Abused Spouses: How Divorce May Affect Your Green Card Chances

The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), passed into law in 1994 and amended in 2001, provides hope for immigrant abuse survivors. Under U.S. immigration law, immigrants may obtain a green card ("U.S. permanent residence”) by marrying a U.S. citizen (USC). The USC must, however under the normal course, petition U.S. Citizenship & Immigration Services (CIS, formerly known as “INS”) for an immigrant visa and a green card application for his/her immigrant spouse based on the marriage. 


But this process is not always easy on the immigrant – in many instances, it provides one of the most abusive ways a sponsoring spouse can exercise control over the immigrant, by holding the immigrant's tentative immigration status over her. 

This is where VAWA helps. Abused immigrants who are married to a U.S. citizen or Lawful Permanent Residents may now petition on their own for an immigrant visa and green card application, without the abuser's knowledge or consent. 

However, one of the recurring problems and questions that come up in these abused spouse cases is what happens to the immigrant’s chances for a green card if the abuser goes through on his threat and files for divorce? 

Similarly, how is her green card chances affected if the immigrant files for divorce, herself? 

Filing for relief under VAWA may still be possible even if divorce proceedings have begun or even if the divorce is final. A divorced immigrant who was subject to extreme cruelty from his or her legal permanent resident or U.S. citizen spouse may apply for an immigrant visa as an abused spouse (eventually leading to a green card) if the petition is filed with CIS (INS) within 2 years following any final divorce decree. 

Thus, if the immigrant is already divorced, s/he can still file for VAWA protection, but only if the divorce is 2 years old or less at the time it is filed and can prove that the abuse was related to the reason for or was the reason for the divorce, itself. 

The divorced immigrant must still prove the basic elements of a VAWA self-petition including having a real marriage (i.e., not a marriage entered into for immigration purposes) as well as prove that s/he lived with the abuser when they were married at some point. 

This provision allowing for divorce immigrants to file applies to all cases that were still being decided by CIS or filed on or after October 28, 2000. There are exceptions to this date, however, so an immigrant in this situation should contact an immigration attorney who regularly deals with VAWA (Violence Against Women cases) to determine if she is eligible to file for immigration protection under VAWA. 

If an abused immigrant spouse chooses to not file a VAWA-based immigrant visa petition and chooses to rely on her spouse to sponsor her, if the spouse fails to sponsor her or the case the spouse filed is not approved by the time the divorce is final, that case will be denied and the immigrant will have to start over with either a VAWA-based immigrant visa (if eligible) or some other potential immigrant visa or will be stuck without the means to obtain a green card. 

If an immigrant believes that her spouse is going to file for divorce or has already filed for a divorce and has a case based on her spouse's sponsorship currently being decided by INS (CIS), there may be a way to save the green card (adjustment of status) application that is attached to her spouse's immigrant visa filing and file for VAWA immigrant visa to protect herself from her spouse’s threats, and retain her work card and travel authorization instead of having to start all over again with a new green card application.  
See below!

Wedding Rings – Through the Ages and for All Eternity

The exact origin of the wedding ring is uncertain and is rife with superstition and mythology. Papyruses dating back to the ancient Egyptian civilization depict wedding rings, and historians credit the land of the Pharaohs with originating this tradition. Engagement or betrothal rings were in use as far back as prehistoric times, but the wedding ring is a relatively new tradition, and unlike the engagement ring, is steeped in religious ritual.


In ancient times, accepting a wedding ring constituted a legally binding agreement between husband and wife. The wife became the property of the husband, a holding of sorts. It also represented protection to the wife—a protection against challengers seizing her legal and rightful position in a power grab.

Early Egyptian wedding rings were simple circular bands, crudely crafted from indigenous materials such as hemp and reeds. The lifespan of the average wedding ring was approximately one year. It's a safe bet that the average marriage outlasted the average wedding band since the eternal circle signified eternal love and devotion.

The circle also represented the joining of two halves to create a whole. The hole in the center symbolized the gateway to the unknown—the future. Wedding bands of ivory, leather, and other sturdy materials were crafted by those who desired a more permanent token of eternity.

Metals replaced the earlier hemp and reed wedding bands. The early Romans moved to lead, while other civilizations chose brass and copper. Eventually, gold emerged as the metal of choice. In fact, early Irish couples insisted on gold, as any other material was thought to bring bad luck at best, and constitute an illegal marriage at worst. For couples unable to afford gold wedding bands, gold wedding rings were secured for the service and returned immediately afterward.

Early crude designs were adorned with semiprecious metals in an attempt to disguise the handiwork. The color of the stones also held significance. The red ruby signified the heart, the blue sapphire signified the skies and the heavens, and the rare diamond's indestructible nature signified the indestructible bond of marriage.

Fit played an equally important role in the realm of superstition surrounding the wedding ring. The fit had to be perfect. Too loose a fit would lead to a sloppy marriage, carelessness, and even cause the couple to grow apart. Too tight a fit would doom the couple to a suffocating, painful marriage.

In ancient times, wedding bands occupied the third finger on the left hand just as they do today. The significance of the third finger was the belief that the vein in the third finger, the "vena amoris," led directly to the heart. This was a thought propagated by the Egyptians and adopted as truth by the ancient Greeks and Romans until later disproved.

Even after the discovery that there was no vena amoris, the custom of wearing the wedding band on the third finger survived. Early Christian marriages included a ritual that landed the wedding band on the third finger: As the priest recited, "In the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," he took the ring and touched the thumb, the first finger, and then the second finger.

When he said, "Amen," he placed the ring on the third finger, sealing the marriage. The wedding band has occupied the third finger into the 21st century, except for a short period during the Elizabethan era, when whimsy decreed that the wedding ring resides on the thumb.

Double-ring ceremonies gained popularity during World War II as young soldiers shipped off to war. The token of the marriage contract took on new sentimentality during those troubling times, and that custom remains intact today. Ceremonies differ, vows are often unique, but the tradition of the wedding band has survived through the ages, and probably will—for all eternity.