You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Traffic tickets and naturalization (threads merged)
- Thread starter patel789
- Start date
Personally, I don't know any of the posters on this board and would rather follow N-400 guidelines than what "people say". People can say and post anything. But what matters is what N-400 instructions demand of applicant. Instructions clearly demand disclosure of all citations, regardless of fine amount or how minor. What it does NOT require is documentation of disposition if fine is less than $500 and no arrest was made. "No need to submit a document" is not the same as "No need to disclose the citation".
Why should I now listen to you and others and fail to disclose the ticket information? Which one of you will overrule USCIS and order it to issue me Certificate of Naturalization if IO rules against applicant "for lack of good moral character in lying to IO and not disclosing a driving 1 mile above speed limit" ticket?
The fact is you can't do squat if I follow your "advise" in violation of N-400 instructions.
This applies to all readers. Of course, everyone can chose what they wish to do, including jumping under the middle of the upcoming train in hopes it won't chop them off. If someone consciously decides to get themselves into trouble and put on harms way, that's the choice they make.
But I am categorically against not warning readers and advising them, instead, to recklessly ignore the instructions on N-400 and test ones' luck on interview date. What for? Why are you setting up the others for a failure? If unwittingly, then read about it and think twice before posting next time. If purposefully, then you deserve to be banned from here. Innocent people may get burned , banned for 5 years and even stripped of Citizenship in future for things that seem petty yet are serious matters in the eyes of immigration authorities.
Don't just listen to me, I will post what others have experienced and wrote in this regard , one or few quotes and links at the time.
==============================
JohnnyCash
Nowhere on naturalization guide and instructions on N-400 it state about not to disclose a traffic ticket...Read very carefully, nowhere it states that applicants don't need to disclose traffic tickets regardless those tickets were under $500 or not, or whether there was an arrest or not as a result of those traffic violations...Nowhere...Instead, it's VERY clearly stated everywhere that ALL citations MUST need to be reported. Traffic tickets are citations. So they MUST be reported no matter what.
Actually what USCIS has stated on naturalization guide and N-400 instructions about traffic tickets is not submitting documentations if fine on those tickets was under $500. Not submitting documentation about those traffic tickets are not same like not disclosing them, and that's what people are not understanding. It could be because they have some fear to get a denial or delaying...Besides, all people care about is just to get naturalized as soon as possible and without disclosing anything if it's possible. Those who have had criminal history then they have no choice just to disclose it because they know FBI background checks will reveal their history anyway; otherwise believe me people will not reveal that one too...trust me...
Just because some "immigration officers" and immigration attorneys have said their PERSONAL OPINION of not disclosing it..people are taking those personal opinion on the face value...even though they know that "immigration officers" over the phone don't know nothing about immigration laws and they are just high school graduate people who give wrong information 96% of the time. And immigration lawyers are well known to mess up the cases by their wrong information.
Also, some people have said that some immigration officers at their interview told them that traffic tickets are not a big deal...and don't need to be reported...But people should think hard that if traffic tickets are not a big deal and if these tickets don't need to be reported then why USCIS haven't changed their instructions on N-400 and on naturalization guide about disclosing all citations...and why many applicants were drilled and even denied because of traffic tickets...And even though there are some courts cases out there wherein it's noted that traffic tickets alone cannot be the reason to deny a citizenship application, but then there are many cases as well wherein courts denied the appeal from those whose citizenship application was denied because of traffic tickets.
By the way, denial of an application based on traffic tickets is one thing, but deny the application or revoking the citizenship in the future on not mentioning everything what it's asked on the application truthfully under Oath and Penalty of perjury is another. I understand having some traffic tickets might not make an application to be denied, but not being truthful about them on the application (as they are citiations) as it's required on the application will very much a ground to revoke the citizenship in the future. USCIS is not saying that it's up to people to decide what they should disclose or what they shouldn't when it comes to traffic tickets; rather they have clearly stated that all citations must be reported. But people are deciding by their own as to whether or not they should disclose traffic tickets, or whether or not disclosing a traffic ticket is worthy for USCIS' attention or its impact on citizenship application...To me, let the USCIS to decide whether traffic tickets would impact an application or not...I would follow what USCIS has stated about it on their instructions than deciding anything on it by my own...as if I'm the judge and I'm the jury on this issue...
I know some people might say that noone could be deported for having some traffic tickets and for not reporting them, but they know nothing. Govt. has revoked and deported, and will revoke and deport anyone who concealed and misrpresented a material fact on the application...I've seen more than thousands of times...And always remember, whenever govt. wants to find a dirt on someone for a reason, they would try anything and everything...believe me...So I personally wouldn't be an advocate on traffic tickets by myself as to whether it's a big deal or not, or whether tickets should be reported or not...I rather play by the rules than risking my and my loved one's immigration life in the future....
Below is the instruction to read what USCIS is saying there....
"Note that unless a traffic incident was alcohol or drug related, you do not need to submit documentation for traffic fines and incidents that did not involve an actual arrest if the only penalty was a fine less than $500 and/or points on your driver’s license."
==============================
JohnnyCash
I personally always believe in following the instructions than making a decision by my own.
Yes, it's true that most people do get paranoid about traffic tickets in context to citizenship application, but then they get paranoid on everything that seems unclear to them...not only on traffic tickets issue. I honestly don't see any reason for them to get paranoid because instructions are very clear...in black & white..on the naturalization guide and on N-400 that all citations must be reported. Period. In my opinion, they make this issue as a very big deal and a complex one and get paranoid because they just simply don't seem to comprehend/understand what is written in a simple English on naturalization guide and on the N-400 about reporting/disclosing all citations.
Actually, they don't seem to comprehend/read well that instructions are saying only not to submit documentation if traffic tickets were less than $500 in fine, but nowhere on instructions it states not to disclose a ciation. To these people, not submitting documentation is same like not disclosing of traffic tickets. So it's a matter of their understanding/comprehension and most probably their reading ability of a simple English, if you ask me. Also, these people listen too much to other people on this issue even though they know what USCIS has instructed on their naturalization guide and on N-400. Plus, these people are deciding by their own as to whether or not to disclose traffic tickets, or whether or not disclosing traffic tickets would impact their application in any way...based upon other people's case..which makes them to completely ignore what USCIS has instructed on N-400.
To be honest to you, these people are paranoid and don't want to disclose this issue is actually for their own reasons. These people are worried to get denied because they don't have a proof of paying to those tickets, and even though they might have paid those tickets and have proof; they are so afraid of their case to be delayed or probably they are afraid of denial. That's why this issue drives them crazy and they get paranoid...and that's why they try to argue with people who don't rubberstamp their thoughts/views on this issue by giving all sort of answering and links. I've been here for so long to witness this. Because of this reason alone, the most helpful and knowledgeable person from this site was banned. He was the most knowledgeable person I've come acorss over the years in all the immigration sites I've been involved to. Plus, he was really a helpful and passionate person. He already had more than 10,000 postings until two years ago. Never involved in nonsense or irrelevant topics. His ID was ****. The people who made him banned were actually being helped by him in the beginning, but once those people's case got decided...they got involved in all sort of games on this site by talking nonsense issues and gang banging on him on this issue which led to racial slur and so on. His ban was the biggest loss to this site. He is now on another immigration site of lawyer Ron...
