|
|
|
|
SUBSCRIBE The leading Copyright |
Dear Editor:
I have been "practicing" immigration law for 15 years - first as a
senior paralegal in a lawfirm and more recently as a corporate,
in-house immigration specialist. If Mr. Murray has never seen anything
like what Mrs. Boecker describes in 24 years of practicing, I would say
he has been extremely fortunate. Far from a "bunch of bunk"
misinformation and capriciousness reign supreme in INS district offices
and service centers, and for a very understandable, if not justifiable
reason. I would say that, with the exception of high-level supervisors,
individual INS info officers do not have a grasp of all the laws and
regulations and are not trained to provide legal advice and strategy.
As Mr. Murray correctly points out, it behooves any would-be immigrant
to seek competent, legal counsel - but finding it can present its own
set of problems. As those who repudiate "unauthorized practice" well
know, there is a big difference between simply helping someone to fill
out forms and giving sound legal advice, which takes into account the
totality of an alien's circumstances (such as children abroad) and all
possible consequences. As a compromise, however, wouldn't it be nice
if Service personnel would be humble enough to admit that they are not
competent to provide legal advice, and refer people to the Immigration
Bar, rather than arrogantly misleading those who are simply trying to do
the right thing.
I know of what I speak. Recently I phoned the VSC to ask advice
about concurrent I-140/I-485 filings - specificially which box to check
on the I-485 form. The advice I received was that since the VSC has
received no guidance from Washington and has no procedures in place,
they are in fact rejecting concurrent filings. I was told only I-140's
could be filed. Given the breadth of my experience I know better that
to take one supervisor's remarks as gospel, and immediately set about to
confirm these rumors with my colleagues in AILA. Two weeks ago, I
spoke to an INS airport inspector about an erroneously executed L visa
at a Consulate and subsequent I-94 problem. The officer proceeded to
explain to me the admission period for L's issued under a Blanket
petition. He was completely off base and I might add, erring on the
side of giving much more time than that to which the alien was
entitled. I had to explain the law to him - him, who is charged with
determining an alien's period of lawful admission in the United
States!! I later spoke to the Port Director, who of course knew exactly
what I was talking about. However, the average Joe has no access to
these high level INS officers, and they can't possibly service the
general public. Last week a "client" of mine almost went beserk in a
local INS office when he went to do his I-89 processing and get his
passport stamped following the approval of his EB adjustment of status
and was told they couldn't do it because he hadn't had an interview and
they didn't have his file!! One shouldn't need to take a lawyer in to
get a passport stamped! So, Mr. Murray, my hat's off to you, if you
have no such vignettes to share.
Unfortunately immigration laws and procedures have become so complex
as to require the assistance of legal counsel or an advanced degree to
file even the most simple applications. There are those who would say
that this is unfair, and we could debate that, but it won't change
anything. They are only going to get more complex. I know this because
I spend a significant portion of my work day reading to stay abreast of
new developments.
I don't think it unreasonable for a visitor or would-be immigrant
from a country like Germany to assume that an INS inspector or
information officer (as the term implies) will be able to provide
accurate information about filing procedures and updated forms, but not
legal advice. Furthermore, I think it's logical from the Boeker's
perspective, to have then consulted their congressperson. However,
again, I would expect the congressperson to refer them to a competent
attorney, rather than try to tackle the problem. It is regrettable that
many well-meaning Americans, including nonimmigration lawyers and
congresspeople, are too often cavalier in their assessment of
immigration laws, and as a result downplay the importance of expert
advice.
When Mrs. Boecker says they engaged a "professional" we don't know if
this was a notary, a lawyer or a charlatan. The Boecker's, too, have to
bear some responsibilty for their choices. If they had enough resources
to apply for an investor visa, they had enough resources to hire a good
lawyer. Mrs. Boecker's editorial does not provide us with enough facts
to determine if in fact they were ever entitled to permanent residence
in the first place, and does not even say how they determined that they
qualified for the intial Alien Labor Certification. The one bad
assumption that the Boeckers and many others make is that being good,
law-abiding, tax-paying, family-oriented people somehow qualifies you
for a green card in this day and age. Do the Turkish Gastarbeiters in
Germany enjoy such rights? In response to such naivete, I would have
to say, "Get over it!". And, please, leave the anti-terrorist
rhetoric to the politicians.
Name Withheld On Request  Share this page | Bookmark this page | Print this page |  Add to del.icio.us
The leading immigration law publisher - over 50000 pages of free information!
© Copyright 1995-2008 American Immigration LLC, ILW.COM |