Maybe they'll remove medical from B2 visa category and create a B3 visa category for it. Limiting the broad use of the B2 visa will effectively reduce birth tourism.

They may add testing before entry later on like was done in Saipan to ensure you don't use a B2 Visa for birthing.

Or they can adopt a process whereby you have to submit your proof of status in the US, and if it has B2 on it, your child won't be given a US passport or SSN.

NothingDoMe:
Maybe they'll remove medical from B2 visa category and create a B3 visa category for it. Limiting the broad use of the B2 visa will effectively reduce birth tourism.

They may add testing before entry later on like was done in Saipan to ensure you don't use a B2 Visa for birthing.

Or they can adopt a process whereby you have to submit your proof of status in the US, and if it has B2 on it, your child won't be given a US passport or SSN.

The constitution is the supreme law of the United States and birthright citizenship is protected under the constitution.

Vlesparza:


The constitution is the supreme law of the United States and birthright citizenship is protected under the constitution.

Yes. Those against birth right citizenship argue the clause "subject to the jurisdiction thereof". Same way an ambassador that gives birth in the US cannot claim birthright citizenship. The opponents believe that it can be expanded to those without legal status in the US.

NothingDoMe:
Maybe they'll remove medical from B2 visa category and create a B3 visa category for it. Limiting the broad use of the B2 visa will effectively reduce birth tourism.

They may add testing before entry later on like was done in Saipan to ensure you don't use a B2 Visa for birthing.

Or they can adopt a process whereby you have to submit your proof of status in the US, and if it has B2 on it, your child won't be given a US passport or SSN.

"Jus soli"....

NothingDoMe:
Maybe they'll remove medical from B2 visa category and create a B3 visa category for it. Limiting the broad use of the B2 visa will effectively reduce birth tourism.
They may add testing before entry later on like was done in Saipan to ensure you don't use a B2 Visa for birthing.
Or they can adopt a process whereby you have to submit your proof of status in the US, and if it has B2 on it, your child won't be given a US passport or SSN.

Just delaying SSN and passport processing for a new born up to 1 year waiting time, will reduce birth tourism.
Ant it looks it's the way now for all immigrants and immigration processes, wait longer and pay more. Easy.

SmartKitty:

Just delaying SSN and passport processing for a new born up to 1 year waiting time, will reduce birth tourism.
Ant it looks it's the way now for all immigrants and immigration processes, wait longer and pay more. Easy.

Hmmm

Trump Administration Plans to Expand Travel Restrictions for Seven Countries
Nations being considered for new rules: Belarus, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania
By Michelle Hackman
Updated Jan. 21, 2020 4:01 pm ET
The Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON—The Trump administration plans to add to the number of countries covered under its travel restrictions, including Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, along with others in Africa and Asia, according to administration officials who have seen the list.

The administration plans to place limits on visas for travelers from seven new countries: Belarus, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania. The countries wouldn’t all face blanket bans on travel to the U.S.—as do six other countries—but could have...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-plans-to-add-seven-countries-to-travel-ban-list-11579638341?mod=e2tw

na sidon look we dey

Kolping:
Trump Administration Plans to Expand Travel Restrictions for Seven Countries
Nations being considered for new rules: Belarus, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania
By Michelle Hackman
Updated Jan. 21, 2020 4:01 pm ET
The Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON—The Trump administration plans to add to the number of countries covered under its travel restrictions, including Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, along with others in Africa and Asia, according to administration officials who have seen the list.

The administration plans to place limits on visas for travelers from seven new countries: Belarus, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania. The countries wouldn’t all face blanket bans on travel to the U.S.—as do six other countries—but could have...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-plans-to-add-seven-countries-to-travel-ban-list-11579638341?mod=e2tw

I love the idea lol

MamaTuoyo:


Congratulations, this is something different. Who has noticed that it is only Nigerians in Nigerian that are being denied because of discount. I have friends in Ghana and London both Nigerians who renewed successfully. The discount is not from govt funds, they are just tired of Nigerians having their babies in America. Trump does not want Nigerians coming to America ( info from an insider).

