Adam Walsh Act and Family Immigration
The Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act is intended to protect children under the age of 18 from crimes committed by sexual predators who are United States citizens or permanent residents.
The act is distinguished from the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA) as it can bar petitioners convicted of "any specified offense against a minor" from obtaining a family based visa for any person, whether a minor or an adult.
IMBRA pivots primarily on K- Fiancee Visa Petitions and K-3 Spousal Visa Petitions while the Adam Walsh Act turns on any of the family based immigration petitions, including the CR-1 and IR-1 petitions.
A "specified offense" against a minor in the Adam Walsh Act is enumerated as: Kidnapping or false imprisonment except by a parent or guardian Solicitation of Sexual Conduct Use in a sexual performance Video voyeurism Possession, production or distribution of child pornography Criminal sexual misconduct involving a minor, or using the internet to facilitate or attempt such conduct As state, federal and international laws might identify the above offenses differently, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service examines the elements of each "specific offense" to determine if they are substantially similar to the above offenses.
When an investigation of a petitioner shows that he has been convicted of a "specified offense" he will be required to supply certified copies of all appropriate law enforcement and court records while also being fingerprinted.
Should fingerprints and submitted materials reveal that the petitioner was not convicted of a "specified offense", a decision must be made on whether the petitioner poses a risk to the beneficiary.
It is the petitioner's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he does not pose a risk.
Should the decision be that the petitioner does pose a risk, the petition is required to be denied with the reason(s) for denial being set forth in writing.
Should the decision be that the petitioner poses no risk of harm,.
that decision is required to be affirmed by the U.
S.
Citizenship and Immigration Service.
In theory, due process procedures exist for a person accused or convicted of a "specified offense" to exhaust available administrative or judicial remedies, however, with the burden of proof being on the petitioner coupled with the anxiety and expense of protracted litigation, it appears as if there are no reported cases that have navigated their way far enough to provide guidance on USCIS affirmation.
It is prudent to retain the services of any experienced immigration attorney for purposes of any K or F Visa Petition.
The act is distinguished from the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act (IMBRA) as it can bar petitioners convicted of "any specified offense against a minor" from obtaining a family based visa for any person, whether a minor or an adult.
IMBRA pivots primarily on K- Fiancee Visa Petitions and K-3 Spousal Visa Petitions while the Adam Walsh Act turns on any of the family based immigration petitions, including the CR-1 and IR-1 petitions.
A "specified offense" against a minor in the Adam Walsh Act is enumerated as: Kidnapping or false imprisonment except by a parent or guardian Solicitation of Sexual Conduct Use in a sexual performance Video voyeurism Possession, production or distribution of child pornography Criminal sexual misconduct involving a minor, or using the internet to facilitate or attempt such conduct As state, federal and international laws might identify the above offenses differently, the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service examines the elements of each "specific offense" to determine if they are substantially similar to the above offenses.
When an investigation of a petitioner shows that he has been convicted of a "specified offense" he will be required to supply certified copies of all appropriate law enforcement and court records while also being fingerprinted.
Should fingerprints and submitted materials reveal that the petitioner was not convicted of a "specified offense", a decision must be made on whether the petitioner poses a risk to the beneficiary.
It is the petitioner's burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he does not pose a risk.
Should the decision be that the petitioner does pose a risk, the petition is required to be denied with the reason(s) for denial being set forth in writing.
Should the decision be that the petitioner poses no risk of harm,.
that decision is required to be affirmed by the U.
S.
Citizenship and Immigration Service.
In theory, due process procedures exist for a person accused or convicted of a "specified offense" to exhaust available administrative or judicial remedies, however, with the burden of proof being on the petitioner coupled with the anxiety and expense of protracted litigation, it appears as if there are no reported cases that have navigated their way far enough to provide guidance on USCIS affirmation.
It is prudent to retain the services of any experienced immigration attorney for purposes of any K or F Visa Petition.
Source...