美国移民律师界力挺USCIS前局长
再一次，为表明OIG在与USCIS腐败做斗争，或者即使只是在表面看来是如此，我们也会大力支持OIG的，但是OIG在提及或者指正Mayorkas先生创新EB-5是错误的这一章节，明显超出其专业的领域”。OIG完全没有理解制度化官僚主义政策对USCIS专横的意义，尤其OIG设想反Mayorkas在USCIS只是一种淳朴的，或者是说在政府机构的恰当行为。正是OIG的这些错误，危害到这篇报告可能有的价值。我们建议可以狭义阅读该报告－当成一篇有不当影响，但没有不恰当政策的文章。通过狭义的阅读，总的来说，我们十分支持OIG阻止人事政治和官僚行为的腐败行为。
Comment: OIG On EB5
Yesterday evening, the Office of Inspector General at DHS (OIG)released a report (see news item below) on former USCIS DirectorAli Mayorkas (currently DHS Deputy Secretary) regarding severalEB5-related matters. When we began reading the 99-page report, wewere prepared to write an editorial comment criticizing Mr.Mayorkas. Instead, after a close reading of the report, we findourselves defending Mr. Mayorkas.
Let us first note that we believe that corruption in Government isintolerable, and inconsistent with American mores, and inimical tothe health of the American Republic. To the extent that OIG isfighting corruption, or even the appearance thereof, we stronglysupport such efforts. The primary function of a free press is toprevent corruption in Government (a commonplace that is oftenforgotten by Americans today), and this is the primary reason whythe free press is the only industry specifically protected in theUS Constitution. Immigration Daily takes its responsibilitiesseriously, in the tradition of the American trade press, and OIGcan count on our unstinting support on any anti-corruptionmatter.
However, USCIS is an agency out of control, and the OIG Reportprovides ample evidence that Mr. Mayorkas's efforts actuallybrought a measure of sanity to EB5 processing.
As Mr. Mayorkas points out in his statement appended to the Report:"When I became Director the most common complaint from the publicabout the agency was that it rendered inconsistent adjudicationsand failed to adhere to the law" (OIG Report at Page 68, all pagereferences that follow are to the OIG Report). Mr. Mayorkas isundoubtedly correct, and the vast majority of Immigration Dailyreaders can attest to the arbitrary nature of USCIS adjudicationsin all immigration matters, too many of which fail to abide by thestatute. One of the particularly annoying peculiarities of USCIS(as opposed to most federal agencies) is that it refuses to followthe principle of Res Judicata. Once a federal agency rules on amatter,
those regulated by it have a reasonable expectation to relyon the rule as applied, as a settled matter. Instead USCIS believesit can revoke approved petitions at will, and frequently does so,throughout the length and breadth of the immigration system (notjust EB5). The OIG Report implies that Mr. Mayorkas's insistence onfollowing precedent is a problem and implies that arbitrarydiscretion at USCIS is correct national policy: "Another officialwrote, 'It appears that [the decision to grant the initial singlepetition] was a simple mistake. And it is absurd to me to accorddeference to simple mistakes'" (Page 28). In other words, OIGbelieves that USCIS ought to reserve to itself the unfettereddiscretion to make "simple mistakes" and that turning human livesupside down by revoking approvals, or changing the rules of thegame in mid-game is A-OK. The better approach would be for USCIS toavoid making those mistakes in the first place, something notaddressed by the OIG Report. Mr. Mayorkas further states:"I shouldnote that, as a general matter, some within USCIS (including somewithin USCIS leadership) resisted engaging with the public,resisted my creation of the Office of Public Engagement, andresisted the practice I began of posting for public comment ourdraft policy memoranda. They preferred the insularity that USCIShad exhibited for years" (Page 89). Mr. Mayorkas is undoubtedlycorrect in that USCIS officials treat immigration case processingas if it were a mystery religion that must be practiced in secret,as Immigration Daily readers experience every day. But let's hearit from the horse's mouth - apparently some at USCIS were irkedthat an official at the US Department of Commerce even knew who toaddress a letter to: "Another staff member noted in an email, 'Idon't recall seeing these folks opine before and wonder how theyeven know who to send this to. I fear we are entering a whole newphase of yuck'" (Page 34). We suggest that those at USCIS who wantto keep who to address at USCIS as a secret are the yucky ones. TheOIG Report seems to support a closed method of functioning atUSCIS, which we believe is utterly wrong - if ever an agency neededmore transparency, USCIS is it.
