Verification from Couple Separation Interviews to Reason for Procedure Selection – Changes in Marriage-Based Green Card Review
For a long time, immigrant visa applications for spouses married to U.S. citizens were considered a relatively straightforward path in immigration law. However, as of 2026, this perception is no longer valid. The scope and depth of scrutiny have changed, delving into the specific procedures the applicant spouse has chosen, and the verification methods have also become more concrete. While a series of guidelines issued since the beginning of this year might appear as minor changes when viewed individually, when pieced together, it becomes apparent that the entire immigration process based on marriage is being reorganized to take longer and be more thoroughly examined. This trend is not limited to individuals of specific nationalities or regions but applies universally to all couples applying for permanent residency through marriage. Couples currently undergoing the process or those who will be filing soon must understand exactly what has changed.
◆ Policy Manual Revision — Enhanced Review and Verification Officially Becomes Policy
“USCIS announced that it has incorporated policy guidance in its policy manual to strengthen its capabilities for reviewing and verifying family-based immigration petitions.”
This directive, in effect since August 1st of last year, clarified the criteria for requiring interviews in cases related to spouse petitions (I-130). It also clarified that the petition itself does not grant immigration status or protection from deportation, and explicitly stated that if the applicant is otherwise subject to deportation, it could lead to a Notice to Appear (NTA - a document ordering appearance in immigration court, initiating deportation proceedings upon issuance). Furthermore, enhanced fingerprint-based background checks, implemented on April 27th of this year, have also been applied to the processing of family-sponsored petitions, leading to an increase in cases experiencing delays in the background check process itself, even when the documentation is complete. This measure is reportedly a result of a presidential executive order signed on February 6th, which allows for broader sharing of criminal record information from multiple federal investigative agencies with the Department of Homeland Security. In the early stages of implementation, a backlog of fingerprint reconfirmation procedures across the board for family-sponsored petitions, as well as for adjustment of status (I-485) and naturalization applications (N-400), resulted in approvals being held up even for cases with no apparent deficiencies in their paperwork. Applicants for adjustment of status based on marriage were not exempt from this fingerprint reconfirmation, leading to cases that had successfully completed interviews but still faced additional waiting periods for final approval. Although the two measures were announced at different times and have different underlying documents, they point in the same direction in practice: the era of simplified procedures solely based on the fact that it is a marriage-based petition is over. The revised directive made it clear that it will prioritize the qualitative persuasiveness of each piece of evidence in genuinely supporting the authenticity of the marriage, rather than the sheer volume of submitted documents. This means moving away from an approach that relied on the thickness of the paperwork. A few documents that can explain specific points in time and circumstances of the marriage may be more persuasive than submitting hundreds of photos. It is safer to prepare with this premise from the very stage of filing the petition.
◆ Couple Separation Interviews — From Exceptional Procedures to Routine Procedures
“There's something I've been explaining to couples who come for interview preparation counseling recently. It's that the method of having both partners answer the same questions separately in different rooms and then comparing those answers is no longer an unusual case.”
In the past, this type of separate, in-depth interview was used sparingly, only for cases with clear indications of fraud. This procedure is often called the "Stokes interview" (named after a 1975 federal court ruling, where spouses are separated and interviewed individually before their answers are compared). In my office consultations, I've recently encountered instances where this interview style is applied even to couples who don't exhibit any prominent suspicious circumstances. The questions primarily revolve around extremely mundane topics such as the layout of the house, what was for dinner last night, the order of waking up in the morning, who did the dishes yesterday, and the last movie they watched together. The interviews themselves can sometimes run longer than expected, and by the time questions for both individuals are asked and compared, the perceived time spent can be substantial. The problem arises not from incorrect answers, but from cases where differences in expression or discrepancies in memory are interpreted unfavorably. Even for couples who have lived together for a long time, detailed memories are naturally retained differently by each person. It's natural for spouses to remember minor details of their daily lives differently, so it's unreasonable to immediately link this to the authenticity of their marriage. It's not about memorizing written answers before the interview, but simply being aware that this type of questioning might occur and being mentally prepared can reduce situations where one falters and gives incorrect answers due to surprise. Furthermore, when answers differ, an unfavorable conclusion is not immediately drawn. The immigration officer considers whether the discrepancies in their answers are due to simple memory differences or if they indicate a more fundamental issue that casts doubt on the marriage itself. Therefore, rather than trying to perfectly memorize every minor detail, it's more helpful to approach the situation with a relaxed mindset, enabling you to describe your daily life as it is.
