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 However, as of 2026, this perception is no longer valid.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.”
과거에는 이런 분리 방식의 심층 인터뷰가 사기 의심 정황이 뚜렷한 사건에 한해 제한적으로 쓰였습니다. 이 절차는 흔히 스톡스 인터뷰(Stokes interview·1976년 연방법원 판결에서 유래한 이름으로, 부부를 분리해 각자 답을 받은 뒤 대조하는 방식)라고 불립니다. 사무실 상담 사례를 보면, 뚜렷한 의심 정황이 특별히 없어 보이는 부부에게도 이런 방식의 질문이 나오는 경우를 최근 자주 접합니다. 주택 구조, 어젯밤 저녁 메뉴, 아침에 일어나는 순서, 어제 설거지는 누가 했는지, 최근 함께 본 영화 같은 지극히 일상적인 질문이 주로 다뤄집니다. 인터뷰 자체가 예상보다 길어지는 경우도 있어, 두 사람 몫의 질문과 대조까지 마치고 나면 체감하는 시간이 상당합니다. 문제는 답이 틀려서가 아니라 배우자와 표현이 다르거나 기억이 어긋나서 불리하게 해석되는 경우입니다. 부부가 오래 함께 살아왔더라도 세부적인 기억은 사람마다 다르게 남기 마련입니다. 실제 부부 사이에서도 사소한 생활 세부사항을 서로 다르게 기억하는 것은 자연스러운 일이라, 이를 곧바로 결혼의 진정성과 연결 짓는 것은 무리가 있습니다. 인터뷰 전 서면으로 답을 맞추라는 뜻이 아니라, 이런 방식의 질문이 나올 수 있다는 것을 미리 알고 마음의 준비를 하는 것만으로도 당황해서 답을 그르치는 상황을 줄일 수 있습니다. 답이 서로 다르게 나왔을 때 그 자리에서 곧바로 불리한 결론이 내려지는 것도 아닙니다. 심사관은 답변 사이의 불일치가 단순한 기억 차이인지, 결혼 자체에 대한 의문으로 이어질 만큼 근본적인지를 함께 살핍니다. 그런 만큼 사소한 부분까지 완벽하게 암기하려 애쓰기보다, 평소 생활을 있는 그대로 설명할 수 있도록 마음을 편하게 갖는 편이 오히려 도움이 됩니다.
◆ Spouse Who Chose U.S. Procedures — The Choice Itself Becomes Subject to Scrutiny
“USCIS가 2026년 5월 21일 낸 지침(PM-602-0199)은 미국 안에서의 신분조정을 권리가 아니라 재량이자 행정적 은혜이며, 통상의 영사 비자 절차를 면제받는 예외적 구제로 규정합니다.”
언론 보도에 따르면 영주권을 신청하는 배우자 본인에게 신청 시점과 경위, 선량한 품성(good moral character·범죄 이력이나 사회적 평판 등을 종합해 판단하는 자격 요건)에 관한 질문이 새롭게 표준화되고 있다고 전했습니다. 예전에는 당연시되지 않던 항목입니다. 5월 지침은 왜 본국에서 영사 처리 절차를 밟지 않고 미국 안에 남아 신분조정을 택했는지를 심사관이 함께 들여다보도록 독려하고 있다고 보도됐습니다. 미국 안에 남는 선택 자체가 하나의 심사 요소가 된 셈입니다. 영사 처리와 신분조정은 법적으로 둘 다 허용된 경로이지만, 실무에서 받는 심사의 무게가 달라졌다는 뜻입니다. 종전에는 부부가 각자 상황에 맞춰 절차를 고르면 그만이었다면, 이제는 그 선택의 이유까지 설명할 수 있어야 하는 국면이 된 것입니다. 같은 보도는 이전에는 드물었던 배우자 구금 사례가 나타나고, 절차 도중 스스로 출국을 택하는 이들도 있으며, 이런 분위기 속에 부부가 이민 당국과의 접촉 자체를 꺼리게 됐다는 변호사와 당사자들의 언급을 함께 전했습니다. USCIS 측은 신원 확인과 개인 이력 검증이 안전을 우선하는 엄격한 절차의 일부라는 입장을 밝힌 것으로 전해집니다. 신청 배우자 본인이 제출하는 진술과 서류 하나하나가 이제는 부수적인 절차가 아니라 사건 전체의 신뢰도를 좌우하는 요소로 다뤄지고 있다고 보아야 합니다.
◆ 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 D. 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
Marriage Green Card, Online Without Office Visits
CHO & Associates (Attorney Jo Jin-dong, NY Bar #4195434) offers the entire process for preparing a marriage-based green card application online. Start with a free eligibility assessment → greencard4spouse.com
☎ (718) 353-2699