RIGHTS: U.S. Giving Immigrants Green Light But Not Green Card

By IPS Correspondents Reprint | | Print |

Alexandra Barsk

NEW YORK, Jul 14 2004 (IPS) - Flora Carolina Rodriguez Santillan was dismissed from her job at a retail chain after five years because the papers that prove she has been approved as a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) of the United States are caught up in a government document logjam.

Flora Carolina Rodriguez Santillan was dismissed from her job at a retail chain after five years because the papers that prove she has been approved as a Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) of the United States are caught up in a government document logjam.

“I was about to be promoted at work, but I lost my job and health benefits because I had no proof that I was authorised to work,” she said.

Santillan is one of thousands of U.S. immigrants who have obtained LPR status in immigration courts but are being blocked from working, attending school and visiting relatives abroad because they have been denied adequate documentation of their legal status by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), according to Javier Maldonado, executive director for the Lawyer’s Committee for Civil Rights under Law of Texas (Texas Lawyer’s Committee).

DHS was created by the administration of President George W Bush in the aftermath of the Sep. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon to protect the United States in the era of Washington’s “war on terrorism.”

Texas Lawyer’s Committee and California-based law firm Cooley Godward LLP have filed a national class-action lawsuit in San Francisco against Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary Tom Ridge, head of the DHS, for failing to provide LPRs with proof of their status in the form of a green card.

Thousands of immigrants are granted the status during deportation or removal proceeding each year, receiving rights that, without documentation proving their lawful status, they are unable to exercise.

“There’s a disconnect between when they’re granted their status and when they actually receive proof of their status,” said Martin Acevedo, associate director for the Texas Lawyer’s Committee.

Waiting time for documentation ranges from three to sometimes more than 18 months, said Maldonado.

Santillan, a native of Mexico, has been living in the United States for almost 20 years. On May 19, 2003, she was granted LPR status by an immigration judge in San Francisco but, to date, has still not received written proof of her status.

(It is not unusual for immigrants to live undocumented in the United States for extended periods of time before authorities catch up with them).

During the waiting period for written proof, LPRs “don’t have any documents that can distinguish them from undocumented aliens,” said Michelle Rhyu, an attorney for Cooley Godward, which is handling the suit free of charge. Without such a document, LPRs are prevented from receiving employment authorisation, a driver’s license, a full-use social security card and in-state tuition at state colleges, she said.

The problem exists nation-wide and does not affect only immigrants from particular countries or ethnic groups. According to Maldonado, in the 2003 federal fiscal year over 10,000 people were granted LPR status in immigration courts, and many are still waiting for their documentation.

Dan Smulian, director of training and legal services at the New York Immigration Coalition, says the problem has only gotten worse since responsibility for immigration issues was divided among three DHS agencies in 2003: the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

“Different agencies each have a role to play in the documentation, and the transition of files isn’t happening effectively,” Smulian said.

Plaintiff Ziber Ismaili, a native of Macedonia, currently lives in Wisconsin State with his wife and stepdaughter, who are both U.S. citizens. Though he has made several requests to the USCIS to receive proof of his status, like Santillan he has not received any documentation since he was granted LPR status in July 2003.

Due to lack of proof of his lawful status, Ismaili cannot travel to Macedonia to visit his 10-year-old daughter and elderly mother, whom he has not seen in eight years. His mother is now very ill and no longer able to care for his daughter so Ismaili wishes to go home to make alternate arrangements for her care until she can move to the United States to live with him.

The LPR lawsuit has 10 named plaintiffs, hailing from all over the country, but the class is expected to number in the thousands, said Rhyu, and will include those who were or will be granted LPR status by an immigration judge or by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA).

The plaintiffs’ attorneys are asking the DHS to provide LPRs with temporary documentation proving their status while they wait for their permanent “green card.” According to Rhyu, they hope to minimise the waiting time for some form of documentation to 14 days.

“We’re just asking the immigration services to issue the paperwork that the LPRs were given the right to when the immigration judge granted them their LPR status,” she said.

“They’ve undergone all the security checks, fulfilled all the legal requirements. All that’s left is to give these people a piece of paper,” Maldonado said.

According to Rhyu, the plaintiffs have fewer rights than before they were granted LPR status because during deportation procedures they were entitled to temporary employment authorisation and travel documents.

Santillan was granted an Employment Authorisation Document (EAD) during the pending of her deportation process. It expired in August 2003, but as an LPR she was unable to extend it and therefore had no proof that she was authorised to work in the United States.

The one document the plaintiffs do have is a copy of the immigration judge’s order granting LPR status. But because it is only a carbon copy of a form check list with a box ticked for adjustment to LPR status and lacks photo-identification, it “doesn’t look very official,” and “routinely employers are not accepting it,” Rhyu said.

Plaintiff Anita Lasbrey, a native of Nigeria living in The Bronx, New York, was granted LPR status on Jul. 7, 2003. Because she had not yet received documentation of her status, Lasbrey attempted to obtain a Social Security card using the immigration judge’s order but was told that it was insufficient proof of her LPR status.

If the plaintiffs are successful in their suit and the DHS is required to provide them and all other LPRs with temporary documentation during the waiting period for processing of their green cards, Lasbrey will finally be able to travel to Nigeria to visit her five siblings, whom she has not seen in 16 years for fear of being unable to re-enter the United States.