All in all, you are favoured. Thank God.

I said it, that trump does not want Nigerians in his country. There are other places to visit and have fun. Everyone should forget USA for a while and visit other beautiful places in the world.

Kolping:
Trump Administration Plans to Expand Travel Restrictions for Seven Countries
Nations being considered for new rules: Belarus, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan, Tanzania
By Michelle Hackman
Updated Jan. 21, 2020 4:01 pm ET
The Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON—The Trump administration plans to add to the number of countries covered under its travel restrictions, including Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country, along with others in Africa and Asia, according to administration officials who have seen the list.

The administration plans to place limits on visas for travelers from seven new countries: Belarus, Eritrea, Kyrgyzstan, Myanmar, Nigeria, Sudan and Tanzania. The countries wouldn’t all face blanket bans on travel to the U.S.—as do six other countries—but could have...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-administration-plans-to-add-seven-countries-to-travel-ban-list-11579638341?mod=e2tw

Maybe this is what we need to reset the whole craziness going on at the embassy. By the time they decide to lift the ban, they will reconsider all this paying back discount issues. A fresh start i hope.

Travel restrictions on certain visas not travel born..visit the Wall Street journal for more accurate info

chibertha:
na sidon look we dey

Lankesolanke:
Gender of VOs don’t matter..

YEah yeah, mood of VO doesnt matter too .
certain factors come into play in human interaction..................thats what makes us human, not machines or AI

Lankesolanke:
Travel restrictions on certain visas not travel born..visit the Wall Street journal for more accurate info

���A restriction specifically targeting pregnant women is now included:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/u-s-impose-visas-restrictions-pregnant-women-n1120706

Hello Nairalanders.

Thanks so much for all the relevant experiences and details shared on this platform.

Please is there anyone that has recently had a baby at Texas? How was the experience with the VO and POE? Any bad vibes about the place? Abi should I rather consider another state?

Would you be at advantageous position if you pay all your bills upfront before the Visa Interview (at least to show you can pay your bills)?

My sister is looking to have a baby in the US by July/August 2020 so I will appreciate any info shared

Thank you so much in advance for your response.

It has eventually happened.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/23/politics/us-new-rules-restricting-travel-fearing-birth-tourism/index.html

Vlesparza:


The constitution is the supreme law of the United States and birthright citizenship is protected under the constitution.

It’s never really been adjudicated by the Supreme Court. My read is the new court is likely to come down 5-4 that non-citizens are not under the jurisdiction of the US, same as diplomatic staff.

NothingDoMe:
Maybe they'll remove medical from B2 visa category and create a B3 visa category for it. Limiting the broad use of the B2 visa will effectively reduce birth tourism.

They may add testing before entry later on like was done in Saipan to ensure you don't use a B2 Visa for birthing.

Or they can adopt a process whereby you have to submit your proof of status in the US, and if it has B2 on it, your child won't be given a US passport or SSN.

Not read the full rule yet (anticipate it will be out tomorrow) but it won't require the creation of a new visa category (that would be easier to challenge in court and be more difficult to implement right away. The rule will simply state that giving birth in the US is no longer a legitimate purpose for obtaining a B visa - it does not mean having a baby in the US is illegal, just that the State Department is not lawfully obligated to facilitate that purpose by giving you a visa to travel to the US.

The rule will likely give consular officers the right to deny you outright if you do not have an alternative primary reason for a visa outside going to give birth.

Frankly, anyone still thinking of having a baby in the US should reconsider their plan effective tomorrow. Likely the rule will apply to CBP as well so even if you get a visa for a legitimate reason then wait to use it until you are ready to give birth, you may risk being sent back at the border.

Hi,

I'm a U.S. immigration reporter with Reuters working on a story about the new U.S. rules restricting birth tourism.