As for Newbie's case then it could be possible that officer might have a personal agenda, but cannot say for sure. Why? Because some officers see violation of traffic tickets differently. And then there are officers who don't like immigrants. But I can bet you that officer wouldn't be reprimanded because she made a decision that she thought was right. Remember, she has a discretionary power to decide on a situation which she thinks it's just? Maybe, other officer on Appeal might not think as she thought. I've seen cases which were initially got denied, but gotten approved on Appeal by another officer even though in some cases initial decision was right. For example, there was a case 2-3 ago about a guy who came here on a student visa but never ever put a step in the school. He right away started working and a few years later he met a US citizen...got married and adjusted his status...But during naturalization officer found out that he used student visa just to get into the country and never went to school even for a day. Officer rightfully denied his application by noting that he violated immigration laws by using non-immigrant visa for immigrant purpose. Secondly, officer noted that he lied to question number 23 (I guess) on the application wherein it states if applicant has ever lied to any immigration officer. The point is-just because another officer on appeal had reversed the denial then that doesn't mean the first officer's decision was wrong. As I said, the determination on a moral character is a very broad aspect of immigration laws.
As for your interview experience, then after the interview having traffic tickets doesn't impact the eligibility so long their wasn't any arrest. But I would still disclose that on my oath notice because oath notice does ask to disclose it. Why? Because when USCIS will try to revoke my citizenship in the future, if, even after many-many years later, then this officer wouldn't be there to testify in my favor to prove that she was the one who said not to disclose those tickets despite of what is stated on oath letter. There is no proof like video of what she said nor any written evidence from her that she made you not to disclose a traffic ticket in the back of oath letter. So, people wouldn't be able to defend themselves if ever case reopens. I personally play the game right and follow what's written in the book. I'm not saying that people who don't disclose traffic tickets will have their citizenship difinately be revoked now or in the future, but one can never say anything....believe me...I've seen this happening more than once...I'm not here to win any argument or make me look good; rather I'm saying what I know for sure. I can care less if people hate me and don't like what I say, but I always say what I know good for immigrants.
=============================
First off, this is NOT true at all that people weren't denied for not disclosing traffic tickets. People do get denial everyday for not disclosing ANYTHING that's being asked on the application. Just because people don't see/hear those denial over here, that doesn't mean there are not people who get denial for not disclosing what's asked on the application.
Secondly, not disclosing of traffic tickets is not just about traffic tickets so to think traffic tickets are petty matter; rather not disclosing of traffic tickets means not providing the full information on the application which is asked. Application for naturalization (N-400) does ask to disclose all citations....and traffic tickets are citations which must be reported regardless someone gets denied or not. Let USCIS make the decision whether it's petty matter or not, or whether it would impace the application or not than being a judge and jury by your own or deciding by your own what information should be submitted and what should be omitted. Just follow the instructions given on naturalization guide and on application form. Nowhere in there states that people don't need to disclose a citiation.
Thirdly, as I said earlier that if there are court cases to say that USCIS cannot deny the application because of traffic tickets then there are many court cases also there wherein courts have affirmed the decision made by USCIS to deny the applications because of traffic tickets. I did tell many times that immigration officers do have discretionary power to make a decision as it seems just to them. And officers have denied many applications to applicants who were involved in traffic violations many times. They had noted in their decision that they don't find applicants to be a person of good moral character in the fact of him/her being involved so many times in violation of our traffic laws. FYI, traffic laws are also laws of this country like IRS laws, and others. Violation of traffic laws is also a sign of disregard of laws. And Federal Appeal Courts agreed to it.
Fourth, don't intermingle two facts here. Disclosing of traffic tickets is one fact, and not disclosing them is another. Denial of an application because of traffic violations is one thing, while denial of an application or revoking of citizenship in the future is another. USCIS has and can deny an application and revoke the citizenship to anyone if they would know that applicant wasn't truthful in providing all the required information on the application under oath and penalty of perjury. Nowhere USCIS states not to disclose a citation. So if someone chooses not to disclose it, then s/he is concealing a fact and misrepresenting himself/herself on the application....a ground in itself to deny the application and revoking the citizenship regardless of whether traffic violations were serious or not to impact the decision on the application.
Fifth, there was a case in the court wherein a guy got naturalized in the court. He didn't disclose on his application that he was charged for defrauding someone (writing bad checks). He wasn't denied for this reason but for other reasons, but he admitted in the court about it and was able to get naturalized. USCIS got easy on him. See here about his case-
Link here
But then there are thousands of cases wherein USCIS has denied the citizenship application to those who didn't disclose a criminal history. Just becuase some cases have slipped under the radar, that doesn't mean other would let the case slip away too. Nor it can be said which decision was right. Again, not mentioning a material fact on the application will very much be a ground to revoke citizenship and deportation even though that information might not impact the application. Remember, people are under oath during the interview, and everything on the application is said under penalty of perjury.
All I'm saying is that nowhere it states not to disclose a citation...nowhere. Instead, what has been said is not submitting document to those tickets wherein fine was under $500. That means, all the citations must need to be reported. But unfortunately, people are becoming a judge and jury by their own by deciding what would impact the application and what wouldn't, and what should be reported and what shouldn't. They are making their own decision based upon what they hear from others and after seeing other people's cases that traffic tickets aren't a big matter because officers don't care...which is making them to completely ignore and disregard what is mentioned on instructions about disclosing all citations. If traffic tickets weren't big deal then why there are so many cases wherein people were denied?? Just because people have not heard of those denial, that doesn't mean those cases don't exist.
On the same toll, some people might become a judge and jury on disclosing their marital history, employment history and their association with some troubled groups, their criminal history...etc...to decide by their own what they should report and what they shouldn't...by being a judge and jury by their own...Again, I'm here up for following the instructions. If I'm asked to write down my name in full, then I will write down my name in full on the application than deciding to put it only in abbre....
=====================================================
JohnnyCash
Nowhere on naturalization guide and instructions on N-400 it state about not to disclose a traffic ticket...Read very carefully, nowhere it states that applicants don't need to disclose traffic tickets regardless those tickets were under $500 or not, or whether there was an arrest or not as a result of those traffic violations...Nowhere...Instead, it's VERY clearly stated everywhere that ALL citations MUST need to be reported. Traffic tickets are citations. So they MUST be reported no matter what.
