Session #85 · 1957–59

Speech #850273042

I am satisfied that these various provisions prescribing the time. cutting the cost. and defining the procedure for and scope of review. will prevent injustice to any alien who has legitimate grounds for seeking judicial consideration of his claim. Opponents of this legislation raise one point which deserves further explanation. They claim that in some cases aliens may be induced to file court proceedings for review of their deportation order even though they may qualify for administrative or legislative relief. Let me give an example. Under section 244 of the present Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U. S. C.. sec. 1254) an alien against whom a final order of deportation is issued may under certain conditions have his deportation suspended and his status adjusted to that of an alien admitted for permanent residence. Ordinarily a request for suspension of deportation under this section is not made until after the determination that the alien is deportable. However. since there is no provision for tolling the 6month period of review under the bill because of such postdeportation proceedings. it is claimed that the alien may feel compelled to file his case in court even though he has a basis for administrative relief. And once a case is filed in court. the Immigration Service may be precluded from concurrently considering a request for administrative relief because of the exclusive jurisdiction of the court over the case. These consequences are admittedly undesirable. However. they are not irreparable. The alien does not forfeit any avenues of administrative relief. but at most. simply has to postpone their enforcement. I have concluded that the real remedy for this situation is to be sought in a change in the present administrative practice of considering the issues of deportability and suspension of deportation piecemeal. There is no reason why the Immigration Service could not change its regulations to permit contemporaneous court consideration of deportability and administrative application for relief. That would remove this objection entirely. I am hopeful that this matter will be given further study by the committee in the near future.
Keywords matched
Immigration deportable deportation

Classification

Target group
Sentiment
Neutral
Stereotyping
No
Confidence
100%
Model
gemini-2.0-flash
Framing
Legal / procedural

Speaker & context

Speaker
KENNETH KEATING
Party
R
Chamber
H
State
NY
Gender
M
Date
Speech ID
850273042
Paragraph
#2
← Prev Next →