Visa, immigrant — Regarded as valid if continuous voyage to United States commenced before the expiration of period of validity, though actual arrival in United States occurs after visa has expired.
(1) While section 221 of the Immigration and Nationality Act does not contain express language to that effect, the legislative history of the act indicates a plain intent to incorporate as a matter of administrative practice the former provision of law that an immigrant visa does not expire if the alien embarked on a continuous voyage to the United States from a port outside the United States or contiguous territory within the period of the visa's validity. The voyage is regarded as continuous even if the immigrant has changed carriers in foreign or contiguous territory for the sole reason of making transportation connections; and also where the vessel or aircraft has made a limited number of stops en route to the United States.
(2) An alien, in possession of a visa expiring on May 11, 1956, who purchased transportation to the United States via a plane which left Bogota, Colombia, on May 13, 1956, and who departed from Cali, Colombia, on May 10, 1956, en route to Bogota, must be held excludable under section 212 (a) (20) of the act. She is considered to have commenced her "continuous voyage" to the United States when she departed from Bogota on her overseas journey to this country. The preliminary steps which she took to reach Bogota, such as her departure from Cali, are not controlling.
EXCLUDABLE:
Act of 1952 — Section 212 (a) (20) ( 8 U.S.C. 1182 (a) (20)) — No valid immigrant visa.
BEFORE THE BOARD
Discussion: The matter comes forward pursuant to 8 CFR 236.16 on appeal by the District Director, Miami, Florida, from a decision of the special inquiry officer dated May 14, 1956, ordering the applicant admitted to the United States for permanent residence.
The facts are fully set forth in the decision of the special inquiry officer. The record relates to a native and citizen of Colombia, 27 years old, female, who arrived at the port of Miami, Florida, on May 13, 1956, via Cubana Airlines from Havana, Cuba, and applied for admission for permanent residence. She presented a valid Colombian passport and a nonquota immigrant visa issued by the American Consul at Cali, Colombia, on January 11, 1956, and marked valid until midnight May 11, 1956.
The record establishes that the applicant purchased transportation to the United States on May 2, 1956, at Cali, Colombia. In order to make connection with the plane which was to take her to the United States via Havana, Cuba, the applicant was required to meet the plane at Bogota, from which point it departed overseas. The applicant was aware that this plane did not depart from Bogota until May 13, 1956. She departed from Cali on May 10, 1956, in order to have a lay over of several days in Bogota in order to meet a friend. The applicant chose the particular airline which she did because it was more economical. It was developed in the hearing that this airline ran on an irregular schedule and that the previous flight prior to May 13, 1956, was two weeks earlier.
Section 221 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1201, provides that the consul, in issuing an immigrant visa, shall specify thereon the date on which the validity of the visa shall expire, not to exceed four months. It is noted that the visa in the instant case was made valid for the maximum period of four months. Section 211 (a) of the act, 8 U.S.C. 1181 (a), provides no immigrant shall be admitted unless at the time of application for admission he has a valid unexpired immigrant visa. Section 212 (a) (20), 8 U.S.C. 1182 (a) (20), provides for the exclusion of an immigrant who is not in possession of a valid unexpired immigrant visa.
The predecessor section of law, section 2 (c) of the Immigration Act of May 26, 1924, 8 U.S.C. 202 (c), likewise provided that the validity of an immigration visa should not exceed a four-month period. However, it was also provided that the immigration visa could be regarded as valid beyond a four-month period in the case of an immigrant arriving in the United States by water on a continuous voyage to the United States, if the vessel, before the expiration of the validity of the immigration visa, departed from the last port outside of the United States and if the immigrant proceeded on a continuous voyage to the United States. In such case, regardless of the time of his arrival in the United States, the validity of the alien's immigration visa was considered not to have expired. While this latter portion of section 2 (c) of the act of May 26, 1924, was not carried over into the present Immigration and Nationality Act, the legislative history indicates a plain intent to incorporate this provision as a matter of administrative practice. Thus, Senate Report No. 1137, 82d Congress, 2d session, contains the following language: "The omission from the bill of the provision in existing law that an immigrant visa does not expire if the alien embarked on a continuous voyage to the United States from a port outside the United States and contiguous territory within a 4-month period is not designed to take away the leeway in the validity period of immigrant visas. It is intended under the language of the bill to permit discretion in determining whether or not unforeseen emergencies are to be excluded from the period of validity" (p. 23).
Administratively, an immigrant visa is regarded to be valid if an immigrant arrives in the United States or foreign contiguous territory on a continuous voyage to the United States and his vessel or aircraft departed from the port at which he originally embarked before the expiration of the validity of his immigrant visa. In such cases the voyage has been regarded as continuous even if the immigrant has changed carriers in foreign or contiguous territory for the sole reason of making transportation connections; and also, where the vessel or aircraft has made a limited number of stops en route to the United States. The critical question in the instant case is when did the applicant commence her continuous voyage to the United States. We believe that this continuous voyage to the United States commenced when the applicant had departed from Bogota, Colombia, the point at which she started on her overseas journey to this country. The date of departure from Bogota took place on May 13, 1956, a date beyond the period of validity of her immigrant visa. We do not regard the preliminary steps which the applicant took to reach Bogota, such as her departure from Cali, to be controlling. In view of the fact that the period of validity of the immigrant visa had already expired on May 13, 1956, when the applicant departed from Bogota for the United States, we conclude that the finding of inadmissibility is sustained.
Order: It is ordered that the alien be excluded from the United States under the provisions of section 212 (a) (20) of the Immigration and Nationality Act as a person not in possession of a valid immigrant visa.