Immigration officials put couples to the test

By Timothy Pratt (contact)

Tuesday, Dec. 19, 2006 | 7:05 a.m.

Quick: If you're married, where did you and your spouse go on your third date?

If you and he, or she, were put in separate rooms and asked that question, would you come up with the same answer?

How about this one: If you walked into your bedroom right now, what color are the sheets?

These and dozens of questions are put to married couples every day at the local Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. Federal officials use the questions, together with paperwork and evidence such as photos, to determine whether marriages between U.S. citizens and immigrants are legitimate or a fraud.

Over the past year, the number of local marriages declared fraudulent has nearly doubled. From their respective positions on opposite sides of the process, local immigration attorneys and federal officials differ as to why.

Robert Okin, district director for the Las Vegas immigration agency, said the local office denied 64 applications because of fraud in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30, about twice as many as the year before.

The attorneys say, in a change in policy and procedure, interviews with the couples in recent months have gone from 15-minute affairs to hourslong marathons. Husbands and wives are separated more often for questioning, they say, and officials sometimes offer the option of withdrawing applications - or facing criminal investigation.

But Okin argues that the combination of Las Vegas being "the marriage capital of the world" and America's tightened borders make immigrants more desperate to attempt such things as paying for an arranged marriage.

In other words, there's more fraud.

While the number denied because of fraud is less than 1.5 percent of the roughly 4,700 applications last year, the change is noteworthy, said Peter Ashman, a local attorney and past president of the local chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association.

Ashman said, until recently, he could recall only two occasions in the past 15 years in which couples were separated for their interviews. In the last three months, however, Ashman said he has had at least 10 couples go through separate interviews.

Ashman said the apparent increased focus on possible fraud is a good thing.

"We don't want anyone ripping off the system," he said.

But he said he is concerned that some interviewers who suspect fraud suggest that applicants withdraw their applications to avoid facing investigation.

"It seems they are trying to force them (the applicants) into a decision they're not willing to make, under the threat of criminal prosecution," Ashman said.

Similarly, Julia Osborne, another local immigration lawyer, said she has seen interviews take longer in recent months, and that appointments for interviews are being granted more quickly than in the past - about six weeks after applying, instead of the three months or more it often took in the past.

The quickened response time, while a boost in efficiency, may have an unintended consequence, because couples who have been together for a short time may find it more difficult to prove that their marriage is real, Osborne said.

For example, an immigrant spouse might not have obtained his or her work authorization from the federal government, and therefore wouldn't have a Social Security number. So he or she might not have opened a joint bank account or done any other business with the spouse.

Or, their shared memories may not be as firm as those of a couple with more time together.

"Getting-to-know-you types of things may not have happened," Osborne said.

She recalled one interview in which the man said he had not met his wife's sister-in-law, but the wife said he had. It turns out that the family member in question was at an event, but they had not spent time looking at photos together or talking about the occasion. Hubby simply forgot the meeting.

Sometimes, Osborne said, such interviews are rescheduled, and the couple have to return with more evidence proving the authenticity of their marriage.

Okin said he doesn't think the changes should lead to inaccurate rulings, however.

"A trained adjudicator can look at the facts and determine whether the benefit can be granted, denied or whether it's necessary to schedule another interview," he said.

In any case, Osborne finds herself taking more time to prepare couples for what can be a grueling interview.

"I tell them, 'Don't be upset, don't be nervous - this is the way everyone is treated.' "