Government’s Role in the I-864

Congress designed and implemented the I-864 to be a Contract between the U.S. Government and the Sponsor(s). Sponsors can be the petitioner, joint-sponsor, and or household member). The petitioner must be the primary sponsor. 

The legislation that initiated the I-864 Affidavit of Support is found in the “Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (IIRIRA). IIRIRA was amended in the INA to add Section 213A. 213A contains the requirements of the legally enforceable affidavit of support and the elements of the contract.

The legislative purpose in implementing the I-864 was to provide a way for the intending immigrant to overcome the public charge ground of inadmissibility to the United States. The primary intent was not to assist immigrants or their sponsors. The congressional intent was and is to protect the American taxpayer from becoming financially responsible to support an immigrant that a sponsor chose to bring to the United States.

The U.S. Government as a party to the Contract has standing to sue the sponsor(s) to enforce the contract. The government is entitled to relief only if the government can show that the immigrant has received means-tested benefits from the government. Means-tested benefits are funded by the American taxpayer.

The intending immigrant who has become a lawful permanent resident (LPR) is not a party to the contract. The LPR is a third-party beneficiary to the contract with standing to sue to compel performance. Unlike the requirement that the government show that the third-party beneficiary has received means-tested benefits to recoup damages, the intending immigrant may file a lawsuit to compel performance whether s/he has received means-tested benefits or not.

As a third-party beneficiary the LPR does not have standing to settle the contract dispute. Only the parties to the contract have standing to settle a dispute based on the contract. You will find more information on this in my blog titled; Should I Settle an I-864 Contract Dispute?

The federal court is the judicial branch of the government and has subject matter jurisdiction over an I-864 contract dispute because the I-864 is based on a federal statute .  The state court that has jurisdiction over a divorce action also has jurisdiction to hear a claim based on the I-864 Affidavit of Support.

Decisions by the court are commonly referred to as case law. Case law interprets the requirements of the contract. There is very little case law regarding the I-864 contract. There are some federal district court cases but few or no case law exists in the appellate court. The U.S. Supreme Court has not heard any case that involves the I-864.  What this means to you is that many issues regarding the terms of the I-864 are open to argument.