It answers from the law, not from memory
Every answer is made of passages found in the law itself: the statute, the regulations, agency guidance and precedent decisions. Nothing is predicted or made up. If no passage answers your question, the system tells you so instead of guessing.
Our system answers from the law
It finds the passage in the actual statute, regulation, guidance or decision, quotes it exactly, and links you to the official text. If no passage answers the question, it says so.
A chatbot answers from memory
A chatbot (a “large language model”, or LLM) writes by predicting which words usually come next. When it doesn't know, it still writes something that sounds right, sometimes citing a section that doesn't exist. That is called a hallucination.
NLP++: a reader that follows rules, not hunches
At the center of this system is NLP++, a rule-based language system built by David de Hilster, the system's architect. It reads text the way a careful paralegal would, following written grammar and legal rules: “this is a section number”, “this sentence sets a time limit”, “this clause is an exception to that one”.
NLP++ does not hallucinate. It does not predict or guess at words. Everything it reports was found in the text, by a rule a person wrote and can read.
It can't invent
NLP++ only reports what its rules find in the text. It has no way to make up a section, a quote or a case.
Same input, same answer
Ask twice and you get the same result. Nothing is left to chance, so results can be tested and checked.
Every step can be inspected
Rules are written down. If a rule ever misreads something, we can see which one and fix it for every case like it. The usual failure is a missed passage, never an invented one.
Look it up, quote it, check it
In Phase 1, NLP++ does the reading and the checking. An AI writer may later be added for one narrow job, putting found passages into plain sentences, and NLP++ checks its work before you see anything.
-
You
1. You ask
In everyday words, e.g. “Can the 10-year bar be waived?”
-
NLP++
2. It reads your question
NLP++ recognizes the legal ideas: “10-year bar” means INA 212(a)(9)(B), “waived” means a waiver.
-
NLP++
3. It finds the law
It searches the official texts only: the statute, the regulations, agency manuals and precedent decisions.
-
AI writer · not yet in use
4. Plain-English draft
Later, an AI may phrase the found passages in plain sentences. It sees only those passages and must cite one for every sentence.
-
NLP++
5. It checks every line
Does the citation exist? Is the quote exact? Does the passage support the sentence? Anything that fails is removed.
-
You
6. You get sources
Each passage is shown word for word with its citation and a link to the official text.
What the site does today: no AI writer is used at all. Every answer is made of passages quoted exactly from the law, each marked “Quoted exactly from the source”. Step 4 is not switched on.
When step 4 is added, the AI will be allowed to reword passages the system found, never to add law of its own. Its draft cannot reach you without passing NLP++'s checks in step 5.
No AI at all: the law turned into logic
In Phase 2, NLP++ does everything. It reads the law and turns each rule into a precise “if this, then that” form. It reads your question the same way. A logic engine then works the rules through step by step, like a checklist, and shows every step with the section it came from.
Applies the rules to the facts, one step at a time. It can only reach a conclusion the rules allow.
A simplified example
Here is roughly what one rule looks like after NLP++ reads it, and how the logic engine uses it.
- If a person
- was in the U.S. unlawfully for more than 180 days but less than 1 year
- and then
- left the U.S. voluntarily, before removal proceedings began
- then
- they can't be admitted for 3 years from leaving
- unless
- an exception or a waiver applies (each its own rule)
- Unlawful presence: 200 days, which is more than 180 and less than 365From your question · INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I)
- Then left the U.S., before any removal proceedingsFrom your question · INA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I)
- ?Exceptions: do any apply? Needs facts you didn't give: the system asks rather than assumes · INA 212(a)(9)(B)(iii)
- Result: the 3-year bar applies, unless an exception or waiver doesINA 212(a)(9)(B)(i)(I), (iii), (v)
Simplified for illustration. The real rules keep every condition of the statute, including how days are counted and who is exempt.
When facts are missing, it asks. If the answer depends on something you didn't say, the system tells you what it needs instead of guessing. If the law leaves a decision to an officer, it says so and shows what the officer weighs.
Where things stand: rules for the first grounds of inadmissibility and their waivers have been built and tested against the statute; more are being added. Until Phase 2 covers a question, the site answers it the Phase 1 way.
The two phases side by side
| Phase 1 | Phase 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Who reads the law | NLP++ | NLP++ |
| Who reasons about it | You (and your attorney), from the quoted passages | A logic engine, using rules NLP++ built from the law |
| Role of AI (LLM) | None today. Later, only rewording found passages, checked by NLP++ | None |
| What you see | Exact quotes, citations, links to the official text | An answer with a step-by-step proof, each step cited |
| If it can't answer | It says the question isn't covered | It says so, or asks for the facts it needs |
The rules that never change: answers come only from the listed official sources. No citation reaches you unless it has been checked against the source. A source we don't have permission to use is never used. And every answer can be traced back to the exact words of the law.