How Immigration Relates to National Security
A number of
aspects of immigration law debated in recent years are ones that relate directly
to our country’s national security and its ability to deter foreign terrorism on
our soil. In FAIR’s recommendations on fighting terrorism, we have addressed all
the following areas.
In-country adjustment of Status for Illegal Aliens (a.k.a.
Section 245(i))
There are circumstances under which a nonimmigrant or
an illegal alien is allowed to become a legal permanent resident alien (for
example, through marriage to a U.S. citizen). Historically, in such cases, if
the alien petitioning to ‘adjust’ his status to legal residency was not legally
present in the U.S., he had to return to his home country to be interviewed and
investigated by U.S. consular personnel, just as other applicants for legal
immigration are.
But a provision of the 1990 Immigration action (Section 245(i)) has been
allowing these applicants to remain in the U.S. and skip the background check,
just by paying a fine. Cynically, the Immigration and Naturalization Service
(INS) has supported this end-run around regular security procedures because it
generates revenue for them in fines.
By allowing illegal aliens to adjust status without going through proper
background checks, Section 245(i) completely short-circuits national security
against foreign criminals and terrorists. Fortunately, after being extended by
Congress, Section 245(i) has finally expired. But there are provisions in
pending bills that would restore it permanently.
Monitoring Foreign Students (CIPRIS)
At any
point in time, there are roughly 500,000 foreign students studying in America.
In recent years, the FBI has warned Congress that state-sponsors of terrorism
have been funding students to come to the U.S., where most are studying
technology-related fields that contribute to foreign weapons programs. One of
the suspects in the September 11th attack was admitted as a foreign student to
study at a San Francisco college. But he never showed up there, and the college
did not report that to the INS as unusual, since it assumed that his visa had
simply been denied.
In 1997, the government did create a system designed for tracking foreign
students: the Coordinated Interagency Partnership Regulating International
Students (CIPRIS). But, due to objections by colleges, implementation of the
system has been delayed until 2005.
Exit-Entry Controls (a.k.a. Section 110)
Every
year millions of foreigners enter the United States as “nonimmigrants” (visitors
or workers of some type) for a limited period. Although they are expected to
return home at the end of their visit, there is no effective means for detecting
those who do not. In 1996, Congress passed a law (the Illegal Immigration Reform
and Immigrant Responsibility Act 1996, a.k.a. “IIRAIRA”), with a provision
(Section 110) requiring the INS to set up a database to track this information
within two years. But, due to objections from the tourism industry and others,
full implementation has been delayed until 2005.
Without exit-entry controls, the U.S. has no way of noticing whether a
nonimmigrant overstays his visa in violation of immigration law. In the absence
of such a system, enemies of our national security can more easily enter the
U.S. as nonimmigrants, and remain to threaten us from within. It is appears that
most of the September 11th hijackers entered as nonimmigrants, who then
overstayed their visas undetected.
Driver’s Licenses
There is a movement in
numerous states to ease up on proof-of-identity requirements for driver’s
license applicants. Proponents admit that the reason is to make it easier for
illegal aliens to get driver’s license, which, they claim, will make the roads
safer.
But in every state, the driver’s license (and its counterpart, the state ID
card) is the primary document used to establish identity and proof of legal
residence. By making driver’s licenses accessible to illegal aliens, you put in
their hands the essential means to pass themselves off as legal residents of the
United States. Of the 19 hijackers in the September 11th attack, 13 had managed
easily to get Florida driver’s licenses, which masked the illegality of their
presence in the U.S.
Local Police Cooperation (Section 133)
In order
for all American law enforcement to work together toward national security,
state and local authorities must be able to work with the federal government to
detect and detain foreigners who are either dangerous or are in our country
illegally. For example, a Florida police officer actually ticketed one of the
September 11th hijackers for driving without a license. But because the officer
did not have access to the Immigration and Naturalization Service’s “watch list”
for terrorists, he released the suspected terrorist.
At present, local police can hold an illegal alien for being illegal only if
local law gives them that authority. In the 1996 IIRAIRA law (Illegal
Immigration Reform and Immigration Responsibility Act), Congress included a
provision (Section 133) that empowers the Immigration and Naturalization Service
to provide training to local law enforcement agencies, who would then gain
authority to detain suspected illegal aliens. But INS and its parent, the
Department of Justice (DOJ), have taken no action to inform local jurisdictions
about the option or to encourage them to do so. The thousands of police officers
nationwide are potentially powerfully allies in the fight against foreign
terrorism on our soil, but the DOJ and INS have wasted their potential.
Classified Evidence
In some immigration trials,
the prosecution has to use classified evidence, gathered through our nation’s
intelligence network, to prove that the alien in question should be removed or
is a danger to the United States. To reveal this information to anyone but the
officers of the court would threaten national security.
But the lawyers for illegal aliens have turned this necessity on its head,
calling such “secret evidence” a violation of their clients’ rights. They seek
to forbid the introduction of classified information into a case as evidence
unless it is disclosed to them and to the public. Some members of Congress are
trying to enact a prohibition on the use of classified evidence.
If the September 11th attack has shown us anything, it’s that America’s
intelligence network is more important than ever in defending our country
against terrorism. Its integrity and our need for national security far outweigh
the cynical demands of lawyers for full disclosure at any cost.
Amnesty for Illegal Aliens
Led by Mexico’s
President Vicente Fox, a movement for granting amnesty to illegal aliens in the
United States has been building in recent months. Normally, before legal
immigrants are admitted to our country, U.S. consular officials abroad can check
to see whether the applicant has a criminal record or other background issues in
his home country. Illegal aliens, of course, do not undergo such a procedure.
Giving amnesty allows millions of illegal aliens to sidestep this important
means of screening out people who pose a threat to our national security.
FAIR 10/01