I would be very interested in speaking with you if you had planned to travel to the U.S. this year to give birth. If you have your visa already, are you still intending to go? If you do not yet have your visa, does this change your plans? I'm especially interested if you have given birth in the US in the past, and had planned to have your next child there as well. Please email me at kristina.cooke(a)reuters.com and we can set up a time to chat.

Thank you in advance,

Kristina

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-trump/trump-administration-rolls-out-new-rule-to-limit-birth-tourism-idUSKBN1ZM2G1

Who talked about mood..mood and gender na same thing??

cretin:


YEah yeah, mood of VO doesnt matter too .
certain factors come into play in human interaction..................thats what makes us human, not machines or AI

TWoods:


Not read the full rule yet (anticipate it will be out tomorrow) but it won't require the creation of a new visa category (that would be easier to challenge in court and be more difficult to implement right away. The rule will simply state that giving birth in the US is no longer a legitimate purpose for obtaining a B visa - it does not mean having a baby in the US is illegal, just that the State Department is not lawfully obligated to facilitate that purpose by giving you a visa to travel to the US.

The rule will likely give consular officers the right to deny you outright if you do not have an alternative primary reason for a visa outside going to give birth.

Frankly, anyone still thinking of having a baby in the US should reconsider their plan effective tomorrow. Likely the rule will apply to CBP as well so even if you get a visa for a legitimate reason then wait to use it until you are ready to give birth, you may risk being sent back at the border.

I know this news would so sweet your belle!

ALERT
Beginning January 24, 2020, the State Department will no longer issue temporary visitor (B-1/B-2) visas to aliens seeking to enter the United States for “birth tourism” – the practice of traveling to the United States to secure automatic and permanent American citizenship for their children by giving birth on American soil. This rule change is necessary to enhance public safety, national security, and the integrity of our immigration system. The birth tourism industry threatens to overburden valuable hospital resources and is rife with criminal activity, as reflected in Federal prosecutions. Closing this glaring immigration loophole will combat these endemic abuses and ultimately protect the United States from the national security risks created by this practice. It will also defend American taxpayers from having their hard-earned dollars siphoned away to finance the direct and downstream costs associated with birth tourism. The integrity of American citizenship must be protected.

TWoods:


Not read the full rule yet (anticipate it will be out tomorrow) but it won't require the creation of a new visa category (that would be easier to challenge in court and be more difficult to implement right away. The rule will simply state that giving birth in the US is no longer a legitimate purpose for obtaining a B visa - it does not mean having a baby in the US is illegal, just that the State Department is not lawfully obligated to facilitate that purpose by giving you a visa to travel to the US.

The rule will likely give consular officers the right to deny you outright if you do not have an alternative primary reason for a visa outside going to give birth.

Frankly, anyone still thinking of having a baby in the US should reconsider their plan effective tomorrow. Likely the rule will apply to CBP as well so even if you get a visa for a legitimate reason then wait to use it until you are ready to give birth, you may risk being sent back at the border.

Isn't that discrimination? I mean wouldn't that cause a lot of trouble by stopping only those coming in for birthing from seeking medical care in the US? Won't the proponents will pick this discrimination and challenge it in court?

jelmusboy:
ALERT
Beginning January 24, 2020, the State Department will no longer issue temporary visitor (B-1/B-2) visas to aliens seeking to enter the United States for “birth tourism” – the practice of traveling to the United States to secure automatic and permanent American citizenship for their children by giving birth on American soil. This rule change is necessary to enhance public safety, national security, and the integrity of our immigration system. The birth tourism industry threatens to overburden valuable hospital resources and is rife with criminal activity, as reflected in Federal prosecutions. Closing this glaring immigration loophole will combat these endemic abuses and ultimately protect the United States from the national security risks created by this practice. It will also defend American taxpayers from having their hard-earned dollars siphoned away to finance the direct and downstream costs associated with birth tourism. The integrity of American citizenship must be protected.

