Final version
dsatish,
Let us see the final version and then comment again.
As far as following this with other actions, please see article from "Murthy" as to why BCIS is working on asylee cases. Let us examine this more closely.
Government Sued Over Mishandling of Asylee Adjustment Cases
The February 22, 2002 MurthyBulletin included an article, available on
MurthyDotCom, on the American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF)
Annual Immigrant Achievement Awards Dinner, which honors highly
accomplished immigrants and raises funds for AILF activities. One example
of these important activities is a class-action lawsuit, filed jointly by AILF
and a private law firm, against the INS, the Attorney General, and the
Commissioner of the INS for alleged failure to properly issue permanent
residence to persons who filed for the green card based upon a grant of
asylum status.
Individuals who are granted asylum status may apply for permanent
residence after they have held the asylum status for one year. There is no
limit to the number of persons who can be granted asylum status. Under
law, however, of these individuals, only 10,000 per year can be approved for
adjustment to green card status. An applicant can file for the green card,
whether or not one of the 10,000 numbers is available to him or her. There
is then a waiting list for allocation of green card approvals. Cases stay in
"pending status" until the approval can be granted.
The lawsuit charges that, over the past eight years, the government has not
issued many of the available green cards, has failed to keep track of the
numbers, and has failed to process the applications on a
first-come-first-served basis. Additionally, the suit claims that certain
individuals who are exempt from the limit of 10,000 are kept on the waiting
list in error, due to their being granted asylum status under certain special
programs. The suit also alleges that certain exempt applicants were
included in the 10,000 approved cases, disadvantaging those regular
applicants who should have been included.
The applicants suffer in many ways. They are forced to spend extra money
in order to renew their employment authorization cards each year, at a fee
that is now $120.00. They are required to undergo repeated fingerprinting,
as the prints expire after 15 months. They must also undergo repeated
medical examinations, at an expense of $200-$250 each. These expenses
can cause substantial hardship, particularly to asylees who often escape
their countries with little more than the clothes on their backs. In many
instances, these people are trying to send money to their families overseas
who are in desperate need.
But the delays cost these applicants more than money. They are subject to
delays in their ability to petition for family members and for themselves
becoming U.S. citizens. They may have difficulty enrolling in schools, be
unable to obtain loans necessary to the furthering of their educations, and
have to pay out-of-state tuitions even within their particular states of
residence.
The lawsuit claims that more than 18,000 of the available asylee
adjustment numbers were not distributed. The suit asks the INS to
distribute the unused numbers, administer the waiting list properly on a
first-come-first-served basis, and find a way to eliminate the need to renew
the employment authorization card for pending cases.
© The Law Office of Sheela Murthy, P.C.
