Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans News Conference - Immigration Reform Legislation

Federal News Service

HEADLINE: SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE REPUBLICANS NEWS CONFERENCE

PARTICIPANTS: SENATOR ORRIN HATCH (R-UT), CHAIRMAN, SENATE JUDICIARY; SENATOR JON KYL (R-AZ); SENATOR JOHN CORNYN (R-TX); SENATOR SAXBY CHAMBLISS (R-GA); REPRESENTATIVE JOHN HOSTETTLER (R-IN)

SUBJECT: IMMIGRATION REFORM LEGISLATION LOCATION: SENATE RADIO/TV GALLERY, U.S. CAPITOL, WASHINGTON, D.C.

BODY:
SEN. HATCH: I'm happy to see all of you. I'm pleased today to announce the introduction of the Fairness in Immigration Litigation Act. The purpose of this bill is to restore fairness to the immigration litigation process, and to restore integrity to our immigration system.

I'm especially pleased to have with me today Senator Cornyn, and I understand others who are co-sponsors will try to get here. I know Chairman Kyl is trying to get here, and he's chairman of the Terrorism and Technology Subcommittee on the Judiciary Committee. Chairman Chambliss of the Immigration Subcommittee and Chairman Cornyn of the Constitution and Civil Rights Subcommittee.

We're also delighted to have as co-sponsor Chairman Sessions of the Administrative Oversight and Court Subcommittee, who unfortunately could not be with us here today, because of a scheduling conflict. In addition, when he gets here I wanted to welcome Chairman Hostettler of the House Immigration Subcommittee. I'm delighted to know that he and my House counterpart, Chairman Sensenbrenner of the House Judiciary Committee, will be introducing a companion bill in the very near future.

Now more than ever we have to take immigration enforcement seriously. Throughout my experience on the Senate, I've always adhered to the principle that the United States should vigilantly protect its borders and enforce its immigration laws. Our immigration laws should always be consistent with our nation's best interests. For the most part, lawful immigrants bring a net benefit to the United States. Furthermore, those of you who are familiar with my record, and-while you know that I do not shy away from extending compassion in extraordinary cases to immigrants who deserve it; but when it comes to immigrants who commit serious crimes or fraud, I have absolutely no misgivings about seeing them deported from the United States.

Let me make very clear that the intent of this bill is not to create a new ground for deportation; nor does it take away any substantive rights of aliens in deportation proceedings. However, it does bring about fairness and integrity to the system-it restores that. Under the status quo, because of the Supreme Court's interpretation of Section 242 of the Immigration and Nationality Act as amended by the 1996 Immigration Reform Act, criminal aliens are able to obtain review of their deportation orders in federal district court via habeas corpus petitions. However, non-criminals must go directly to the court of appeals after receiving a final agency order of deportation. This means not only that criminals get more review, but they get to delay their deportation for several months or even years if there is a busy court docket. This is neither just, nor is it fair. Justice Byron White said the purpose of an appeal is to correct legal errors which occurred at the initial determination of deportability. It is not to permit an indefinite stalling of physical departure.

As lawmakers, we have the responsibility of making sure that our laws protect due process, but are not susceptible to the abuse of process. We need to correct this absurdity of giving criminals more rights than non-criminals. We can do that by amending Section 242 so that criminals will be able to obtain review in the court of appeals. At the same time, we can affirmatively eliminate the district court route as a layer of review for deportation orders. This way criminals, and non-criminals alike, will receive the judicial review to which the Supreme Court says they are entitled, but without the opportunity to file frivolous petitions in district court for the purpose of delay.

Perhaps these numbers will give you an indication of the seriousness of the problem. In 1995, just before the 1996 Immigration Act took hold-and that act took away direct review for criminals-there were 403 immigration habeas petitions filed. In 2003, that number rose to 2,374. Over the same period, the total number of immigration-related cases in federal court rose from 1,939 to 11,906. This is after Congress passed a law to limit review for criminal aliens. Clearly a legislative fix is necessary to streamline the judicial review process.

I want to emphasize again that this bill does not take away any substantive rights. Criminal aliens will still get judicial review like everyone else in deportation proceedings. Habeas petitions are still available to challenge the actual physical detention of criminal aliens. The bill simply targets those who intend to prolong their stay by filing frivolous petitions.

