Speech #980133001

Let me examine the results of this restrictive approach. H2 or temporary workers would not be eligible for legal services. These persons. as the Judiciary Committee report on the Legal Services Act Amendments of 1983 points out. are "clearly in the United States as a result of decisions by the executive branch that such persons are a benefit to the American economy." Asylum applicants would be ineligible. They should be eligible because the nature of the threat that awaits a legitimate refugee fully justifies providing the procedural protections of counsel for the person who asserts a claim of persecution. Persons escaping persecution. it must be remembered. generally cannot take with them resources to hire attorneys. The United States. in my view. must not have two essentially different processes for determining asylum statusdepending on the finances of the applicant. Another category consists of individuals granted extended voluntary departure. The Judiciary Committee recognized the special situation of these individuals when it concluded that "it would be anomalous to refuse to return these individuals to another country because of human rights problems there. while at the same time denying them access to legal services here." The Judiciary Committee. in addition to incorporating these three categories in the original version of H.R. 3222. also included parents. spouses. and unmarried sons and daughtersunder age 21of lawful permanent resident aliens. persons granted parole status. CubanHaitian "entrants." individuals granted indefinite stays of deportation. and aliens eligible for permanent resident status under the suspension of deportation and registry provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. The Committee on the Judiciary was guided by considerations of basic fairness in developing the list of exceptions to the alien disqualification. I hope at some other time we can rectify our omissions.*