[加西网正招聘多名全职sales 待遇优]
好新闻没人评论怎么行，我来说几句
Comment: OIG On EB5
Yesterday evening, the Office of Inspector General at DHS (OIG)released a report (see news item below) on former USCIS DirectorAli Mayorkas (currently DHS Deputy Secretary) regarding severalEB5-related matters. When we began reading the 99-page report, wewere prepared to write an editorial comment criticizing Mr.Mayorkas. Instead, after a close reading of the report, we findourselves defending Mr. Mayorkas.
Let us first note that we believe that corruption in Government isintolerable, and inconsistent with American mores, and inimical tothe health of the American Republic. To the extent that OIG isfighting corruption, or even the appearance thereof, we stronglysupport such efforts. The primary function of a free press is toprevent corruption in Government (a commonplace that is oftenforgotten by Americans today), and this is the primary reason whythe free press is the only industry specifically protected in theUS Constitution. Immigration Daily takes its responsibilitiesseriously, in the tradition of the American trade press, and OIGcan count on our unstinting support on any anti-corruptionmatter.
However, USCIS is an agency out of control, and the OIG Reportprovides ample evidence that Mr. Mayorkas's efforts actuallybrought a measure of sanity to EB5 processing.
As Mr. Mayorkas points out in his statement appended to the Report:"When I became Director the most common complaint from the publicabout the agency was that it rendered inconsistent adjudicationsand failed to adhere to the law" (OIG Report at Page 68, all pagereferences that follow are to the OIG Report). Mr. Mayorkas isundoubtedly correct, and the vast majority of Immigration Dailyreaders can attest to the arbitrary nature of USCIS adjudicationsin all immigration matters, too many of which fail to abide by thestatute. One of the particularly annoying peculiarities of USCIS(as opposed to most federal agencies) is that it refuses to followthe principle of Res Judicata. Once a federal agency rules on amatter,
those regulated by it have a reasonable expectation to relyon the rule as applied, as a settled matter. Instead USCIS believesit can revoke approved petitions at will, and frequently does so,throughout the length and breadth of the immigration system (notjust EB5). The OIG Report implies that Mr. Mayorkas's insistence onfollowing precedent is a problem and implies that arbitrarydiscretion at USCIS is correct national policy: "Another officialwrote, 'It appears that [the decision to grant the initial singlepetition] was a simple mistake. And it is absurd to me to accorddeference to simple mistakes'" (Page 28). In other words, OIGbelieves that USCIS ought to reserve to itself the unfettereddiscretion to make "simple mistakes" and that turning human livesupside down by revoking approvals, or changing the rules of thegame in mid-game is A-OK. The better approach would be for USCIS toavoid making those mistakes in the first place, something notaddressed by the OIG Report. Mr. Mayorkas further states:"I shouldnote that, as a general matter, some within USCIS (including somewithin USCIS leadership) resisted engaging with the public,resisted my creation of the Office of Public Engagement, andresisted the practice I began of posting for public comment ourdraft policy memoranda. They preferred the insularity that USCIShad exhibited for years" (Page 89). Mr. Mayorkas is undoubtedlycorrect in that USCIS officials treat immigration case processingas if it were a mystery religion that must be practiced in secret,as Immigration Daily readers experience every day. But let's hearit from the horse's mouth - apparently some at USCIS were irkedthat an official at the US Department of Commerce even knew who toaddress a letter to: "Another staff member noted in an email, 'Idon't recall seeing these folks opine before and wonder how theyeven know who to send this to. I fear we are entering a whole newphase of yuck'" (Page 34). We suggest that those at USCIS who wantto keep who to address at USCIS as a secret are the yucky ones. TheOIG Report seems to support a closed method of functioning atUSCIS, which we believe is utterly wrong - if ever an agency neededmore transparency, USCIS is it.
[加西网正招聘多名全职sales 待遇优]
| 分享: |
| 注： | 在此页阅读全文 |
推荐: