Entry into US as a Canadian Citizen after 10 year ban

[Q45]

@Hank Moody thanks for coming back with an update...always good to here success stories (even not so positive stories can help others). Other than what you do in Canada, what other specific questions did they ask for? Did you have to show proof of ties to Canada? If so, what? Did you show any paperwork regarding your previous immigration/travel to the US?

 

[Hank Moody]

I did not carry any documents to proof my ties with Canada other then Canadian passport. They asked me when did I leave US and did I attend my hearing I said no o left US before my hearing and it's been more then 10 years. They asked do u carry any other passport I said yes but it's not with me right now. Asked when did I get married. Why am I visiting US. I said just sightseeing.
They asked me to fill a declaration card and inspected my car. I was with my family so that was a bug plus too. Most of the time they were reading notes from there computer that's what I noticed and just typed few things.

@Hank Moody thanks for coming back with an update...always good to here success stories (even not so positive stories can help others). Other than what you do in Canada, what other specific questions did they ask for? Did you have to show proof of ties to Canada? If so, what? Did you show any paperwork regarding your previous immigration/travel to the US?

 

[Q45]

I did not carry any documents to proof my ties with Canada other then Canadian passport. They asked me when did I leave US and did I attend my hearing I said no o left US before my hearing and it's been more then 10 years. They asked do u carry any other passport I said yes but it's not with me right now. Asked when did I get married. Why am I visiting US. I said just sightseeing.
They asked me to fill a declaration card and inspected my car. I was with my family so that was a bug plus too. Most of the time they were reading notes from there computer that's what I noticed and just typed few things.

That's good to know. Thanks again for your response and all the best to you bud.

 

[John Rogers]

If you have 10 year ban, you need to apply for an I-192 application REGARDLESS of whether your ban is up or not. You committed an immigration offence. You cannot enter without "advance permission". If they do not think you need a waiver they can send you a " September letter" but it's more likely you will be a waiver applicant for life.

 

[newacct]

If you have 10 year ban, you need to apply for an I-192 application REGARDLESS of whether your ban is up or not. You committed an immigration offence. You cannot enter without "advance permission". If they do not think you need a waiver they can send you a " September letter" but it's more likely you will be a waiver applicant for life.

What legal basis do you have for this? If the ban is over, they are admissible; on what basis would they be denied entry? I-192 is a waiver; if you have no ban, you have nothing to "waive". I-192 specifically says it is for "inadmissible nonimmigrant aliens"; nothing on it says it can be filed for someone who is admissible.

 

[John Rogers]

What legal basis do you have for this? If the ban is over, they are admissible; on what basis would they be denied entry? I-192 is a waiver; if you have no ban, you have nothing to "waive". I-192 specifically says it is for "inadmissible nonimmigrant aliens"; nothing on it says it can be filed for someone who is admissible.

I do waivers every day in my office in Brampton. Its all I do, although we do pardons as well, I focus only on the Waivers. To the point where I even would go every Saturday to the Airport to assit people who are waiting in line to hand their waiver in. I have been doing waivers since 1996. I also live and work in Brampton. If you know anything about Brampton, it is a major address for much of Ontarios Indian community. overstays and smuggling people and people who went to the US and stayed illegally and then came to Canada and are now Canadian Citizens are a HUGE part of my market. I go by what I SEE every day. No one is getting a ban, then simply waiting until that ban is up, and going back to the United States without filing a waiver. NO ONE. Since Trump has been in office they are even being stricter on enforcing the full ban. It used to be that you could file after 5 years even if the ban was in place, but now they are enforcing the FULL ban in most cases.

Other changes under Trump
-Pearson Airport, not taking Waiver right now, only open Tuesdays for inquiries
-Sexually based offences, even if a waiver had been issued in the past, being denied
-waivers are either taking 90 days (85%) or MUCH longer if they need a secondary look. More than a year in some cases.
-When a waiver is rejected, no more detailed explanations of why. They are giving very little information on why the waiver is being rejected.
-The fee was increased to $930. Canadian Citizens handing the waiver in at a border point of entry (95% of applicants) pay $585 are exempted from the increase
-1-212 is now $930 and they are making more people file one than in the past.

This isn't information i have READ. This is information i KNOW. Show me all the people you know that are entering with no waivers because of their bans being completed. It is NOT happening.

 

[newacct]

I do waivers every day in my office in Brampton. Its all I do, although we do pardons as well, I focus only on the Waivers. To the point where I even would go every Saturday to the Airport to assit people who are waiting in line to hand their waiver in. I have been doing waivers since 1996. I also live and work in Brampton. If you know anything about Brampton, it is a major address for much of Ontarios Indian community. overstays and smuggling people and people who went to the US and stayed illegally and then came to Canada and are now Canadian Citizens are a HUGE part of my market. I go by what I SEE every day. No one is getting a ban, then simply waiting until that ban is up, and going back to the United States without filing a waiver. NO ONE. Since Trump has been in office they are even being stricter on enforcing the full ban. It used to be that you could file after 5 years even if the ban was in place, but now they are enforcing the FULL ban in most cases.

Other changes under Trump
-Pearson Airport, not taking Waiver right now, only open Tuesdays for inquiries
-Sexually based offences, even if a waiver had been issued in the past, being denied
-waivers are either taking 90 days (85%) or MUCH longer if they need a secondary look. More than a year in some cases.
-When a waiver is rejected, no more detailed explanations of why. They are giving very little information on why the waiver is being rejected.
-The fee was increased to $930. Canadian Citizens handing the waiver in at a border point of entry (95% of applicants) pay $585 are exempted from the increase
-1-212 is now $930 and they are making more people file one than in the past.

This isn't information i have READ. This is information i KNOW. Show me all the people you know that are entering with no waivers because of their bans being completed. It is NOT happening.

What bans are you talking about. You talk about "Sexually based offences", but the ban for crimes is a lifetime ban, which cannot be over. There are other lifetime bans like the ban for fraud or material misrepresentation, which cannot be over. It's possible you are talking about people who have multiple bans, e.g. a ban for being removed plus a ban for crimes, and one ban is over but the other isn't so that's why they need to apply for a waiver (because they still have a ban). There is no such thing as a "full" ban or "not full" ban. The length of a particular ban is specified in law. Different bans have different lengths.

 

[John Rogers]

When a ban is given, it was meant to restrict the ability to APPLY for readmission. A waiver is "advance permission to re-enter, as a non immigrant". A person who does ANY immigration offence, overstay, work without proper authorization etc, has committed an "Immigration offence". They then need a waiver. Sometimes, they are also given a ban, especially if they are caught trying to re-enter the United States. Sometimes its automatic. A client who was here to see me here today has a 20 year ban because "you were ordered removed from the United States on 2 separate occasions by an immigration judge". This is directly quoted from his paperwork. He will not be able to travel into the United States when the ban is over, because it says "relief can only be obtained by filing an I-212, application to reapply for admission". This makes it SEEM that once he does an i-212 at the end of his ban, he will be "off the hook". But in practice he will only get a waiver, and it will only be for a maximum of 5 years. Why would a shoplifter need waivers for the rest of their life....but a guy who overstayed for 5 years illegally just "wait out a ban" and then be free to travel to the United States? That is not how Homeland Security works.

 

[newacct]

When a ban is given, it was meant to restrict the ability to APPLY for readmission. A waiver is "advance permission to re-enter, as a non immigrant". A person who does ANY immigration offence, overstay, work without proper authorization etc, has committed an "Immigration offence". They then need a waiver. Sometimes, they are also given a ban, especially if they are caught trying to re-enter the United States. Sometimes its automatic. A client who was here to see me here today has a 20 year ban because "you were ordered removed from the United States on 2 separate occasions by an immigration judge". This is directly quoted from his paperwork. He will not be able to travel into the United States when the ban is over, because it says "relief can only be obtained by filing an I-212, application to reapply for admission". This makes it SEEM that once he does an i-212 at the end of his ban, he will be "off the hook". But in practice he will only get a waiver, and it will only be for a maximum of 5 years. Why would a shoplifter need waivers for the rest of their life....but a guy who overstayed for 5 years illegally just "wait out a ban" and then be free to travel to the United States? That is not how Homeland Security works.

We say someone has a "ban" if the law says they are inadmissible for a period of time. A ban is not "given". Nobody has the power to "give a ban". Only the law can make someone inadmissible when the conditions in the law are met by the facts. Someone who is removed upon arrival has a 5-year ban (20-years for a second time) not because anyone "gave" it, but rather because INA 212(a)(9)(A)(i) says "Arriving aliens.-Any alien who has been ordered removed under section 235(b)(1) or at the end of proceedings under section 240 initiated upon the alien's arrival in the United States and who again seeks admission within 5 years of the date of such removal (or within 20 years in the case of a second or subsequent removal or at any time in the case of an alien convicted of an aggravated felony) is inadmissible." It's the fact that the person was removed upon arrival that triggers the ban, not any "paperwork". The "paperwork" only indicates that the removal happened. (The judge does have the power to grant voluntary departure, in which case if the person complies then they are not counted as "remove", and thus does not trigger this particular ban, but again, that's not the judge having the power to "give a ban" or not. The ban arises from the law and the facts of whether there was a removal or not.)

Certain bans, namely INA 212(a)(9)(A) and INA 212(a)(9)(C), can be overcome with "permission to reapply" (I-212) rather than a waiver. This removes the ban completely, as provided by law. But this is unnecessary when the ban is over (in the case of 9A; 9C is lifetime). Neither is a waiver necessary. Nothing is necessary when the ban no longer exists. You are misreading the paperwork; the paperwork says "relief" as in relief from the ban, while the ban exists. You don't need "relief" when the ban is over, because there is no ban; there is nothing you need "relief" from. And in fact, you can't file I-192 or I-212 when the ban is over because you do not meet the eligibility conditions of the form; those are only for people who are "inadmissible" and you are not. In any case, what matters is what the law says, not "paperwork" which is not always written eloquently; the "paperwork" is not responsible for giving you legal advice. You are responsible for figuring out what applies in your case by reading the law yourself.

And yes, a guy who overstayed for 5 years illegally can ABSOLUTELY JUST wait out the 10-year ban and then not need a waiver to travel to the United States, if he has no other bans. That is EXACTLY how US law works. This is how it works for every non-Canadian nationality, and it is the same way it works for Canadians. Not needing a waiver doesn't mean they will be let in; most types of nonimmigrant statuses are subject to "immigrant intent", where the officer has discretion deny the person entry for failing to overcome the presumption of immigrant intent. But this is completely independent from needing a waiver for a ban. And denial for immigrant intent cannot be "waived", as it is not a ban. Even if you had a waiver, you can be denied for immigrant intent because it's a completely independent thing.

Non-Canadians need to apply for a visa for most cases. Non-Canadians applying for a nonimmigrant visa who are currently under a ban and who are denied only due to a ban have to go through a process to apply for a waiver from the consular officer, a long process that takes months. Non-Canadians applying for a nonimmigrant visa whose bans are over do not have to do anything about any waivers; their applications are adjudicated like any other applicant who has never had a ban. Are you telling me that Canadian citizens whose bans are over are treated WORSE than non-Canadians whose bans are over? That is absurd.

 

[John Rogers]

newacct for transparency, please tell us how many waivers you have ongoing, and how many you do weekly. I assume you are questioning my expertise because you have a lot of waiver experience, correct? This is my REAL name on my profile. My reputation is VERY important to me as almost all my business comes from referrals.

 

[SusieQQQ]

With a disclaimer that I personally know nothing about this, it interested me so I did some searching
The first 2 legal sites I tried said waiver only necessary to come back before ban period is up (or if have committed crimes etc /other reasons to be inadmissible)
I was sure I’ve seen a number of people here and VJ talk about re+entering after ban up, no waiver. First one I found - In the first half page on this thread are 2 people who just reentered after ban up, both from Canada, the only mention of a waiver again being if didn’t want to wait ban out https://forums.immigration.com/threads/entry-into-us-as-a-canadian-citizen-after-10-year-ban.312058/

Just because you do a waiver doesn’t mean you have to do a waiver... it’s just like some people arrive at tourist visa interviews with I134s. Just because they present them doesn’t mean they have to.. see many lawyers on these forums who convince people they have to do stuff so lawyers get the fees when they’re not actually necessary


...just my uninformed 2c ...

 

[Cthulhu_Reborn]

I agree with @newacct.

My understanding is, for strictly immigration violations, you can either be barred for: either 5, 10 or 20 years for removal (I-212), and/or 3 or 10 years due to unlawful presence (I-192 or 212(d)(3) for non-immigrants, or I-601 for immigrant visas). You can simply ride out these bars (whichever applies to your situation), and then be admissible again (though it doesn't mean you will be let back in, it would depend on whether the border guard is convinced that you would not overstay your welcome). It is also possible to be barred for life, if after being deported, you entered or attempt to reenter the country illegally.

You would need to file I-192 for life if you are barred due to misrepresentation or criminal convictions (or I-212 to waive deportation). Those would bar you for life. And sexual offences and people smuggling and document fraud would definitely get you a lifetime ban, but we are NOT talking about those kinds of offences.

It is conceivable that somebody might be removed upon arrival due to, say, misrepresentation of non-immigrant intent, in which case I-212 would be needed to waive the inadmissibility due to the expedited removal (during the first 5 years), and I-192 to waive the misrepresentation (which is for life). In such cases, the I-192 would be needed for life (because of the misrepresentation).

But if you only 'sin' is to overstay (or simple removal cases without any illegal attempt at re-entry), that would not result in a lifetime inadmissibility (again, just because you are not under any bar, it doesn't mean that CBP would simply let you back in as it is within their discretion to deny you entry).

 

[John Rogers]

When you do waivers for a living, here is how is ACTUALLY works. Also, when using "examples" please do not use people who posted in 2013. It has nothing to do with Donald Trumps America in 2018.

A person travels from Pakistan as a visitor, and visits family in the US. He then tries to adjust his status so he can stay. He overstays. He fails at status adjustment. Then then applies and gets permission to come to Canada. He leaves the United States, comes to Canada, eventually becomes a Canadian Citizen. One day, he takes his family to Buffalo. He gets stopped, and turned around. He is officially denied entry. He is told specifically, to file a waiver. Sometimes a ban was issued, especially if he was deported, but in many cases if he left voluntarily, he has no ban.

Client come to my office, referred by a friend, and I do a waiver. Before Trump, even with a ban, you could get a waiver as long as 5 years had elapsed. Since April 2017, bans are being enforced to the letter of the law.

Example 2, person has a ban, waits it out, and then tries to travel into the United States. He is denied entry, and told to do a waiver. If people Have a ban and wait it out, and then travel into the United States, I would not know. Everyone I see NEEDS a waiver because they are TOLD to do a waiver.

Do you think I am at the border intercepting people before they check and making them do unnecessary waivers? No. They come to me when they have been TOLD to do a waiver.

Looking things up online is not the same as actually SEEING the reality. I live and work in Brampton and almost 1/3 of my waivers are overstays with bans that have expired, and most of these people were born in India, Pakistan or Sri Lanka. Your suggestion would be that they should march back to Homeland Security and say "Cthulhu_Reborn" and "SusieQQQ" and "Newacct" all said I should be fine...look it up." You give advice with NO responsibility for the repercussions.