◆ Spouse Who Chose U.S. Procedures — The Choice Itself Becomes Subject to Scrutiny
“In a report on July 6th, NPR stated that the scrutiny of spouses married to U.S. citizens has significantly intensified under the Trump administration. They reported that guidance issued in May encourages immigration officers to examine whether spouses have left the U.S. to apply for a green card in their home country, and that those who remain in the U.S. to proceed with the process face longer and more intrusive verification.”
The same reports stated that questions about the timing and circumstances of the application, as well as good moral character (qualification criteria judged by factors such as criminal history and social reputation), are being newly standardized for the spouse applying for a green card. These are items that were not taken for granted in the past. The May directive reportedly encourages immigration officers to examine why an applicant chose to adjust their status within the United States instead of going through consular processing in their home country. The choice to remain in the U.S. has become a screening factor in itself. While both consular processing and adjustment of status are legally permitted pathways, the weight of scrutiny in practice has changed. Previously, couples could simply choose the procedure that fit their circumstances, but now they must be able to explain the reasons for that choice. The same reports also included comments from lawyers and individuals mentioning that instances of spouse detention, which were rare before, are now occurring, that some individuals choose to depart the country during the process, and that in this atmosphere, couples are becoming reluctant to even interact with immigration authorities. USCIS reportedly stated that identity verification and personal history checks are part of a stringent process that prioritizes safety. Every statement and document submitted by the applicant spouse should now be viewed not as a supplementary procedure, but as an element that determines the overall credibility of the case.
◆ Marriage Cases in a Discretionary Review Environment
“The policy memo issued on May 21 of this year redefined the entire Adjustment of Status (AOS) review process as a discretionary judgment area for immigration officers.”
Status adjustments based on marriage are no exception in this discretionary review environment. This means that even if the requirements are met, approval is not guaranteed; instead, the presumption has strengthened that the adjudicator will make a discretionary judgment considering the overall circumstances. In addition to evidence supporting the bona fides of the marriage, it has become more meaningful than before to prepare supporting materials regarding circumstances or equities that arose during the marriage. For example, circumstantial evidence that might aid discretionary judgment, such as a child's school life, the health issues of dependents, or extensive records of community involvement, would fall under this category. While such materials are separate from the bona fides of the marriage, they can influence how the adjudicator views the overall case. Another observation from the field is that the timing of interview notices after concurrent filing (filing I-130 and I-485 together) varies greatly from case to case. Some cases receive a notice within a couple of months of filing, while others take much longer, making it difficult to predict the speed of progress based solely on the filing date. In June, when this publication covered the first month of the policy memo's implementation, we discussed the general principles of discretionary review; this time, we are examining its repercussions specifically for marriage-based cases. Ultimately, the environment has shifted from preparing after completion to having preparation finished simultaneously with filing.
Closing remarks
In this situation, a couple can clearly do the following: First, before the interview, they should gather and submit concrete evidence supporting their marital relationship, such as joint lease agreements, bank accounts, insurance policies, and tax filings. It's not about the quantity of documents, but how well they realistically depict the couple's life together. Second, during the interview, they should practice answering truthfully and consistently based on their own knowledge, rather than trying to match each other's responses. An honest attitude leaves a better impression than worrying about minor differences in memory. Third, the intending immigrant should be aware that their own past history and the reasons for choosing adjustment of status in the U.S. can be scrutinized. They should discuss with their attorney, along with supporting statements, why they chose adjustment of status over consular processing. While applying for a green card based on marriage has not disappeared, the scope of preparation required to pass the process has widened from just the intending immigrant to both spouses, and from a single document submission to the entire process up to the interview day.
Disclaimer: This column is for general information purposes only and is not legal advice for your specific case. You should always consult with an attorney who specializes in immigration law for your individual case.
Law Offices of Jin Dong Cho
NEW YORK OFFICE (Flushing) 35-24 154th Street, Flushing, NY 11354
(t) 718-353-2699 (f) 718-353-8132
NEW JERSEY OFFICE 560 Sylvan Avenue, 3Fl., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
(t) 201-449-0009