In addition, this bill also fixes three other areas in our current immigration law in order to restore integrity to the system. First, it properly places the burden of proof in asylum cases on the applicant. In some jurisdictions now the government has the burden of disapproving or disproving the claim. As a result, asylum fraud is rampant.

Secondly, the bill clarifies the statutes, so that when the United States government is physically able to deport illegal aliens to their native countries, the deportation can be effectuated despite a lack of formal acceptance by the home country.

Finally, the bill consolidates immigration review in the court of appeals for the federal circuit. Immigration is a matter of national security and diplomacy, and we need to speak with one voice on immigration matters and on immigration laws. The federal circuit is a natural forum for immigration review, because it already has experienced dealings with specialty areas in the law. Now, I want to conclude by thanking Senators Kyl, Sessions, Chambliss and Cornyn, as well as Chairmen Sensenbrenner and Hostettler for their support of this bill and for working with me in this bicameral effort. This is an important bill. It is one that has been needed for quite a while, and I'm happy to have my colleagues with me.

Shall we go first to the Immigration Subcommittee chairman? And then we'll go to Senator Cornyn.

SEN. CHAMBLISS: Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership on this issue. And Chairman Hatch has explained the bill, obviously. Let me just add that it was the purpose of the '96 Immigration Reform Act that it be easier to deport criminal aliens from the United States. And as a result of that bill what's happened is that we have seen the number of habeas petitions increase by 600 percent since 1996. That's not the way the law is intended to work. This bill addresses that issue. It's going to get back to the basics of allowing those folks who should be here legally and are lawfully abiding to stay here. But if you're a criminal and you're an alien, then we need to make it easier to deport you-very simply stated. And I thank you again for your great leadership, Mr. Chairman.

SEN. HATCH: Thank you.

SEN. CORNYN: Well, I want to say to Chairman Hatch and the chairman of the Immigration Subcommittee, Chairman Chambliss, how much I appreciate being able to work with them on this, which I think is an important component of immigration law reform.

Chairman Chambliss has a number of bills pending before the subcommittee that address other needs, but this is one of the urgent ones and something that needs to be handled as quickly as we can.

Basically as you've heard it eliminates frivolous repetitive appeals which delay the deportation of criminal aliens. At the same time, I think it's important as we take up the matter of comprehensive immigration reform that we understand that in many respects what we have done till this point is not working. That's why I have filed a temporary worker program. That's why others have filed immigration bills that are designed to deal with this issue comprehensively.

But surely one thing we can all agree upon is that immigration aliens, people who have committed aggravated felonies in this country and who need to be deported, should not be able to avail themselves of repetitive appeals to the habeas corpus process. This of course does not deny them any rights to due process, because of course that will be handled either administratively or on appellate review by the federal circuit court of appeals. So I think this is an important step in the right direction, and I'm delighted to be a co-sponsor of this legislation. Chairman Hatch, thanks for your leadership and that of Chairman Chambliss on these matters.

SEN. HATCH: Well, thank you. Any questions on this? Yes, sir?

Q Yes, a couple of questions. Does this deal only with criminal aliens, or also with aliens who -- (inaudible) -- ?

SEN. HATCH: Well, if they're in this country illegally, that's a crime.

Q And does this reinforce methods for apprehending undocumented aliens?

SEN. HATCH: It certainly would be. It certainly does. Because what we do here is we-a lot of these people, they file appeals and file for habeas, and then they go into the community and they're lost. This is one way of staying on top of illegal aliens in our country, but especially criminal aliens.

Q If you could just clarify documented. If somebody either has an order of deportation out for them, because they overstayed their visa for example, would this apply in terms of the appeal procedure; or would it only would it only apply to somebody who had been serving a sentence in one of our jails, had been convicted of a crime in court and then would be -- (inaudible) -- ?

SEN. HATCH: No, it would not apply in that case, as I understand it. It is for-Senator Cornyn mentioned-more aggravated cases.

Q So it would be the case under the changes in the felony -- (inaudible) -- '96 law?

SEN. HATCH: Right, that's my understanding.

Q Mr. Chairman, what is your outlook for the package of overhaul -- (inaudible) -- ?

SEN. HATCH: Well, let's be honest with you. The president gave four suggestions as to what we should try and put into immigration bills. Those were suggestions. In this highly-charged political year, it's going to be very difficult to implement all four of those suggestions. I think we could probably turn to Senator Chambliss on this, right after I just make these short remarks.

