212 waiver, controlled substance

[hk33]

Hi!

I have read some good articles about the § 212 (h or d.. don't remember) in regards of waiving inadmissibly grounds relating to controlled substances.

I just have two questions; is § 212 used to waive inadmissibility for all kinds of visas, B1/B2 as well?

And; in the article, it shows that the "simple possession" part of INA is understood so that being under the influence and possession of paraphernalia is included. But, is two or more at the same time included? In an example where person A gets a fine for being in possession of less than 30 grams, and is also, at the time under the influence, is that also waivable under § 212 (h)? In the example person A gets one single fine for both things.


Best regards

[newacct]

You are talking about particular sections of law dealing with immigrant waivers for certain bans. Most bans have immigrant waivers, and the section of law that provides for the waiver varies from ban to ban, but the exact section is not important. Immigrant waivers are applied for with Form I-601 when you apply to immigrate.

However, you mention nonimmigrant visas like B1/B2. Nonimmigrant waivers are a whole different process (technically under INA 212(d)(3)(A), for almost all types of bans). Basically, if you get denied a nonimmigrant visa due only a ban (and not due to immigrant intent), the officer will inform you of how to apply for a waiver; there is no form involved.

[hk33]

Ok, thank you. So, basically the whole "simple possession of 30 grams or less" thing is for IV, not NIV?

Just wondering if "simple possession", seeing that the term also includes use and paraphernalia, includes one or more at the same time. But, seeing that I don't pursue an IV, it probably then isn't relevant?

[newacct]

Ok, thank you. So, basically the whole "simple possession of 30 grams or less" thing is for IV, not NIV?

Just wondering if "simple possession", seeing that the term also includes use and paraphernalia, includes one or more at the same time. But, seeing that I don't pursue an IV, it probably then isn't relevant?

Yes, those are part of the conditions for an immigrant waiver of that ban, not for the nonimmigrant waiver.

[hk33]

Yes, those are part of the conditions for an immigrant waiver of that ban, not for the nonimmigrant waiver.

Ahh, ok. Thank you!

Everything seems so much clearer now. So in short, the waiver for NIV can be for (in example) both use and possession of, lets say 50 grams of heroin, in theory, seeing that the criteria (set in stone) for IV doesn't apply.

So, the ARO determines the waiver for NIV based on the three criteria set in Hranka-case.

[hk33]

And, one more thing; I have read some articles about the waiver, suggesting that if you received a fine, you might not need one. And, seeing that my case is kind of special, I just want to make sure that I actually need a waiver, and was thinking about sending an email to the "[email protected]"-email I saw in another thread here. Is this even worth the bother?

I have received a waiver before, and now I want to renew it.. Is it too late to argue not needing a waiver, after one has already been given to you?

Edit; And has this become stricter after the change of presidents, or is the NIV process untouched for citizens of other countries than the six or seven in the travel ban?