Actually what USCIS has stated on naturalization guide and N-400 instructions about traffic tickets is not submitting documentations if fine on those tickets was under $500. Not submitting documentation about those traffic tickets are not same like not disclosing them, and that's what people are not understanding. It could be because they have some fear to get a denial or delaying...Besides, all people care about is just to get naturalized as soon as possible and without disclosing anything if it's possible. Those who have had criminal history then they have no choice just to disclose it because they know FBI background checks will reveal their history anyway; otherwise believe me people will not reveal that one too...trust me...
Just because some "immigration officers" and immigration attorneys have said their PERSONAL OPINION of not disclosing it..people are taking those personal opinion on the face value...even though they know that "immigration officers" over the phone don't know nothing about immigration laws and they are just high school graduate people who give wrong information 96% of the time. And immigration lawyers are well known to mess up the cases by their wrong information.
Also, some people have said that some immigration officers at their interview told them that traffic tickets are not a big deal...and don't need to be reported...But people should think hard that if traffic tickets are not a big deal and if these tickets don't need to be reported then why USCIS haven't changed their instructions on N-400 and on naturalization guide about disclosing all citations...and why many applicants were drilled and even denied because of traffic tickets...And even though there are some courts cases out there wherein it's noted that traffic tickets alone cannot be the reason to deny a citizenship application, but then there are many cases as well wherein courts denied the appeal from those whose citizenship application was denied because of traffic tickets.
By the way, denial of an application based on traffic tickets is one thing, but deny the application or revoking the citizenship in the future on not mentioning everything what it's asked on the application truthfully under Oath and Penalty of perjury is another. I understand having some traffic tickets might not make an application to be denied, but not being truthful about them on the application (as they are citiations) as it's required on the application will very much a ground to revoke the citizenship in the future. USCIS is not saying that it's up to people to decide what they should disclose or what they shouldn't when it comes to traffic tickets; rather they have clearly stated that all citations must be reported. But people are deciding by their own as to whether or not they should disclose traffic tickets, or whether or not disclosing a traffic ticket is worthy for USCIS' attention or its impact on citizenship application...To me, let the USCIS to decide whether traffic tickets would impact an application or not...I would follow what USCIS has stated about it on their instructions than deciding anything on it by my own...as if I'm the judge and I'm the jury on this issue...
I know some people might say that noone could be deported for having some traffic tickets and for not reporting them, but they know nothing. Govt. has revoked and deported, and will revoke and deport anyone who concealed and misrpresented a material fact on the application...I've seen more than thousands of times...And always remember, whenever govt. wants to find a dirt on someone for a reason, they would try anything and everything...believe me...So I personally wouldn't be an advocate on traffic tickets by myself as to whether it's a big deal or not, or whether tickets should be reported or not...I rather play by the rules than risking my and my loved one's immigration life in the future....
Below is the instruction to read what USCIS is saying there....
"Note that unless a traffic incident was alcohol or drug related, you do not need to submit documentation for traffic fines and incidents that did not involve an actual arrest if the only penalty was a fine less than $500 and/or points on your driver’s license."
Why should I now listen to you and others and fail to disclose the ticket information? Which one of you will overrule USCIS and order it to issue me Certificate of Naturalization if IO rules against applicant "for lack of good moral character in lying to IO and not disclosing a driving 1 mile above speed limit" ticket?
The fact is you can't do squat if I follow your "advise" in violation of N-400 instructions.
This applies to all readers. Of course, everyone can chose what they wish to do, including jumping under the middle of the upcoming train in hopes it won't chop them off. If someone consciously decides to get themselves into trouble and put on harms way, that's the choice they make.
But I am categorically against not warning readers and advising them, instead, to recklessly ignore the instructions on N-400 and test ones' luck on interview date. What for? Why are you setting up the others for a failure? If unwittingly, then read about it and think twice before posting next time. If purposefully, then you deserve to be banned from here. Innocent people may get burned , banned for 5 years and even stripped of Citizenship in future for things that seem petty yet are serious matters in the eyes of immigration authorities.
Don't just listen to me, I will post what others have experienced and wrote in this regard , one or few quotes and links at the time.
==============================
JohnnyCash
Nowhere on naturalization guide and instructions on N-400 it state about not to disclose a traffic ticket...Read very carefully, nowhere it states that applicants don't need to disclose traffic tickets regardless those tickets were under $500 or not, or whether there was an arrest or not as a result of those traffic violations...Nowhere...Instead, it's VERY clearly stated everywhere that ALL citations MUST need to be reported. Traffic tickets are citations. So they MUST be reported no matter what.
Actually what USCIS has stated on naturalization guide and N-400 instructions about traffic tickets is not submitting documentations if fine on those tickets was under $500. Not submitting documentation about those traffic tickets are not same like not disclosing them, and that's what people are not understanding. It could be because they have some fear to get a denial or delaying...Besides, all people care about is just to get naturalized as soon as possible and without disclosing anything if it's possible. Those who have had criminal history then they have no choice just to disclose it because they know FBI background checks will reveal their history anyway; otherwise believe me people will not reveal that one too...trust me...
Just because some "immigration officers" and immigration attorneys have said their PERSONAL OPINION of not disclosing it..people are taking those personal opinion on the face value...even though they know that "immigration officers" over the phone don't know nothing about immigration laws and they are just high school graduate people who give wrong information 96% of the time. And immigration lawyers are well known to mess up the cases by their wrong information.
Also, some people have said that some immigration officers at their interview told them that traffic tickets are not a big deal...and don't need to be reported...But people should think hard that if traffic tickets are not a big deal and if these tickets don't need to be reported then why USCIS haven't changed their instructions on N-400 and on naturalization guide about disclosing all citations...and why many applicants were drilled and even denied because of traffic tickets...And even though there are some courts cases out there wherein it's noted that traffic tickets alone cannot be the reason to deny a citizenship application, but then there are many cases as well wherein courts denied the appeal from those whose citizenship application was denied because of traffic tickets.
By the way, denial of an application based on traffic tickets is one thing, but deny the application or revoking the citizenship in the future on not mentioning everything what it's asked on the application truthfully under Oath and Penalty of perjury is another. I understand having some traffic tickets might not make an application to be denied, but not being truthful about them on the application (as they are citiations) as it's required on the application will very much a ground to revoke the citizenship in the future. USCIS is not saying that it's up to people to decide what they should disclose or what they shouldn't when it comes to traffic tickets; rather they have clearly stated that all citations must be reported. But people are deciding by their own as to whether or not they should disclose traffic tickets, or whether or not disclosing a traffic ticket is worthy for USCIS' attention or its impact on citizenship application...To me, let the USCIS to decide whether traffic tickets would impact an application or not...I would follow what USCIS has stated about it on their instructions than deciding anything on it by my own...as if I'm the judge and I'm the jury on this issue...