But we are working to try to get some effective immigration legislation through. But this, as with all immigration legislation, it takes quite a bit of time, and we're going to have to just keep working on it, and go from there.

Let me turn to Senator Chambliss.

SEN. CHAMBLISS: Well, you're exactly right, Mr. Chairman. Trying to get our arms around the whole immigration issue and to implement a true reform of the entire system is going to be impossible, obviously, in this political year. But I think we've got some rifle shots that we're going to continue to fire, as well as put out some fires. For example, H2A reform-that's a rifle shot that we've seen fired from several different senators. It's much needed. There's a bipartisan effort to get that done. We had hoped we'd be able to do that. It may or may not happen this year.

Other fires that we are putting out are those that are caused by the expiration of laws, like the L-1 visa loophole that we are trying to close by the H1B cap that has now been taken off by the H2B cap,that has now been taken off. Those individual issues are being taken up one at a time, and they're kind of consuming us right now, trying to get something resolved on those. And it's-we're going to work towards solving those immediate needs so that the economy of this country is not hurt by some expiration of visa caps, for example, as opposed to the overhaul of the total immigration policy of this country.

Q Senator Cornyn, I wanted to -- (off mike) -- aggravate. Could you elaborate on that?

SEN. CORNYN: I think as I understand the bill it would not-this does not address someone who has merely overstayed a visa and who is thereby illegally in this country. This affects people who are guilty of aggravated felonies. These are a different category who-and prevents them from frivolous repetitive habeas corpus filings, but requires them to go through an administrative process, and then once they want to go to court, that they would go to one court, and that would be the federal court of appeals here in Washington, D.C. So it is a-this is, as I think Chairman Chambliss aptly stated, a rifle shot. This is not designed to deal comprehensively with the issue of people who have overstayed their visas or who are otherwise illegally in this country.

Q (Off mike)?

SEN. HATCH: You can't do it, even if he files for asylum? Speak up.

STAFF: Cannot.

SEN. HATCH: Okay. That clarifies that.

Yes, ma'am?

Q Any chance of any movement on your -- (inaudible) -- this session?

SEN. HATCH: We still have a shot at that. I mean, that's a bipartisan bill. It came out of the committee with an overwhelming vote. It wasn't unanimous, but it was overwhelming. And I sure hope it is, because it's something-it's what? i SEN. CHAMBLISS: It's as good as it gets on the Judiciary Committee.

SEN. HATCH: It's as good as it gets on the Judiciary Committee, that's right. (Laughs.)

Q Senator, I have a separate question-still on immigration, but -- (inaudible) -- said it's a cap on immigration, on immigrants. I wonder what your view of multiculturalism is and --

SEN. HATCH: Well, it depends on how you define multiculturalism. If it means many people brought together working as one and getting along and loving each other, that's what this country is. You know, there's no question we have people from every country in the world from this country. And if that's what multiculturalism is, then of course we're for it 100 percent, and we're lucky that we have it, because we have tremendous people-almost all of us, except for Native Americans-are the descendants of immigrants, and we all have to keep that in mind. I doubt he meant it less than that. I really doubt that.

Q (Off mike) -- assimilate and learn to speak English. (Off mike)?

SEN. HATCH: Well, let's be honest about it. We hope that every immigrant who comes to this country will become familiar with and passable in English so that they can get by better. But that doesn't mean that they have to forgo their native tongue. I mean, I think some of us maybe learned more than one language ourselves.

I look at Europe, and some of the other countries in the world, and people are bilingual or multilingual-and our country maybe not as good. We need to do more of that. And one of my deficiencies in my education is that I wish I spoke a second language, and I don't. I can muddle along in some ways, but not very effectively. So it's one of the defects in my education, as far as I'm concerned.

Q Senator Chambliss -- (inaudible) -- ?

SEN. HATCH: Let me turn to Senator Chambliss.

SEN. CHAMBLISS: Well, there are several H2A reform bills out there. There's the jobs bill, there's Senator Craig's bill and Senator Kennedy's bill. Senator Cornyn has one, I have one, Senator McCain has one. And what we got to do is we've got to pull out the best portions of all of these bills and put them together, because I don't think that even though Senator Craig has a large number of co- sponsors out there now, we've had some feedback from some of those folks that they didn't really understand the issue well enough, and they didn't understand the bill. So I think at the end of the day, Senator Craig's bill has got a lot of very positive provisions in it that may form a large part of any consolidated bill, and that's sort of what we're working on right now, to hopefully get some H2A reform this year. But it may be very difficult to do.