Wise decision.

jelmusboy:
ALERT
Beginning January 24, 2020, the State Department will no longer issue temporary visitor (B-1/B-2) visas to aliens seeking to enter the United States for “birth tourism” – the practice of traveling to the United States to secure automatic and permanent American citizenship for their children by giving birth on American soil. This rule change is necessary to enhance public safety, national security, and the integrity of our immigration system. The birth tourism industry threatens to overburden valuable hospital resources and is rife with criminal activity, as reflected in Federal prosecutions. Closing this glaring immigration loophole will combat these endemic abuses and ultimately protect the United States from the national security risks created by this practice. It will also defend American taxpayers from having their hard-earned dollars siphoned away to finance the direct and downstream costs associated with birth tourism. The integrity of American citizenship must be protected.

The end of an era. But i trust Nigerians to find a way. Maybe couples will start going to the US now, copulate there, get pregnant there and kuku stay and deliver the baby there. ��

NothingDoMe:
Isn't that discrimination? I mean wouldn't that cause a lot of trouble by stopping only those coming in for birthing from seeking medical care in the US? Won't the proponents will pick this discrimination and challenge it in court?

A court challenge is very unlikely, consular officers already have wide latitude to grant or deny a visa. I don't see how you can claim discrimination in this case.

lami88:




The end of an era. But i trust Nigerians to find a way. Maybe couples will start going to the US now, copulate there, get pregnant there and kuku stay and deliver the baby there. ��

we go dey go from canada, there will always be a way out.

aremso:


we go dey go from canada, there will always be a way out.

Canada too has tightened their visa approval. If you are a woman and you apply for canadian visa, they will call you on phone and ask if you are pregnant or ask you to come for a test. If you declare you are pregannat and intend to give birth, they will ask uou to go and get one ridiculous letter , its that letter youbwill be looking for till your delivery date is due

TWoods:

A court challenge is very unlikely, consular officers already have wide latitude to grant or deny a visa. I don't see how you can claim discrimination in this case.

True.

Canada visa applications going to shoot through the roof but the Canadians already got the memo. Once you apply for birthing they ask you to submit documents that isn't easy to come by since you ain't resident in Canada.

Also, most applications are not treated with urgency. This delay, intentional or not, result in the applicant giving birth in Nigeria.

Folks should please read the new policy as captured in the Federal Register (https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2020-01218.pdf).


The different news outlets are interpreting the policy in very different ways, sometimes in ways that are completely wrong. Some news outlets do not even know the difference between consular officers and CBP officers.


There is only one fundamental change in the new policy and that is that a pregnant lady or someone suspected to have intentions of having a baby in the US would be treated as someone requiring medical teatment for visa purposes. You would no longer get visa to give birth in the USA just because you would like to. Consequently you need to prove that you require specialized medicare and it is not available where you are. You also need to establish that you have enough funds and that a doctor in the USA has accepted you as a patient. Actually, there are other reasons you can give to get the visa but you can not just say you would like to give birth in the US. Other than this nothing has changed.

Another thing to point out is that the new rule was released by the Department of state not the Dept of Homeland Security. The Dept of homeland security is in charge at the border and have not changed any of their rules. B1/B2 visa allows you to have baby in the US...period. Actually there are no immediate plans for the dept of homeland security to change rules regarding birthing. Any rule change of this magnitude by a US agency needs to be published in the 'Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions' and it will go through reviews over months. The new policy by the state dept had been advertised probably over a year ago and it had gone through all the stages... through proposed rule and ended as final rule after input by relevant bodies.

In the coming weeks, many folks would come here and report how they passed through border with ease and had their babies.

Maybe this rule will change a lot for other countries but definitely not Nigeria considering the number of denials in the past one year.

Reading the policy, what I felt was that the US govt just wanted to register their dsipleasure with birth tourism and attempt to reduce the number of births by foreigners within the limits of the constitution.