I know some people might say that noone could be deported for having some traffic tickets and for not reporting them, but they know nothing. Govt. has revoked and deported, and will revoke and deport anyone who concealed and misrpresented a material fact on the application...I've seen more than thousands of times...And always remember, whenever govt. wants to find a dirt on someone for a reason, they would try anything and everything...believe me...So I personally wouldn't be an advocate on traffic tickets by myself as to whether it's a big deal or not, or whether tickets should be reported or not...I rather play by the rules than risking my and my loved one's immigration life in the future....
Below is the instruction to read what USCIS is saying there....
"Note that unless a traffic incident was alcohol or drug related, you do not need to submit documentation for traffic fines and incidents that did not involve an actual arrest if the only penalty was a fine less than $500 and/or points on your driver’s license."
==============================
JohnnyCash
I personally always believe in following the instructions than making a decision by my own.
Yes, it's true that most people do get paranoid about traffic tickets in context to citizenship application, but then they get paranoid on everything that seems unclear to them...not only on traffic tickets issue. I honestly don't see any reason for them to get paranoid because instructions are very clear...in black & white..on the naturalization guide and on N-400 that all citations must be reported. Period. In my opinion, they make this issue as a very big deal and a complex one and get paranoid because they just simply don't seem to comprehend/understand what is written in a simple English on naturalization guide and on the N-400 about reporting/disclosing all citations.
Actually, they don't seem to comprehend/read well that instructions are saying only not to submit documentation if traffic tickets were less than $500 in fine, but nowhere on instructions it states not to disclose a ciation. To these people, not submitting documentation is same like not disclosing of traffic tickets. So it's a matter of their understanding/comprehension and most probably their reading ability of a simple English, if you ask me. Also, these people listen too much to other people on this issue even though they know what USCIS has instructed on their naturalization guide and on N-400. Plus, these people are deciding by their own as to whether or not to disclose traffic tickets, or whether or not disclosing traffic tickets would impact their application in any way...based upon other people's case..which makes them to completely ignore what USCIS has instructed on N-400.
To be honest to you, these people are paranoid and don't want to disclose this issue is actually for their own reasons. These people are worried to get denied because they don't have a proof of paying to those tickets, and even though they might have paid those tickets and have proof; they are so afraid of their case to be delayed or probably they are afraid of denial. That's why this issue drives them crazy and they get paranoid...and that's why they try to argue with people who don't rubberstamp their thoughts/views on this issue by giving all sort of answering and links. I've been here for so long to witness this. Because of this reason alone, the most helpful and knowledgeable person from this site was banned. He was the most knowledgeable person I've come acorss over the years in all the immigration sites I've been involved to. Plus, he was really a helpful and passionate person. He already had more than 10,000 postings until two years ago. Never involved in nonsense or irrelevant topics. His ID was ****. The people who made him banned were actually being helped by him in the beginning, but once those people's case got decided...they got involved in all sort of games on this site by talking nonsense issues and gang banging on him on this issue which led to racial slur and so on. His ban was the biggest loss to this site. He is now on another immigration site of lawyer Ron...
As for Newbie's case then it could be possible that officer might have a personal agenda, but cannot say for sure. Why? Because some officers see violation of traffic tickets differently. And then there are officers who don't like immigrants. But I can bet you that officer wouldn't be reprimanded because she made a decision that she thought was right. Remember, she has a discretionary power to decide on a situation which she thinks it's just? Maybe, other officer on Appeal might not think as she thought. I've seen cases which were initially got denied, but gotten approved on Appeal by another officer even though in some cases initial decision was right. For example, there was a case 2-3 ago about a guy who came here on a student visa but never ever put a step in the school. He right away started working and a few years later he met a US citizen...got married and adjusted his status...But during naturalization officer found out that he used student visa just to get into the country and never went to school even for a day. Officer rightfully denied his application by noting that he violated immigration laws by using non-immigrant visa for immigrant purpose. Secondly, officer noted that he lied to question number 23 (I guess) on the application wherein it states if applicant has ever lied to any immigration officer. The point is-just because another officer on appeal had reversed the denial then that doesn't mean the first officer's decision was wrong. As I said, the determination on a moral character is a very broad aspect of immigration laws.
As for your interview experience, then after the interview having traffic tickets doesn't impact the eligibility so long their wasn't any arrest. But I would still disclose that on my oath notice because oath notice does ask to disclose it. Why? Because when USCIS will try to revoke my citizenship in the future, if, even after many-many years later, then this officer wouldn't be there to testify in my favor to prove that she was the one who said not to disclose those tickets despite of what is stated on oath letter. There is no proof like video of what she said nor any written evidence from her that she made you not to disclose a traffic ticket in the back of oath letter. So, people wouldn't be able to defend themselves if ever case reopens. I personally play the game right and follow what's written in the book. I'm not saying that people who don't disclose traffic tickets will have their citizenship difinately be revoked now or in the future, but one can never say anything....believe me...I've seen this happening more than once...I'm not here to win any argument or make me look good; rather I'm saying what I know for sure. I can care less if people hate me and don't like what I say, but I always say what I know good for immigrants.
=============================
First off, this is NOT true at all that people weren't denied for not disclosing traffic tickets. People do get denial everyday for not disclosing ANYTHING that's being asked on the application. Just because people don't see/hear those denial over here, that doesn't mean there are not people who get denial for not disclosing what's asked on the application.
Secondly, not disclosing of traffic tickets is not just about traffic tickets so to think traffic tickets are petty matter; rather not disclosing of traffic tickets means not providing the full information on the application which is asked. Application for naturalization (N-400) does ask to disclose all citations....and traffic tickets are citations which must be reported regardless someone gets denied or not. Let USCIS make the decision whether it's petty matter or not, or whether it would impace the application or not than being a judge and jury by your own or deciding by your own what information should be submitted and what should be omitted. Just follow the instructions given on naturalization guide and on application form. Nowhere in there states that people don't need to disclose a citiation.
Thirdly, as I said earlier that if there are court cases to say that USCIS cannot deny the application because of traffic tickets then there are many court cases also there wherein courts have affirmed the decision made by USCIS to deny the applications because of traffic tickets. I did tell many times that immigration officers do have discretionary power to make a decision as it seems just to them. And officers have denied many applications to applicants who were involved in traffic violations many times. They had noted in their decision that they don't find applicants to be a person of good moral character in the fact of him/her being involved so many times in violation of our traffic laws. FYI, traffic laws are also laws of this country like IRS laws, and others. Violation of traffic laws is also a sign of disregard of laws. And Federal Appeal Courts agreed to it.
Fourth, don't intermingle two facts here. Disclosing of traffic tickets is one fact, and not disclosing them is another. Denial of an application because of traffic violations is one thing, while denial of an application or revoking of citizenship in the future is another. USCIS has and can deny an application and revoke the citizenship to anyone if they would know that applicant wasn't truthful in providing all the required information on the application under oath and penalty of perjury. Nowhere USCIS states not to disclose a citation. So if someone chooses not to disclose it, then s/he is concealing a fact and misrepresenting himself/herself on the application....a ground in itself to deny the application and revoking the citizenship regardless of whether traffic violations were serious or not to impact the decision on the application.