SEN. HATCH: We have Congressman Hostettler here, and I'd like to give him an opportunity to make his comments. We're grateful to be able to work with him.

REP. HOSTETTLER: Thank you, Senator Hatch. I'm pleased to here today with Senator Hatch and Senator Cornyn and Senator Chambliss to discuss the Fairness in Immigration Litigation Act. Chairman Sensenbrenner on the House side and I applaud Chairman Hatch's leadership, and Chairman Sensenbrenner has recently introduced this extremely important legislation in the House just this afternoon.

Over the past few years, criminal aliens have been given more and more leniency from the courts, and immigration aliens and their lawyers have been gaming the system so that the criminal will not be deported. This inflicts further home on those that the criminal has victimized. There's now a huge criminal alien population in our country. These criminals could be deported after their release, but instead have been allowed to remain here under a broken system. One third of all federal prisoners in the United States are foreign-born. Justice Department data reveals that 37 percent of all convicted criminal aliens who are released from prison are convicted of another serious crime within three years of their release. Many of the crimes committed by criminal alien predators are committed actually in immigrant neighborhoods against other immigrants. Deporting criminal aliens is a necessary and important measures towards maintaining and improving the quality of life of all people in America, both native- born and immigrant.

FILA remedies this state of affairs by strictly limiting judicial review of removal orders of criminal aliens so that they cannot continue their stay under the guise of unlimited appeals. FILA will also combat the rampant abuse of our asylum system. The temptation is overwhelming for illegal aliens facing removal to file bogus asylum claims, and if successful receive the greatest of immigration prizes: permanent residence.

It's not fear for illegal aliens with no fear of persecution to take advantage of America's good will as a haven of the oppressed. The Ninth Circuit has handed down decisions that would leave the government with almost no ability to contest bogus claims of persecution. Department of Homeland Security lawyers have long had one hand tied behind their backs. They are barred by confidentiality regulations of asking questions of the applicant's home country, even if that information would show an applicant is lying about his claims of persecution. Sometimes the asylum application might suggest that the applicant is suspected of being a terrorist. But the Department of Homeland Security lawyers are not even allowed to ask that question.

Even DHS already has to work within this difficult framework, the Ninth Circuit would like to make it more difficult to remove those who are falsely seeking asylum. The Ninth Circuit has gone a step further, and decided that its judges can substitute their own views in place of the truth.

If the Ninth Circuit thinks an alien's claim is credible, that decision will stand, even if all other evidence points to the contrary. The Ninth Circuit is making it almost impossible for immigration judges to deny fraudulent asylum applications. The results have been staggering. In the last seven years, asylum applicant success rates before immigration judges have increased over 117 percent. And the number of asylum grants by immigration judges has increased by over 160 percent. Gaming the asylum system is becoming a winning proposition.

FILA remedies this situation by underscoring that the applicant for asylum bears the burden of proof, and providing a nonexhaustive list of factors that an immigration judge should consider in assessing their credibility-such as the demeanor, candor or responsiveness of the applicant or witness; the consistency between written and oral statements; and the consistency of each of these statements. FILA will help ensure that asylum is granted those it was intended to help-the truly persecuted-and not abused by scheming criminal aliens seeking a way around our immigration laws.

Again, I thank Chairman Hatch for introducing this important legislation, and look forward to working with Chairman Sensenbrenner on the House side to move it into the House.

SEN. HATCH: We appreciate your comments, Congressman Hostettler. Any last questions?

Q One last question, senator. Do you have the support of Democrats -- (inaudible) -- ?

SEN. HATCH: I'm not speaking for the House.

REP. HOSTETTLER: Well, we have just recently drafted the bill. At this time we have not checked to see. We have not worked on the side of the minority in the House to see their disposition on it.

SEN. HATCH: And that sums it up in the Senate as well . We're just drafting the bill and hopefully we'll be able to build some momentum for it. I don't see why anybody would be against it, because we are trying to stop those who are actual criminals or who have committed immigration fraud. So it goes a little bit beyond just hardened criminals. Those are the people we're trying to resolve these problems with.

Okay? Thanks so much.