Nationality Act, including, but not limited to, fair and timely processing of visa applications and
naturalization petitions.
132
Not surprising in light of such criticism, reviewing courts frequently rejected INS policies
and decisions, which suggested deeper structural problems within the agency.
Although now
more than 15 years old, one influential empirical study of judicial review of immigration
129
See supra
text accompanying note 58.
130
See
Johnson,
supra
note 50, at ____.
131
See Meriam N. Alrashid,
The “Comprehensive” Immigration Reform:
Only as Good as the Bureaucracy It
is Built Upon
, 13 NEXUS J. O
P
. 29 (2007/08).
132
See generally
J
OHNSON
,
supra
note14, at 79-82 (summarizing historical reputation of the INS); A
LFREDO
M
IRANDÉ
, G
RINGO
J
USTICE
107-45 (1987) (analyzing history of Border Patrol and its abuses).
27
decisions concluded that successful impact lawsuits – class actions designed to remedy perceived
patterns and practices of violations of the law, “coupled with Congress’ failure to overturn their
results, provide a clear signal that some important aspects of the INS’ administrative
performance are deeply and systematically flawed.”
133
To begin with, the nation needs to take steps to improve the quality of the decision-
making of the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, which have long been
harshly criticized from observers that span the political spectrum.
134
Resources are much-needed
in order to increase the number of adjudicators so that each immigration judge will have the time
necessary to decide removal cases in a reasoned and responsible manner; in addition, steps must
be taken to ensure that merit-based schemes, rather than adherence to political litmus tests, are
fastidiously followed in the selection of immigration adjudicators.
135
Moreover, to encourage professionalism in the immigration adjudication machinery, we
need to reconsider many of the “court stripping” provisions that were added in 1996 and
subsequent legislation limiting the judicial review of immigration decisions.
136
Importantly, the
nation needs checks on bureaucratic tyranny as well as better-staffed and adequately funded
immigration agencies.
The United States currently may well be moving in exactly the wrong direction.
An
unacceptable and inexplicable blunder – the renewal of the visas of several of the noncitizens
involved and killed in the events of September 11, 2001 -- led to a major restructuring of the
immigration agencies.
137
Since the spring of 2003, the newly-created Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) has been primarily charged with enforcing the U.S. immigration laws.
138
Some
commentators contend that the treatment of immigrants is now worse than it was before with the
DHS mission of ensuring “homeland security” and fighting terrorism dominating other
legitimate immigration objectives.
