A former cruise-ship worker called the Immigration Answer Show with a fact pattern Jim Hacking described as a law-school exam: three years on a C-1/D crewman visa, a later entry on a B-1/B-2 visitor visa in 2014, a long overstay, two U.S. citizen children with a prior green-card-holder partner, and a new marriage to a naturalized citizen 20 years her senior who got his own status through a previous marriage. Two separate questions are buried in there, and the order matters.
The first is whether a crewman can ever adjust. 8 U.S.C. § 1255(c) bars adjustment of status for anyone “admitted in transit” or as a crewman. But the bar attaches to the entry you’re adjusting from, not to the visa you once held. Someone who later enters on a B-1/B-2 — a lawful, non-crewman admission — can have a basis to adjust. The practical problem is convincing USCIS of it.
mic What the Attorney Says
“It’s hard to get USCIS to understand that just because you had a crewman visa doesn’t mean you can’t ever adjust.”
The second question is the one that actually decides the case, and it has nothing to do with crewman status. It is whether the marriage survives scrutiny. Here the indicators pile up: the children’s father is a lawful permanent resident whose relationship with her overlapped the start of the new marriage, and an officer reads that as a competing real relationship.
mic What the Attorney Says
“They’re going to say this marriage now is one of convenience to try to get you immigration status and that your real love is the father of your children.”
A finding of marriage fraud is not just a denial. 8 U.S.C. § 1154(c) bars approval of any future petition once an officer concludes a prior marriage was entered to evade the immigration laws. The other indicators compound it:
- A 20-year age gap. Not disqualifying, but officers treat it as a reason to look harder.
- A spouse who got his own green card through marriage. USCIS can pull his prior file and test whether that marriage was bona fide too.
- A long overstay with unauthorized work. Out-of-status filers are held to a higher standard, and the case draws fraud-unit attention by default.
- Two U.S. citizen children under 21. They cannot petition for a parent until they turn 21, so they offer no relief now.
Put together, this is the rare case where Hacking told the caller not to file. Under the May 2026 adjustment memo, a denial is easier to issue as a matter of discretion, and a denied applicant inside the system is a referral to immigration court.
mic What the Attorney Says
“I believe that if you raise your hand and apply for a marriage-based I-130 and a green card, I think the chances are significantly higher that you end up in deportation than you get a green card.”
The lesson generalizes past this one caller. The crewman bar is a real but beatable hurdle when there is a clean later admission. Fraud indicators are different — they don’t get cleaner with time, and a weak marriage case filed in 2026 is an invitation to the exact discretion the agency is now eager to use. Anyone in this position should have the marriage evidence honestly graded before filing, and should treat interview preparation as the place the case is won or lost.