Although the Comprehensive Immigration Reform bill recently scuttled in the Senate was deeply flawed, one thing was clear. Our legal immigration system is broken. Nothing proves it more than what happened today. -
On June 13, 2007, the U.S. State Department announced that, as of July 2, individuals seeking permanent residence ("green cards") through employer sponsorship finally would be allowed to proceed with their applications. Applicants would have a short window, possibly only through July or perhaps August, to complete their paperwork.
Those intending immigrants, immediately and at great expense, rushed to gather final documents, complete their paperwork and obtain required medical exams. Many sent their applications off on Friday, June 29 for arrival on July 2 at the Department of Homeland Security, for the last phase of the multi-step process that leads to a green card.
However, on the very day the door was to open, DOS and DHS slammed it shut.
On July 2, DHS and DOS announced - based on no different information than they had on June 13 when they announced the opening of this filing door - that all applications would be turned away.
"People ask why those who come to the United States illegally can't just follow the rules," said Kathleen Campbell Walker, President of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. "But here people followed the rules and did everything right, yet without warning or explanation the door was slammed in their faces. This hoax perpetrated by these two government agencies is unconscionable, and is an example of how badly our immigration system is broken."
Annecdotal evidence suggests that up to 200,000 people are having the door slammed in their faces by this action. To place it in context, the USCIS has built up a huge backlog of applications over the years by processing no more than 800 to 1600 applications a month. Suddenly in June, it was able to process 60,000 of them.
For the record, in the prior 2 fiscal years, we lost about a total of 60,000 visas because they were not processed at all. The Deparment of State releases visa numbers in batches through out the fiscal year based upon anticipated usage. This year, to avoid visa number loss, the Deparment of State basically released all of the remaining numbers starting in July, hoping that both the backlogs abroad and in the U.S. could be cleared without any loss this year.
Even more unfair and ridiculous , the adjustment applications now being rejected represent a legal exception to normal visa processing. The system is supposed to allot visas to people who apply for visas in their home country after waiting abroad for visa numbers.
The particular 60,000 applications USCIS just approved represent people who already are in the U.S. lawfully in some form of nonimmigrant status who file for adjustment to avoid returning to the home country. People in the U.S. with adjustment applications pending are allowed to remain in the U.S. and work during the time it takes to approve the petition.
People abroad are now completely precluded from moving forward in their application. And the 200,000 people in the U.S. who would have been eligible to submit applications but for this unprecedented action will now have to incur multiple expenses in renewing their nonimmigrant status - renewals, which, by the way, will end up burdening the USCIS even more since they could have been avoided just by allowing the people to apply for ajdustment instead.
The smart thing to have done would have been to try to clear up the backlog of people abroad and then, at the very last minute, approved adjustment applications to ensure that all visa numbers were used up.
What kind of message are we sending when we handle our legal immigration process this way? Is this the administration's hissy fit at not getting comprehensive immigration reform? If so, its impact on the approximately 250,000 people waiting in line to enter legally, as well as on the 250,000 U.S. sponsors seems to be a rather inordinate price to pay. How can we, with a straight face condemn those who enter illegally and those who employ them, when we treat those who meticulously follow or laws with such disdain?