SusieQQQ you forget a certain reality about waivers, because you have no idea how they are processed. Processing a waiver means a Homeland Security officer does WORK. If you arrive at the border with a Waiver, they NEVER process it if the person does not need it. The problem we have is the opposite. A client who NEEDs it, but get a lazy Homeland Security officer who says "nah, your fine". We tell the client to please ask for something in WRITING. At that point, they sigh, then process the waiver.

Even if the officer process the waiver in error, Homeland Security would send a letter stating they do not NEED advance permission to enter. Clients are NOT getting this. They are getting a 5 year waiver.

While I appreciate the general suspicion you regard Immigration lawyers (I share the same view) I am not an Immigration lawyer. I run a company called Pardon and Waiver Experts, and I pride myself on being honest, reliable and upfront. Clients do not like to pay for something and turn up at the border just to be told, "you don''t need this". Thats how a reputation gets ruined. And thats why when I post, I use my REAL name. Unlike all of you keyboard research warriors, who are great at using google, but have never done an actual waiver.

 

[SusieQQQ]

Yup, just a keyboard warrior, ain’t the internet great?

Can you do us a favor as the expert in this - it will definitely settle the argument - we know everything in immigration is defined by law. Just quote us the section saying people with expired bans need to get waivers, I’m sure you know it by heart without even having to look it up if you do it all day every day, then it’s all settled?

 

[John Rogers]

Its not all settled. Show me where after 9/11 male Homeland Security had the right to search women wearing a full burqa just to humiliate her? Show me where shoplifting in Canada makes you inadmissible? Show me where "admitting that you smoked marijuana when you were 19 " allows Homeland security to deny you entry? These are all things that HAPPENED, to my clients. The actual way to settle this is that you produce all of these people who have bans but are simply crossing when their bans are up. Where are they? There must be THOUSANDS. Then my clients can rightly asked...why was I made to do a waiver, and they were not? Remember, they see me AFTER they are denied entry and TOLD not to come back without a waiver. They have committed an immigration offence. Why would the United States imply forgive them, with no official paperwork? The waiver is where they actually apologize, explain what they did, show proof that they have no intentions of overstaying again.

Why would Homeland Security assume that they would not simply overstay once again when their ban is up? Homeland Security is suddenly a big believer in rehabilitation?

You need to start talking to people who actually CROSS the border. Ask young males when they say they are flying to Colorado how the scrutiny ramps up because of legalized marijuana in that state. Its mind boggling that you think Homeland Security knows a person overstays and then simply says "ok...we believe in second chances so without ASKING permission,.....just come here whenever you want".

Did you know the Trump administration CUT Homeland Security funding for certain places? I do. I know where as well. Because I talk to people. Clients. Homeland Security officers, some who LIVE in Canada. None of that is on google. My JOB is to know these things, such as "why won't they take waivers anymore at Canada's busiest Airport?". Google that.

 

[SusieQQQ]

Its not all settled. Show me where after 9/11 male Homeland Security had the right to search women wearing a full burqa just to humiliate her? Show me where shoplifting in Canada makes you inadmissible? Show me where "admitting that you smoked marijuana when you were 19 " allows Homeland security to deny you entry? These are all things that HAPPENED, to my clients. The actual way to settle this is that you produce all of these people who have bans but are simply crossing when their bans are up. Where are they? There must be THOUSANDS. Then my clients can rightly asked...why was I made to do a waiver, and they were not? Remember, they see me AFTER they are denied entry and TOLD not to come back without a waiver. They have committed an immigration offence. Why would the United States imply forgive them, with no official paperwork? The waiver is where they actually apologize, explain what they did, show proof that they have no intentions of overstaying again.

Why would Homeland Security assume that they would not simply overstay once again when their ban is up? Homeland Security is suddenly a big believer in rehabilitation?

You need to start talking to people who actually CROSS the border. Ask young males when they say they are flying to Colorado how the scrutiny ramps up because of legalized marijuana in that state. Its mind boggling that you think Homeland Security knows a person overstays and then simply says "ok...we believe in second chances so without ASKING permission,.....just come here whenever you want".

