Juanita de los Santos Moss v. Immigration and Naturalization Service
651 F.2d 1091 (1981)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
The 90-day marriage requirement for a nonimmigrant alien entering on a K-visa under § 214(d) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act is not an absolute, mandatory deadline. This period may be tolled if the alien can demonstrate that the failure to marry within the statutory period was due to circumstances beyond their control.
Facts:
- Juanita de los Santos Moss, a citizen of the Philippines, lived with her U.S. citizen fiancé for a year in the Philippines.
- On July 16, 1977, Moss entered the United States on a 'K visa' as the fiancée of a U.S. citizen.
- It is undisputed that both Moss and her fiancé had a bona fide intention to marry at the time of her entry.
- Moss married her fiancé on October 18, 1977, which was 92 days after her entry into the U.S.
- The record indicated that illness or other factors beyond Moss's control may have caused the two-day delay in the marriage.
- The marriage was undisputed to be bona fide and not entered into for immigration benefits.
- A child was born of the marriage, but Moss's husband abandoned her two months prior to the child's birth.
Procedural Posture:
- The Immigration and Naturalization Service (I.N.S.) issued a show cause order to Juanita Moss to establish her deportability.
- At a hearing before an Immigration Judge (court of first instance), Moss argued for substantial compliance, but the Judge refused to hear evidence on the reasons for the delay.
- The Immigration Judge found Moss deportable for failing to marry within the 90-day period.
- Moss (appellant) appealed the decision to the Board of Immigration Appeals (intermediate appellate body).
- The Board of Immigration Appeals upheld the decision of the Immigration Judge.
- Moss (appellant) then appealed the Board's decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, with the I.N.S. as the appellee.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the 90-day marriage requirement under § 214(d) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act impose a strict and mandatory deadline that cannot be excused, even when the delay is due to circumstances beyond the alien's control?
Opinions:
Majority - Garza, Circuit Judge
No, the 90-day marriage requirement under § 214(d) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act does not impose a strict and mandatory deadline. The court held that the time period can be tolled if the delay in marriage was due to circumstances beyond the nonimmigrant alien's control. The court reasoned that the primary purpose of the K-visa provision is to facilitate the formation of bona fide marital relationships. The key inquiry is not strict adherence to the timeline but whether the parties have a 'bona fide intent to marry,' which the marriage itself confirms. It would be incongruous with the statute's purpose to deport an alien for a minor delay caused by factors beyond her control when the intent to marry was genuine. The court also noted that Congress's use of both 'ninety days' and 'three months' in the statute suggested a lack of intent for the time period to be rigidly controlling.
Analysis:
This decision introduces flexibility into what was previously interpreted as a rigid statutory deadline in immigration law. By allowing for the tolling of the 90-day period for reasons beyond the alien's control, the court shifts the focus from strict compliance to the underlying purpose of the statute—verifying the bona fide intent to marry. This precedent allows aliens in similar situations to present evidence to justify a minor delay, thereby preventing automatic deportation for technical violations. It prioritizes a purposive interpretation of the law over a strictly literal one, impacting how immigration authorities and courts handle K-visa compliance cases.
