In April of 2012, the INS issued a proposed regulation that would limit the authorized stay in the US for most pleasure visitors to 30 days instead of the current six months most receive. There were a few exceptions spelled out in the rule, but they do not come anywhere close to addressing the problems that the new rule will likely cause.
Upon entry to the US, it will be the visitor’s responsibility to prove to the satisfaction of the INS inspector the amount of time they should be admitted to the US. The burden of demonstrating entitlement to an extension will also be heightened. The regulation allows for extension applications, but only if one of the following is present:
- unexpected events or compelling humanitarian reasons
- members of religious denominations in the US solely to perform missionary work
- people engaged in establishing a new office for purposes of an L visa
- servants of people authorized to be in the US
- employees of foreign airlines
- those who own homes in the US that they occupy on a seasonal or occasional basis
This list does not cover even a fraction of the legitimate reasons a person would need to remain in the US for an extended period of time.
For example, many people here on work visas bring their parents to the US for extended visits, particularly if the parents are elderly. Similarly, a nonimmigrant worker might have a family member who they care for, but who does not qualify for a derivative visa. While the rule makes an exception for people who own property in the US, there is no similar exception for people who spend routinely spend significant amounts of time in the US without property ownership.
The regulation also fails to take into consideration many State Department memos on activities that can be done while on a visitor visa. The State Department has long maintained, for example, that domestic partners of people in working in the US are entitled to remain in the US in B status for as long as their companion is lawfully in the US. The impact of the new INS regulation on State Department decisions such as this is unclear.