Did you know the Trump administration CUT Homeland Security funding for certain places? I do. I know where as well. Because I talk to people. Clients. Homeland Security officers, some who LIVE in Canada. None of that is on google. My JOB is to know these things, such as "why won't they take waivers anymore at Canada's busiest Airport?". Google that.

Whether or not someone was searched to “humiliate” her is subjective.

There are indeed sections in law about criminal activity making you inadmissible, that is totally not in doubt, and anyone can easily look those up. Past drug including marijuana use being a problem has been documented for years as being one of those things very hard to overcome. And yes these all fall under criminal activity where everyone agrees legally that you need a waiver. So using these as examples does nothing to prove your case about people who have waited out their ban period.

And of course people going to or from states where marijuana is legal when it’s still a federal offense get more scrutiny, and you don’t even need to cross the border for that - it happens in the US as well when you cross state lines. More “traffic stops” etc... So that little anecdote doesn’t do anything to support your waiver argument. Actually it’s got nothing at all to do with it ....

People refused entry are refused under a section of the law. You are a specialist in this and don’t know what section these hordes of your clients are being sent to you under? Ok.....
If the needing vs not needing a waiver has changed under trump, as you claim to discredit earlier reports on here, either there is a section of law that wasn’t being enforced, or there is something new that they are following. All I’m asking is what this section is, simple question
Bottom line... Lots of defensive and even inflammatory statements and nothing in law. Sounds ripe for the current army of immigration rights lawyers who love taking up cases where DHS/CBP are overstepping their authority ...I wonder why they are nowhere to be seen...

 

[John Rogers]

Actually the bottom line is your admitting you have no practical experience. And your asking "Sounds ripe for the current army of immigration rights lawyers who love taking up cases where DHS/CBP are overstepping their authority ...I wonder why they are nowhere to be seen..." yet your posting in a forum under a pseudonym. Bit hypocritical right?

It very easy for you to write all this and do nothing. Canadians simply want to travel into the United States for vacations and holidays and to visit family. Many of these Canadians are born in places where Republicans are pretending they are the "bad guys". And you think they should look a uniformed officer in the face and say "no. I will not do a waiver. The law says you are wrong. Let me in NOW!" Why don't you do that if you feel so passionately about it? IN person. See what happens.

 

[Cthulhu_Reborn]

See post #61 of this thread by @Hank Moody

He left the country on April 2007 during removal proceedings, so his ban was over in April 2017. He successfully crossed the border on February 2018, long after Trump assumed presidency. If he wanted to cross the border before the ban was up, then he would've needed to file I-212 (and possibly I-192 as well for unlawful presence).

And I agree that, just because you don't need a waiver anymore, it doesn't mean that you would be let in.

CBP officers still have the discretion to deny you entry, and if you don't have strong ties to your country of origin or Canada, they can and will refuse you.

 

[John Rogers]

Remember in my thread where I said I saw a change in April 2017? This is before that. And "Hank Moody". We know nothing about Hank Moody. Is that his real name? What did he show at the border? What country is Hank Moody from? Was he born in Canada? Will he be accompanying my clients who are NOT getting in and were born in Pakistan so that he can make the case that Homeland Security is wrong and Hank Moody is right? People are being told to GO DO WAIVERS. BY HOMELAND SECURITY. What would you have these people DO?

 

[Sm1smom]

Remember in my thread where I said I saw a change in April 2017? This is before that. And "Hank Moody". We know nothing about Hank Moody. Is that his real name? What did he show at the border? What country is Hank Moody from? Was he born in Canada? Will he be accompanying my clients who are NOT getting in and were born in Pakistan so that he can make the case that Homeland Security is wrong and Hank Moody is right? People are being told to GO DO WAIVERS. BY HOMELAND SECURITY. What would you have these people DO?

Okay, I think some time out is required here. This specific thread IS NOT about your clients. You need to stop being rude and disparaging forum members on the basis of not using their real name - that is what a typical forum is about!