Fifth, there was a case in the court wherein a guy got naturalized in the court. He didn't disclose on his application that he was charged for defrauding someone (writing bad checks). He wasn't denied for this reason but for other reasons, but he admitted in the court about it and was able to get naturalized. USCIS got easy on him. See here about his case-
Link here
But then there are thousands of cases wherein USCIS has denied the citizenship application to those who didn't disclose a criminal history. Just becuase some cases have slipped under the radar, that doesn't mean other would let the case slip away too. Nor it can be said which decision was right. Again, not mentioning a material fact on the application will very much be a ground to revoke citizenship and deportation even though that information might not impact the application. Remember, people are under oath during the interview, and everything on the application is said under penalty of perjury.
All I'm saying is that nowhere it states not to disclose a citation...nowhere. Instead, what has been said is not submitting document to those tickets wherein fine was under $500. That means, all the citations must need to be reported. But unfortunately, people are becoming a judge and jury by their own by deciding what would impact the application and what wouldn't, and what should be reported and what shouldn't. They are making their own decision based upon what they hear from others and after seeing other people's cases that traffic tickets aren't a big matter because officers don't care...which is making them to completely ignore and disregard what is mentioned on instructions about disclosing all citations. If traffic tickets weren't big deal then why there are so many cases wherein people were denied?? Just because people have not heard of those denial, that doesn't mean those cases don't exist.
On the same toll, some people might become a judge and jury on disclosing their marital history, employment history and their association with some troubled groups, their criminal history...etc...to decide by their own what they should report and what they shouldn't...by being a judge and jury by their own...Again, I'm here up for following the instructions. If I'm asked to write down my name in full, then I will write down my name in full on the application than deciding to put it only in abbre....
=====================================================
JohnnyCash
Nowhere on naturalization guide and instructions on N-400 it state about not to disclose a traffic ticket...Read very carefully, nowhere it states that applicants don't need to disclose traffic tickets regardless those tickets were under $500 or not, or whether there was an arrest or not as a result of those traffic violations...Nowhere...Instead, it's VERY clearly stated everywhere that ALL citations MUST need to be reported. Traffic tickets are citations. So they MUST be reported no matter what.
Actually what USCIS has stated on naturalization guide and N-400 instructions about traffic tickets is not submitting documentations if fine on those tickets was under $500. Not submitting documentation about those traffic tickets are not same like not disclosing them, and that's what people are not understanding. It could be because they have some fear to get a denial or delaying...Besides, all people care about is just to get naturalized as soon as possible and without disclosing anything if it's possible. Those who have had criminal history then they have no choice just to disclose it because they know FBI background checks will reveal their history anyway; otherwise believe me people will not reveal that one too...trust me...
Just because some "immigration officers" and immigration attorneys have said their PERSONAL OPINION of not disclosing it..people are taking those personal opinion on the face value...even though they know that "immigration officers" over the phone don't know nothing about immigration laws and they are just high school graduate people who give wrong information 96% of the time. And immigration lawyers are well known to mess up the cases by their wrong information.
Also, some people have said that some immigration officers at their interview told them that traffic tickets are not a big deal...and don't need to be reported...But people should think hard that if traffic tickets are not a big deal and if these tickets don't need to be reported then why USCIS haven't changed their instructions on N-400 and on naturalization guide about disclosing all citations...and why many applicants were drilled and even denied because of traffic tickets...And even though there are some courts cases out there wherein it's noted that traffic tickets alone cannot be the reason to deny a citizenship application, but then there are many cases as well wherein courts denied the appeal from those whose citizenship application was denied because of traffic tickets.
By the way, denial of an application based on traffic tickets is one thing, but deny the application or revoking the citizenship in the future on not mentioning everything what it's asked on the application truthfully under Oath and Penalty of perjury is another. I understand having some traffic tickets might not make an application to be denied, but not being truthful about them on the application (as they are citiations) as it's required on the application will very much a ground to revoke the citizenship in the future. USCIS is not saying that it's up to people to decide what they should disclose or what they shouldn't when it comes to traffic tickets; rather they have clearly stated that all citations must be reported. But people are deciding by their own as to whether or not they should disclose traffic tickets, or whether or not disclosing a traffic ticket is worthy for USCIS' attention or its impact on citizenship application...To me, let the USCIS to decide whether traffic tickets would impact an application or not...I would follow what USCIS has stated about it on their instructions than deciding anything on it by my own...as if I'm the judge and I'm the jury on this issue...
I know some people might say that noone could be deported for having some traffic tickets and for not reporting them, but they know nothing. Govt. has revoked and deported, and will revoke and deport anyone who concealed and misrpresented a material fact on the application...I've seen more than thousands of times...And always remember, whenever govt. wants to find a dirt on someone for a reason, they would try anything and everything...believe me...So I personally wouldn't be an advocate on traffic tickets by myself as to whether it's a big deal or not, or whether tickets should be reported or not...I rather play by the rules than risking my and my loved one's immigration life in the future....
Below is the instruction to read what USCIS is saying there....
"Note that unless a traffic incident was alcohol or drug related, you do not need to submit documentation for traffic fines and incidents that did not involve an actual arrest if the only penalty was a fine less than $500 and/or points on your driver’s license."
Incognegro
Registered Users (C)
Why are you beating a dead horse? Isnt there a humougous sticky about this?(how about merging this thread mods)... You can either disclose tickets or not disclose, either way no big deal, I chose the later and i agree with bob the only thing you have to avoid doing is lying to the IO if he specifically asks. Friend of mine had had 6 tickets(5 moving violations) in a 3 yr period and had no issues, never even came up. Using Caps and exclamation points puts no emphasis on your rubbish post, unless your audience is children.
Here's an official USCIS document, posted on the USCIS website, that clearly states that minor traffic violations do not need to be reported (read the first section on page 60):
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About Us... Guide/Permanent_Residents_Naturalization.pdf
There was also a case where an applicant was denied for 4 minor traffic violations within an 8-year period, also due to poor moral character. He appealed the decision and successfully had it overturned. Search this forum for posts by nyc_newbie and stop it with the fear-mongering.
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/About Us... Guide/Permanent_Residents_Naturalization.pdf
There was also a case where an applicant was denied for 4 minor traffic violations within an 8-year period, also due to poor moral character. He appealed the decision and successfully had it overturned. Search this forum for posts by nyc_newbie and stop it with the fear-mongering.
Why are you beating a dead horse? Isnt there a humougous sticky about this?(how about merging this thread mods)... You can either disclose tickets or not disclose, either way no big deal, I chose the later and i agree with bob the only thing you have to avoid doing is lying to the IO if he specifically asks. Friend of mine had had 6 tickets(5 moving violations) in a 3 yr period and had no issues, never even came up. Using Caps and exclamation points puts no emphasis on your rubbish post, unless your audience is children.
