Tricky immigration questions that can throw a lawyer off (2)

Tricky immigration questions that can throw a lawyer off (2) | Daily Tribune

Another potential tricky question involves the filing of a naturalization application.

In a different hypothetical scenario, let’s assume that the same lady lawyer is hanging out with friends at a local pub when, in the midst of a group conversation, a new male acquaintance suddenly blurts out:

“Hey, can I ask you something? I’ve been a green card holder for over five years now. Is it true that you need to be present in the US for at least half of the previous five years before you can apply for US citizenship?”

Before the lady lawyer could respond, her fiancé arrives and his sudden appearance distracts her from the conversation. However, she manages a quick reply before leaving the bar:

“Yes, that’s correct. Gotta go now.”

As it turns out, the new male acquaintance is a minor celebrity from the Philippines who has spent parts of the past five years traveling back and forth between the US and Manila to prop up his flailing showbiz career.

In one of his recent travels, however, the Filipino guy is forced to stay in Manila for over six months due to various professional commitments. To his surprise, his citizenship application is denied by reason of this prolonged US absence for failure to meet the five-year US residency requirement.

Notably, had their conversation been more extensive or had the question been more specific, the lady lawyer could have explained to him that a single continuous US absence of more than six months could break the continuity of residence for naturalization purposes despite being present in the US for over half of the preceding five-year period.

Let’s tweak the facts some more and assume that the Filipino guy asks the following question instead:

“Hi, I’m a green card holder and my wife is a US citizen. Is it true that if you’re married to a US citizen, you only need to wait three years to apply for US citizenship?”

Assuming once again that the lawyer is distracted by her fiancé’s sudden appearance, her hurried response is:

“Yup, that’s correct. Gotta go now.”

However, it turns out that the Filipino guy’s wife only became a US citizen eighteen months before. Since the law requires the American spouse to have been a US citizen for the entire three-year period preceding the filing of a naturalization application, the guy’s application is denied, and he blames the lady lawyer for giving him a “bad” advice.

‘Hi, I’m a green card holder and my wife is a US citizen. Is it true that if you’re married to a US citizen, you only need to wait three years to apply for US citizenship?’

Incidentally, even if the American spouse meets the three-year US citizenship requirement, if the Filipino guy has been married to the US spouse for less than three years, his application would still have been denied, because the law requires the applicant to have been married to the US citizen spouse for at least three years.

There are still a bunch of tricky immigration questions out there but the bottom line is: A lay person in need of a legal advice should avoid asking for a lawyer’s off-the-cuff opinion in a downtime environment because lawyers are not infallible human computers that are wired to run on 100 percent round-the-clock efficiency meter.

Indeed, a recent article from the American Bar Association (ABA) Journal expressly forewarns attorneys, especially the newer ones, from giving casual advice to friends and family members.

Not only can a binding attorney-client relationship inadvertently develop, the authors warn, but the attorney may end up “dabbling” in an unfamiliar area of the law to satisfy a friend or relative’s need for legal assistance.

As the article’s introductory note says, “It’s never going to go well.”