International Marriage Broker Regulation Act

IMBRA, the International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (Subtitle D of United States Public Law 109-162), [ [http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ162.109.pdf E:PUBLAWPUBL162.109 ] ] is a United States federal statute that requires background checks for all marriage visa sponsors and limits serial visa applications. The impetus for its introduction was several high-profile cases (including the Susanna Blackwell case in 1995 and the Anastasia King case in 2000) in which foreign women had been abused and eventually murdered by the men who had used international marriage brokers to bring them to the United States. Several international marriage brokers challenged its constitutionality but the stautute was upheld by a federal court in 2007. [http://www.usaimmigrationattorney.com/JudgeCooperDecision.pdf] IMBRA has been the subject of controversy since its passage because of free-speech and identity theft concerns. [ [http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress04/martinez092204.htm Federal Bureau of Investigation - Congressional Testimony ] ] Failed verification|date=July 2008Also controversial are the obligations it imposes on the international marriage broker industry, commonly referred to as the mail order bride industry. [ [http://www.tahirih.org/legal/docs/SummaryofIMBRA2005aspassed(Final).pdf Memorandum ] ]

Legislative History

In 1990, the first federal provisions to help battered immigrant spouses were passed, followed in 1994 by more comprehensive protections contained in the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), legislation that was reauthorized and expanded in 2000 and again in 2005. In 1996, a regulation responding to concerns about abuses was first imposed on the international marriage broker (IMB) industry by the “Mail-Order Bride Act” (8 U.S.C. §1375). In 1999, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service recommended that male IMB clients be screened and female IMB recruits be informed of their rights and resources if they are abused. [http://www.uscis.gov/files/article/Mobrept_full.pdf.] Following these findings and recommendations, and motivated by some brutal high-profile murders of mail-order brides, several states enacted legislation to protect foreign women who meet their spouses through international matchmaking agencies from abusive marriages. In 2001, Washington State was the first to enact legislation to address the problem, followed by Texas, Hawaii and Missouri. IMBRA was initially introduced to Congress in July 2003, and in July 2004, Senator Sam Brownback convened a hearing of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee on “Human Trafficking: Mail-Order Bride Abuses.” [ [http://www.senate.gov/~foreign/hearings/2004/hrg040713p.html Hearing: Human Trafficking: Mail Order Bride Abuses - U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations ] ] IMBRA was reintroduced in September 2005 by Sen. Sam Brownback (R-KS), Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA), and Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA)). IMBRA was incorporated into the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization in 2005, and was passed by both houses of Congress in December 2005. It was signed into law by President George W. Bush in January 2006.

Key Provisions

Marketing of Children Prohibited. IMBs may not provide personal contact information, photographs, or other information about anyone under the age of 18 to any individual or entity. (Section 833(d)(1))

Duty to Disclose Criminal and Marital History and Obtain Written Consent. Before a (for fee) IMB may provide a foreign national client’s personal contact information to a United States client, the IMB must:(1) search sex offender public registries for information regarding the United States client;(2) collect certain criminal and marital background information through documentation or an attestation from the United States client;(3) provide to the foreign national client any records retrieved from the sex offender public registry search and the background information collected in her primary language;(4) provide to the foreign national client a government-prepared information pamphlet about the legal rights and resources available in the U.S. to immigrant victims of domestic violence and other crimes; and(5) obtain the foreign national client’s signed, written consent to the release of her information to the United States client. (Sections 833(d)(2) and (3))

Penalty for Misuse of Information. Any person who knowingly misuses any information obtained by an IMB under IMBRA (i.e., uses that information for any unauthorized purpose other than IMBRA’s required disclosures) is subject to a fine or imprisonment of not more than 1 year, or both, in addition to other possible penalties that may be imposed under federal or state law. (Sections 833(d)(3)(C))

Penalties for Other Violations/Nonpreemption. An IMB is subject to a civil penalty of $5,000 - $25,000 per violation or attempted violation of its obligations under IMBRA, and criminal penalties for not more than five years in prison. This is in addition to other possible penalties and remedies that may be provided for under federal or state law. (Sections 833(d)(5) and (6))

Definition of an International Marriage Broker. “International marriage broker” is defined as an entity (whether or not U.S.-based) that charges fees for providing matchmaking services or social referrals between U.S. citizens/permanent residents and foreign nationals. The definition also exempts nonprofit religious or cultural matchmaking services, and dating services that do not match U.S. citizens/residents with aliens as their principal business and that charge comparable rates and offer comparable services to all clients, regardless of gender or country of citizenship.

Informational Pamphlet about Legal Rights and Resources IMBRA requires the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Departments of State (DOS) and Justice (DOJ) and nongovernmental organizations with specialized expertise, to develop a pamphlet for foreign fiancé(e)s and spouses about the K visa immigration process, the legal rights and resources available to immigrant victims of domestic violence and other crimes, the illegality of marriage fraud (i.e., knowingly entering a marriage solely to obtain an immigration benefit) and U.S. legal obligations regarding child support. The pamphlet will also include a warning concerning the potential use of K visas by U.S. citizens with a history of violence, whose acts may not have resulted in a criminal record; as well as a notification regarding IMBs’ obligations to disclose U.S. clients’ violent criminal records.

Criminal Background Information Disclosed to Foreign Fiancé(e) or Spouse. IMBRA requires U.S. citizens petitioning to sponsor K visas to disclose convictions for a list of violent crimes on the “I-129F” petition form that they file with DHS, including convictions for domestic violence and assault & battery, as well as convictions for elder abuse, child abuse or neglect, and stalking; and multiple (three or more) convictions for offenses related to alcohol/controlled substances. DHS must provide to DOS a copy of the petitioner’s I-129F petition form, together with any criminal background information (including information on protection orders) that DHS has gathered on the petitioner under existing authority. DOS must provide these materials to the foreign fiancé(e) or spouse. The U.S. consular officer conducting the K visa interview overseas must inform the foreign fiancé(e) or spouse that this information may not be complete, and ask her (1) whether an IMB facilitated her relationship with the petitioner and if so, which one and (2) whether the IMB complied with IMBRA by providing her with the required disclosures and information. (Sections 832(a), 833(a)(5), and 833(b)(1))

Limits Placed on How Many and How Often Fiancé(e) Visa Petitions May be Filed; Petitioners with Violent Criminal Records Barred from Serial Sponsorship. IMBRA limits a US petitioner’s sponsorship of K1 (fiancé(e)) visas to 2 total, with no less than 2 years between the filing of the last approved petition and the current petition. A petitioner may seek a discretionary waiver of these limits from DHS. However, DHS cannot ordinarily waive the limits if the U.S. petitioner has a record of violent criminal offenses. (Section 832(a)(1))

References