I am not beating a dead horse, but I wonder why some posters suggesting people not to disclose their traffic citations when N-400 clearly states that you must do so.(what it does not ask for is proof of disposition, payment or, in short, documentation related to it - if - the citation didn't result in arrest, fine greater than $500 or wasn't drunk driving related).
The link you have posted , on Page 60, also clearly states that:
You must reveal any arrests, offenses and convictions even if a lawyer, judge or other person has said that you have no record and do not have to disclose the incidents.
Do you have a difficulty distinguishing between
A) Submitting a documentation for
and
B) Revealing (without documentation) all citations and offenses
???
Why are you setting people up for a failure?
Why are you beating a dead horse? Isnt there a humougous sticky about this?(how about merging this thread mods)... You can either disclose tickets or not disclose, either way no big deal, I chose the later and i agree with bob the only thing you have to avoid doing is lying to the IO if he specifically asks. Friend of mine had had 6 tickets(5 moving violations) in a 3 yr period and had no issues, never even came up. Using Caps and exclamation points puts no emphasis on your rubbish post, unless your audience is children.
I can't post links yet (must have 15 posts before allowed to) , but when I can I'll have numerous pages linked here (from forums, including this, with individually affected discussing their cases all the way to AILA CIS liaison meeting and expert attorneys advises posted on the net).
BTW, three of the posts I copy pasted above are Johnny Cash's (someone who has been on this forum long enough to see consequences).
How is it fear-mongering to tell people that they MUST follow the instructions on N-400 rather than hear-say and disclose all traffic citations or risk denial of application on "lack of moral grounds" , which comes with 5 year restriction to reapply? How is it fear-mongering to help people understand the wording of instruction (that while it does not require documentation on minor violation, there is nothing in the language of instruction that allows you not to reveal any and all of citations and offenses, regardless of how minor)?
It is appalling that some people reading your posts can actually fall for it and risk their application being denied and barred for 5 years from re-applying, while, had they simply followed the instructions on N-400, no such danger would be posed.
Call my post rubbish, I don't care if you like it or not, my goal is to make sure that the greater proportion of those who read it and are in process of applying for Citizenship realize what the instructions in plain English require of them and what the repercussions of not following USCIS guidelines and listening to hearsay could be.
I am not beating a dead horse, but I wonder why some posters suggesting people not to disclose their traffic citations when N-400 clearly states that you must do so.(what it does not ask for is proof of disposition, payment or, in short, documentation related to it - if - the citation didn't result in arrest, fine greater than $500 or wasn't drunk driving related).
The link you have posted , on Page 60, also clearly states that:
You must reveal any arrests, offenses and convictions even if a lawyer, judge or other person has said that you have no record and do not have to disclose the incidents.
Do you have a difficulty distinguishing between
A) Submitting a documentation for
and
B) Revealing (without documentation) all citations and offenses
???
Why are you setting people up for a failure?
Are you really that daft, or are you just pretending to be?
Here is the direct quote from the document:
"Except for minor traffic offenses that did not result in your arrest (and drunk driving is not considered a minor traffic offense), you should always reveal any arrest, whether or not charged, and any conviction, and whether or not the conviction has been expunged, sealed or vacated."
Does it really get any clearer than that??? I guess you still consider official documents "hear say".
I can't post links yet (must have 15 posts before allowed to) , but when I can I'll have numerous pages linked here (from forums, including this, with individually affected discussing their cases all the way to AILA CIS liaison meeting and expert attorneys advises posted on the net).
BTW, three of the posts I copy pasted above are Johnny Cash's (someone who has been on this forum long enough to see consequences).
How is it fear-mongering to tell people that they MUST follow the instructions on N-400 rather than hear-say and disclose all traffic citations or risk denial of application on "lack of moral grounds" , which comes with 5 year restriction to reapply? How is it fear-mongering to help people understand the wording of instruction (that while it does not require documentation on minor violation, there is nothing in the language of instruction that allows you not to reveal any and all of citations and offenses, regardless of how minor)?
It is appalling that some people reading your posts can actually fall for it and risk their application being denied and barred for 5 years from re-applying, while, had they simply followed the instructions on N-400, no such danger would be posed.
Call my post rubbish, I don't care if you like it or not, my goal is to make sure that the greater proportion of those who read it and are in process of applying for Citizenship realize what the instructions in plain English require of them and what the repercussions of not following USCIS guidelines and listening to hearsay could be.
I'd certainly be interested in seeing those links, particularly the one for the USCIS - AILA liaison meeting that you mention in one of your posts above. However, in the meantime, could you tell us the approximate dates of those links, both for the threads in this forum that you mention and for the USCIS -AILA thing? How recent are they? It is possible that the USCIS stance on these matters changed over time.
Are you really that daft, or are you just pretending to be?
Here is the direct quote from the document:
"Except for minor traffic offenses that did not result in your arrest (and drunk driving is not considered a minor traffic offense), you should always reveal any arrest, whether or not charged, and any conviction, and whether or not the conviction has been expunged, sealed or vacated."
Does it really get any clearer than that??? I guess you still consider official documents "hear say".
From N-400 application:
D.16 (Good moral character)
Have you ever been arrested, cited or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason.
No matter how you put it, traffic ticket is a citation and N-400 clearly asks to disclose ANY.
What part of ANY or the rest of the question you don't understand?
I'd certainly be interested in seeing those links, particularly the one for the USCIS - AILA liaison meeting that you mention in one of your posts above. However, in the meantime, could you tell us the approximate dates of those links, both for the threads in this forum that you mention and for the USCIS -AILA thing? How recent are they? It is possible that the USCIS stance on these matters changed over time.
For starters read few few posts of JohnnyCash I copy pasted above. He is the moderator who was long enough on this website to see all kind of cases and he seems to eloquently express his opinion on it. I tried to post a link to where he posted it, but had to remove it since can't post links until after 15 posts. You can try to copy a phrase or sentence from it (put it in quotes) and then paste it on Google search bar. Goodle will find the relevant forum and thread (it's on this forum) from where I copy pasted it.
Once I pass the 15 Psts I'll be able to copy-paste the links here and definitely will do so ( I just don't want to post for the sake of exceeding 15 ).
Incognegro
Registered Users (C)
*sigh*
From N-400 application:
D.16 (Good moral character)
Have you ever been arrested, cited or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason.
No matter how you put it, traffic ticket is a citation and N-400 clearly asks to disclose ANY.
What part of ANY or the rest of the question you don't understand?
OK, you're obviously daft.
When you fill out your application, make sure to disclose every parking ticket you've ever received. If you've ever let anyone borrow your car and they were issued a parking ticket, make sure you disclose those as well - since parking tickets are issued to the vehicle, the owner is the responsible party.
