"But just the idea, that I may
be detained (and if it was only for a few days) and be separated from my child is an
absolute nightmare I fear...not to mention the fear I have of being deported into a
country that I don't know (I'm a citizen of a country that I never lived in - gulp)." ZEYNEPGELDI
New Guidelines Steer
Enforcement Away from Harsh Prosecutions
By way of a 13-page government memo, INS officials have been distributing new
prosecution guidelines to their field offices around the nation. Contained in that memo is
a strong message to the offices that they should review several key factors very carefully
as they consider whether or not to prosecute certain immigration cases. The goal is
to bring a semblance of reason and humanity to some of the unforgiving laws passed more
than four years ago.
Discussed in the memo are factors such as immigrants' personal and criminal history, and
the length of residence in the United States. A good record can be used as legitimate
rationale not to prosecute.
This discretion, says Immigration and Naturalization Service spokesman Bill Strassberger,
"has always been available to us... but it became clear something had to be done with
the '96 laws."
The spokesman is referring in part to the rash of cases where law abiding, hardworking
legal immigrants are being deported based on fairly nominal crimes, some of them age-old.
Other cases have seen adopted juveniles sent away from their families and back to a
country they've never known, based on petty transgressions. (The Child citizenship law was
recently passed for this and other reasons.)
Under the immigration laws of 1996, many permanent residents who had been convicted of
crimes since they had first arrived in the United States were suddenly subject to removal.
Time served or any other legal punishment fulfilled, was irrelevant. And the law was
retroactive so that long-term permanent residents with a criminal offense decades old were
being deported, and often times, detained indefinitely due to deportation complications.
To make matters worse for green card holders, the exorbitant laws also extended the nature
of crimes that can render immigrants deportable, and at the same time placed
limitations on immigration judges in terms of their authority to provide relief from
removal to those deemed worthy of legal compassion.
Although the INS maintains that discretion is already exercised among the Service, many
verified media stories beg to differ.
One of the most outrageous examples of the 1996 law was a case last year where a long-time
permanent resident went to apply for citizenship and wound up in deportation proceedings.
Her crime? Some 10 years earlier she had caught her boyfriend with another woman and had
pulled the other woman's hair and been arrested and charged with assault. She now faced
being banished from her family and her country to be returned to a country she barely
knew.
The irony is that hundreds of thousands of serious criminal illegals remain in this
country every day because of a serious lack of enforcement resources. Citizens often
complain that when they call up to report illegal aliens in their neighborhood who are
dealing drugs or engaging in other grave activities, that no one from the INS or the
police force even responds to the call.
Hopefully, the new Guidelines, and eventual legislation on the matter, will help to
prevent frivolous cases from going to court, so that the INS can focus on those aliens who
actually endanger our society.
and 
| 