you need to show that you have a college degree.  Also, you need to show that you have been a member of the same denomination as the employer for the 24 months immediately preceding the filing of the petition.  Fortunately, the definition of denomination is open-ended, so that if you can show that you were a member of a ch-rch that was similar to the denomination of the employer, then that will often work.

Finally, this is the employment position.  There usually needs to be compensation paid or provided by the employer.  This could be actual salary, but it could also be room and board.  Sometimes the alien can be self-supported, but in order to do this the employer needs to show that they have a history of having self-supported workers in their m-nistry.

I hope this is interesting and helpful.   Remember that this is not legal advice.  It is just a summary of certain aspects of immigration law which may or may not apply to your situation.   I encourage you to consulate an attorney if you think any of this may apply to your situation.