Ever been pulled over by a police officer and let go with a warning? Guess what? You've been detained! Better check "YES" to the appropriate question on the N-400. Ever pass through a DUI/seat belt checkpoint? Detained! Ever been through a secondary inspection at an airport? Detained! I hope you have records of everything, as I'm sure you'll be disclosing it all on the N-400!
Again, the document I linked to clearly states that minor traffic tickets that didn't result in an arrest should not be disclosed. Since you are having trouble comprehending that, I can't help you.
OK, you're obviously daft.
Calling me names doesn't validate your point nor proves mine wrong.
When you fill out your application, make sure to disclose every parking ticket you've ever received. If you've ever let anyone borrow your car and they were issued a parking ticket, make sure you disclose those as well - since parking tickets are issued to the vehicle, the owner is the responsible party.
But it does not ask to , it specifically asks if you ever were cited by law enforcement officer. If someone borrow my car they are the ones cited by law enforcement officer, N-400 does not ask whether a car you own was driven by anyone other than you who got cited while doing so. Parking tickets , as well, are issued to a car for being placed in wrong place , not to a person per se who owns it (even though the owner is monetarily liable for fines, the infraction is not considered the same as if one was cited in person for violation of law). Those tickets do not have the name of individual, only the Vin number (through which ownership and monetary responsibility determined), therefore do not count the same as citation by law enforcement officer where the individual is identified by the same as the culprit of infraction.
Ever been pulled over by a police officer and let go with a warning? Guess what? You've been detained! Better check "YES" to the appropriate question on the N-400.
No. Courts have ruled on this and mere traffic stop ,without formal restraining and "You are under arrest" warning, are not considered detainment .
Ever pass through a DUI/seat belt checkpoint? Detained! Ever been through a secondary inspection at an airport? Detained! I hope you have records of everything, as I'm sure you'll be disclosing it all on the N-400!
1. See above
2.Inspection in the course of accessing federal or secured private property is NOT a detainment nor is it an arrest (unless one is formally warned and placed under arrest as a result).
Again, the document I linked to clearly states that minor traffic tickets that didn't result in an arrest should not be disclosed. Since you are having trouble comprehending that, I can't help you.
And I have quoted another sentence, under the very same paragraph from which you quoted, where it clearly states You must reveal any arrests, offenses and convictions even if a lawyer, judge or other person has said that you have no record and do not have to disclose the incidents.
And , most importantly, N-400 application itself asks without any ambiguity under D.16 Have you ever been arrested, cited or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason.
What part of it you do not understand?
Last edited by a moderator:
Calling me names doesn't validate your point nor proves mine wrong.
But it does not ask to , it specifically asks if you ever were cited by law enforcement officer. If someone borrow my car they are the ones cited by law enforcement officer, N-400 does not ask whether a car you own was driven by anyone other than you who got cited while doing so. Parking tickets , as well, are issued to a car for being placed in wrong place , not to a person per se who owns it (even though the owner is monetarily liable for fines, the infraction is not considered the same as if one was cited in person for violation of law). Those tickets do not have the name of individual, only the Vin number (through which ownership and monetary responsibility determined), therefore do not count the same as citation by law enforcement officer where the individual is identified by the same as the culprit of infraction.
Wrong. A ticket is a ticket. You have a typical case of selective interpretetation. Either disclose everything or nothing. Since the owner is monetarily responsible for the ticket and will be pursued by the governing authority for the payment, he/she has been cited. End of story
No. Courts have ruled on this and mere traffic stop ,without formal restraining and "You are under arrest" warning, are not considered detainment .
Wrong again. Any time you are stopped by a police officer and are not free to go until you have been told so, you have been detained. Once you are told that you are under arrest, you are no longer detained, but arrested.
1. See above
2.Inspection in the course of accessing federal or secured private property is NOT a detainment nor is it an arrest (unless one is formally warned and placed under arrest as a result).
Again, arrest and detention are not the same things.
And I have quoted another sentence, under the very same paragraph from which you quoted, where it clearly states You must reveal any arrests, offenses and convictions even if a lawyer, judge or other person has said that you have no record and do not have to disclose the incidents.
And , most importantly, N-400 application itself asks without any ambiguity under D.16 Have you ever been arrested, cited or detained by any law enforcement officer (including USCIS or former INS and military officers) for any reason.
What part of it you do not understand?
There is actually plenty of ambiguity - a formal definition of citation is a document requesting the respondent's presence in court. Most traffic/parking tickets do not require court presence. Look it up on one of the websites for which you've been promising to provide the links all day.
There is actually plenty of ambiguity - a formal definition of citation is a document requesting the respondent's presence in court. Most traffic/parking tickets do not require court presence. Look it up on one of the websites for which you've been promising to provide the links all day.
Still can't post links, so I will copy-paste some articles for the most impatient, let's start with these two.
If you don't want to read whole article you can scroll down to highlighted and underlined parts.
===========================================================
From Lawyers dot com
Good Moral Character is Needed for Naturalization
According to the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), which is part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and, nearly 1.5 million foreign nationals applied for naturalization in 2007. That was a dramatic increase from the .5 million who applied in 2006.
An immigrant or foreign national can become a US citizen through the naturalization process. Generally, if you meet several requirements, you are granted citizenship. One of the requirements is that you have good moral character. There's no clear-cut definition of "good moral character," but there are some ways you can show that you have it. And you should know that there are times when there's no way you can show that you have good moral character for naturalization purposes.
What's "Good Moral Character?"
There's no easy definition of "good moral character." US courts have defined it to mean character that measures up to the standards of average citizens of the community where you live. In other words, your present and past actions and behavior are in line with that of your neighbors; you're generally a law-abiding, productive member of your community.
As a practical matter, it's better to explain what good moral character is by giving you examples of what's not good moral character. That's generally the approach taken by the US immigration laws, as well as the USCIS when it consider an immigrant's application for naturalization.
When you file an application for naturalization, the USCIS has the authority to ask about or investigate your activities during your entire life. The USCIS will definitely look at your behavior and conduct during the five-year period immediately before you file your application. If you're married to a US citizen at the time of your application, the good moral character review period is three years. For naturalization purposes, it may be determined that you don't have the required good moral character if, at the time of your application or during the last five years (or three years), you:
* Were convicted of any controlled substance law, except for a single offense of simple possession of 30 grams or less of marijuana
* Were imprisoned on a conviction and the prison term was 180 days or more
* Have convictions for two or more gambling offenses
* Were involved in prostitution
* Smuggled illegal aliens into the US
* Are or ever have been a habitual drunkard
* Are a male and you haven't registered with the US Selective Service Program when you were between the ages of 18 and 25
These are only some of the things that might show a lack of good moral character. You should check the immigration laws for other items the USCIS will look at.
