But. the most serious part. it seems to me. is the provision that the Attorney Generals decision shall be final. I think it is about time we restored the right of individuals to have their cases heard in a court. I point out in subsection B of section 242 that a special inquiry officer conducting deportation proceedings can be both prosecutor and judge. that he is not required to be a lawyer. and that the other provisions of this section are somewhat weaker than similar provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act. It seems to me particularly where you are dealing with human liberty. it is important to insure that the litigant have access to the courts. If that language does not deny access to the courts. then It seems to me it does not belong in this act. Why do we put language in that does not mean anything? If the gentleman from Pennsylvania is correct that my amendments are mere surplusage. it seems to me we ought to clarify the language by adopting my amendments. There is a case in my own district of a man who is perhaps subject to deportation to Poland. He came here .when he was 2 years old. IIL he is sent back to Poland. which is now behind the Iron curtain. what will become of him. his family. and his children?
Keywords matched
deportation