Can a non-US citizen get a green card through marriage if they are already in the US on a visa?

1. Summary of the results

A non-U.S. citizen who is physically present in the United States on a valid visa can, in many cases, seek lawful permanent resident status (a “green card”) through marriage to a U.S. citizen by filing for Adjustment of Status (AOS), but eligibility depends on specific entry and admissibility criteria and recent procedural changes. Federal guidance and practice note that immediate relatives (spouses of U.S. citizens) are generally exempt from numerical limits and may file Form I-485 to adjust status if they were inspected and admitted or paroled into the U.S.; this pathway is repeatedly affirmed in family-based immigration guidance ^[1]. Recent USCIS policy updates and form revisions in 2025 have tightened documentation requirements, increased fraud-detection measures, and standardized interviews and evidentiary standards for marriage-based cases, which affects timelines and evidentiary burdens for applicants already in the U.S. ^{[2] [3]}. Sources focused on 2025 procedure changes emphasize that some categories — notably nonimmigrants who entered without inspection or who violated status in certain ways — face additional hurdles or ineligibility for AOS and may require consular processing abroad; those who were admitted or paroled and maintain lawful entry status typically remain eligible but should expect more detailed vetting ^{[1] [2]}. In short, marriage to a U.S. citizen commonly provides a path to a green card for noncitizens present on a visa, but eligibility hinges on the manner of entry, current immigration status, criminal/admissibility issues, and compliance with newer USCIS documentation and interview requirements ^{[4] [2] [1]}.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Analyses that state simply “yes” or “no” often omit pivotal legal and factual distinctions that determine admissibility. First, whether the person was “inspected and admitted or paroled” on entry is decisive: those admitted or paroled may generally adjust status in the U.S., whereas those who entered without inspection often must apply through a U.S. consulate and may need waivers ^[1]. Second, the role of prior immigration violations, criminal history, public-charge concerns, or deportation orders can render an otherwise eligible spouse inadmissible or subject to removal — factors sometimes minimized in general guides ^[4]. Third, recent 2025 USCIS changes introduced new form editions, stricter evidence rules, and routine interviews aimed at fraud prevention; these changes increase processing time and the evidentiary burden, and may disproportionately affect low-income or non-English-speaking couples who lack legal counsel ^{[2] [3]}. Alternative viewpoints include immigrant-rights advocates who warn that heightened vetting can create barriers to family unity and legal access ^[2], while government sources argue stricter procedures protect program integrity and reduce marriage fraud ^[2]. Practical nuances — such as concurrent filing of I-130/I-485, availability of work permits and travel documents during adjudication, and waiver pathways for unlawful presence — are often omitted but materially affect outcomes and timelines ^[1].

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement’s brevity can create misleading impressions that benefit certain narratives: a simplistic “yes” supports the view that marriage is an easy route to legalization and may underplay legal limits, while a blunt “no” supports deterrent or restrictionist arguments that ignore lawful pathways. Sources emphasizing eligibility ^[1] may be construed as reassuring to prospective applicants but can understate obstacles like inadmissibility, unlawful entry, or new evidentiary burdens ^[2]. Conversely, sources highlighting stricter rules and fraud measures ^{[2] [3]} can be used by enforcement-focused actors to justify broader crackdowns, while downplaying family-based exemptions for immediate relatives. Stakeholders who benefit from framings that overstate simplicity include migration facilitators and unregulated advisors; parties who benefit from emphasizing risk and restriction include agencies advocating for stricter controls. Balanced factual reading requires acknowledging both the well-established AOS route for eligible spouses and the recent procedural tightening and legal exceptions that materially affect many real-world cases ^{[4] [2]}.