Also, an immigrant absolutely can't establish good moral character and become a naturalized citizen if he's been convicted of:
* An aggravated felony after November 29, 1990. Aggravated felonies include crimes like drug trafficking and armed bank robbery, as well as many less serious crimes such as bribery, and counterfeiting or mutilating a passport
* Murder, regardless of when it happened
Proving Good Moral Character
If you have a "clean record" with no criminal convictions and are generally a law-abiding member of your neighborhood, showing that you have good moral character shouldn't be hard. The lack of a criminal record itself tends to show that you have good moral character. To help things, though, you may want to get letters from people like your neighbors, church pastor (or other religious leader), and employer vouching for your good character. Also, showing the USCIS copies of your tax returns will help show good character.
Honesty is very important. You need to tell the truth when answering questions on the application or when asked by USCIS personnel, especially about past problems with law enforcement. Don't make the mistake of thinking that a simple traffic ticket or a 20-year-old gambling conviction won't make a difference on your application. In the eyes of the USCIS, your intentional failure to tell it about such things is a clear indication that you don't have good moral character. This is so even if the withheld facts wouldn't have caused denial of your application.
For example, getting a speeding ticket isn't one of the grounds that show a lack of good moral character. However, if you don't tell USCIS about that ticket, it may lead to the denial of your application because your attempt to hide the truth, or your failure to be completely honest, shows a lack of good character.
Questions for Your Attorney
* I listed my prior theft conviction on my application for naturalization, and now the USCIS wants me to get a copy of my criminal record. My record's been sealed by the court. How can I get a copy?
* I was convicted 10 years ago of drug possession, but the conviction has been expunged from my record. Do I need to list that old conviction on my naturalization application?
* My application for naturalization was denied because I didn't tell the USCIS about how I was arrested two years ago when the police thought I was involved in car theft. It was a mistake, and I was let go after they caught the real thief. Can I appeal the denial of my application? Do I need a lawyer for the appeal? How much will it cost?
==========================================================
How to Report a Speeding Ticket on Immigration Form N 400
Jackie Whalen
In order to be eligible to naturalize as a United States citizen, you must have good moral character and be a law-abiding citizen. A mere speeding ticket will not deem you ineligible for citizenship, as long as you are not an habitual offender, but you must report the ticket on the N-400 Application for Citizenship. If your traffic offense involved drugs or alcohol, you must submit documentation of the disposition of the case, otherwise, a simple reporting of the ticket on the N-400 will suffice.
Difficulty:
Easy
Instructions
1.
* 1
Obtain the N-400 form from the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services website (see References). Type or use black or blue ink to fill out the N-400 form.
* 2
Go to Part 10 of the form. Part 10 is the Additional Questions section.
* 3
Go to Section D, Good Moral Character.
* 4
Go to Question 16 and check "Yes" because you were cited by a law enforcement official.
* 5
Complete the table underneath the question. Fill in why you were cited for the traffic violation, the date you received the ticket, the location you received the ticket, and the outcome, such as a fine or points added to your driving record.
===================================================
Last edited by a moderator:
It seems that this new guy is a troll. There is a very big thread made sticky about traffic tickets, and it has a poll. If he was a bit smarter, he would first read that entire thread (not an easy task, I admit) before opening this pathetic thread. The matter of traffic tickets was discussed over and over again with hundreds, if not thousands, of first-hand accounts from forum members; therefore, people here have some idea where this issue stands with respect to the USCIS and what consequences they should or should not expect for reporting or not reporting infraction citations. Before the OP came to the board, nobody advocated for/against reporting minor citations so vigorously and with so little regard for thousands of previous discussions that occurred here. Now, the new guy comes, open new (or so he thinks) thread, posts in caps, large and red fonts while pretending that he is the first one to invent the wheel.
It seems that this new guy is a troll. There is a very big thread made sticky about traffic tickets, and it has a poll. If he was a bit smarter, he would first read that entire thread (not an easy task, I admit) before opening this pathetic thread. The matter of traffic tickets was discussed over and over again with hundreds, if not thousands, of first-hand accounts from forum members; therefore, people here have some idea where this issue stands with respect to the USCIS and what consequences they should or should not expect for reporting or not reporting infraction citations. Before the OP came to the board, nobody advocated for/against reporting minor citations so vigorously and with so little regard for thousands of previous discussions that occurred here. Now, the new guy comes, open new (or so he thinks) thread, posts in caps, large and red fonts while pretending that he is the first one to invent the wheel.
1. Why am I a troll for suggesting people to follow the instructions and truthfully disclosing the facts inquired about in question, while those who insist on lying to and concealing a material fact from USCIS aren't?
2. I have created this thread after reading the post by dmx11 [posted July 24th 11:10PM, on a thread started by Zeel50 under the title of N-400 - Traffic Citations did not mentioned ]
I have created this thread on July 25th at :30PM.
May be you should look up the mirror before calling me a troll.
1. Why am I a troll for suggesting people to follow the instructions and truthfully disclosing the facts inquired about in question, while those who insist on lying to and concealing a material fact from USCIS aren't?
First and foremost, traffic tickets and other non-criminal violations/offenses are not material facts and the USCIS is not concerned with them. This has been made very clear by the plethora of interview and oath experiences posted on this forum. If, however, you consider them to be material facts, why do you insist that parking tickets and police stops/checkpoints don't need to be reported? Again, you exhibit is selective interpretation in it's purest form.
It seems that this new guy is a troll. There is a very big thread made sticky about traffic tickets, and it has a poll. If he was a bit smarter, he would first read that entire thread (not an easy task, I admit) before opening this pathetic thread. The matter of traffic tickets was discussed over and over again with hundreds, if not thousands, of first-hand accounts from forum members; therefore, people here have some idea where this issue stands with respect to the USCIS and what consequences they should or should not expect for reporting or not reporting infraction citations. Before the OP came to the board, nobody advocated for/against reporting minor citations so vigorously and with so little regard for thousands of previous discussions that occurred here. Now, the new guy comes, open new (or so he thinks) thread, posts in caps, large and red fonts while pretending that he is the first one to invent the wheel.
I think you're correct. A while back (over a year ago, I believe), there was a user named pintoo123, or something along those lines, who was equally as obnoxious about traffic tickets. He only posted a few times and disappeared.
It is undisputed that N-400 requires to reveal any citations ever issued to beneficiary by a law enforcement officer.
Your deliberate inducement and persistent insistence that applicants should lie to USCIS and conceal the fact asked about in N-400 is amazing, to say the least.
Why are you insisting that applicants for Citizenship lie to USCIS and risk denial of petition on lack of moral grounds? Why do you want to put potential applicants in the harms way? What is your intention in doing this?
Your deliberate inducement and persistent insistence that applicants should lie to USCIS and conceal the fact asked about in N-400 is amazing, to say the least.
Why are you insisting that applicants for Citizenship lie to USCIS and risk denial of petition on lack of moral grounds? Why do you want to put potential applicants in the harms way? What is your intention in doing this?