IMBRA establishes federal criminal  and civil penalties for IMBs that violate these provisions. Agencies Have Implemented Some, Not All, IMBRA Requirements

USCIS, DOS, and DOJ have implemented some, but not all of the IMBRA  requirements that are designed to inform visa applicants about the persons  petitioning for them to immigrate to the United States. DOS also issued IMBRA  implementation guidance to its consular officers. Although DOS’s  guidance does provide for the mailing of criminal history information to  beneficiaries, the guidance does not specifically require DOS to mail  beneficiaries a copy of the approved I-129F petitions, as required by  IMBRA. USCIS officials told us that they do not check every petitioner  against USCIS’s application management information system, called  CLAIMS, to determine if the petitioner has previously filed a fiancé(e)  petition. As shown in Table 1, USCIS adjudicators are to routinely check CLAIMS if  the petitioner self-attests that he or she has previously filed a petition. As a result, by  limiting USCIS checks to those petitioners that acknowledge prior filings,  USCIS increases its risk that it will approve more fiancé(e) petitions than  allowed under IMBRA, including petitions filed by persons with a record  of violent criminal offenses, who are not entitled to a waiver of IMBRA’s  filing limits except in extraordinary circumstances. In  addition, after a second approval, upon filing of a third petition within 10  years of the first filing, USCIS is to notify both the petitioner and  beneficiary of the number of previously approved petitions filed by the  petitioner. USCIS officials told us that  initially they attempted to notify beneficiaries, as required. However,  USCIS no longer tries to notify beneficiaries because of the reported  difficulty in obtaining accurate overseas mailing addresses. USCIS Has Not Finalized the Information Pamphlet Designed to Inform Beneficiaries about Their Legal Rights and Resources

IMBRA requires that USCIS, in consultation with DOS and DOJ, develop  an information pamphlet for beneficiaries to include information on the  visa application process; the illegality of domestic violence, sexual assault,  and child abuse in the U.S.; the legal rights of immigrant victims and the  resource services available to them; child support; marriage fraud; a  warning that some U.S. citizens with a history of violence may not have a  criminal record; and information on requirements for IMBs under IMBRA. USCIS officials told us they did not know when the pamphlet  would be finalized, nor did they have a specific time frame for finalizing  the pamphlet. Until the  pamphlet is finalized, translated, and distributed USCIS increases the risk  that beneficiaries are not being made aware of their rights or the resources  that are available should they encounter domestic violence. The Chief Administrative Hearing Officer within EOIR had  drafted IMBRA-related regulations regarding how civil penalties would be  administered, but these regulations cannot be finalized until the agencies  decide who will be responsible for investigating, referring, and ultimately  prosecuting potential violations at a hearing before DOJ’s Chief  Administrative Hearing Officer. Without a framework for enforcement of the IMBRA provisions, it  will be difficult for IMBRA violators to be prosecuted and assessed  applicable penalties. Most of the USCIS Data Required for GAO Study Are Not in a Summary or Reportable Form; Other Required Data Are Not Collected

As part of our study on the impact of IMBRA on the K nonimmigrant visa  process, IMBRA mandated that USCIS and DOS collect and maintain  specific data for us to report. Although IMBRA mandated that USCIS  and DOS collect and maintain the data necessary for us to conduct such a  study, the data we are requested to report on are essentially petition- driven data for which USCIS would have responsibility to collect and  maintain. Conclusions

The purpose of IMBRA is to address issues of domestic violence and abuse  against beneficiaries by petitioners, including those who met their foreign- born spouses through an international marriage broker. We could not determine the reason a petitioner was denied or granted a  waiver or the extent to which petitioners with a criminal history or history  of violence have filed K nonimmigrant petitions, including how many of  those petitioners used the services or an IMB or received waivers of  IMBRA’s filing limits, because USCIS did not collect and maintain this data  in a summary or reportable format for this study. We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of Homeland  Security and State and the Attorney General.
Why GAO Did This Study

The International Marriage Broker Regulation Act of 2005 (IMBRA) was enacted to address issues of domestic violence and abuse against noncitizens (beneficiaries) married or engaged to U.S. citizens (petitioners) who have petitioned for them to immigrate to the U.S., including those who met through an international marriage broker (IMB). IMBRA mandated that GAO study the act's impact on the visa process for noncitizen spouses and fiance(e)s. This report addresses the extent to which the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), a component of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); the Department of State (DOS); and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have implemented IMBRA, and the extent to which USCIS and DOS have collected and maintained data for this GAO report as required by IMBRA. To address these objectives, GAO reviewed the act and related legislation, analyzed IMBRA implementation guidance and available data on applications filed, and interviewed officials at USCIS, DOS, and DOJ.

What GAO Found

USCIS, DOS, and DOJ have implemented two of seven key IMBRA requirements identified by GAO, but five key provisions intended to provide beneficiaries with information about the petitioners seeking to bring them to the United States have yet to be completed. First, although IMBRA requires DOS to mail a copy of the approved petition to each beneficiary, the agency is not currently fulfilling this requirement. Second, IMBRA limits the number of petitions a person may file for a noncitizen fiance(e) unless USCIS grants a waiver of the filing limits. However, USCIS officials told GAO that they do not check all petitioners against records to determine if a petitioner has previously filed a fiance(e) petition. USCIS adjudicators are required to check the record if the petitioner self-attests that he or she has previously filed a petition. By limiting its checks to those petitioners who acknowledge prior filings, USCIS increases the risk that it will approve more fiance(e) petitions than allowed under IMBRA. Third, IMBRA mandates that after two approved petitions, upon filing of a third petition within 10 years of the first, USCIS is to notify both the petitioner and beneficiary of previously approved petitions filed by the petitioner. USCIS officials told GAO that they no longer try to notify beneficiaries because of the difficulty in obtaining accurate overseas mailing addresses. Thus, beneficiaries are left without all required information for making a decision about the person petitioning on his or her behalf. USCIS officials told GAO that they plan to ask DOS to notify beneficiaries during their visa interview with a DOS consular officer. Fourth, the requirement to provide beneficiaries with a pamphlet that discusses the visa application process and available resources if the beneficiary encounters domestic violence or abuse is not being met. USCIS has drafted the pamphlet, but has not established time frames for finalizing the pamphlet. Until the pamphlet is finalized, translated, and distributed, USCIS increases the risk that beneficiaries are not being made aware of their rights or the resources that are available should they encounter domestic violence. Lastly, IMBRA establishes federal criminal and civil penalties for IMBs who violate its provisions. Although DOJ has drafted IMBRA-related regulations regarding how civil penalties would be administered, these regulations cannot be finalized until DOJ, USCIS, and DOS decide which agencies will be responsible for investigating, referring, and prosecuting potential IMBRA violations. Until the agencies resolve these issues and establish an enforcement framework, it will be difficult for IMBRA violators to be penalized. USCIS is collecting and maintaining some of the data for this report as required by IMBRA; however, most of the data are not in a summary or reportable form and other required data have not been collected. For example, GAO could not determine the extent to which petitioners with a criminal history or history of violence have filed petitions because USCIS does not capture this data electronically. USCIS officials told GAO that they are considering modifying their data management system to collect data that is currently not being collected. However, no decisions have been made.