Speech #980214155

For many years. weve had a similar summary exclusion procedure for alien crewmen who jump ship and for stowaways on board ships and planes. The procedure has worked well with these cases. and it is extremely important that we extend the procedure in a workable fashion to all aliens who have not entered the United States. but are apprehended like the stowaways and the alien crewmen when they are attempting to enter the United States. Otherwise. we are going to continue to have an overburdened. overworked. and unworkable adjudication system for processing aliens in exclusion and deportation cases. This is an extremely important part of this bill to regain control over our borders. There has been little discussion of this because it has been overshadowed by the debate on employer sanctions and legalization. but summary exclusion is a critical element in the whole process of regaining control of our borders. The second portion of my amendment strikes from the bill provisions giving a right to class action suits in the adjudication of asylum. exclusion and deportation matters. After setting forth a procedure for judicial review in such matters. the bill provides an opportunity for an individual to bring a petition for habeas corpus individually or on a multiple party basis. and then also provides for the right to bring a class action suit as was discussed in the amendment of the gentleman from New York [Mr. OTTINGERI which was just debated. My amendment would retain the habeas corpus provisions. but would strike the right to a class action suit. Once class actions are granted. the entire adjudication process is stopped. Time after time. representatives of asylum seekers have blocked the adjudication system with class action suits. They are not necessary for due process inasmuch as any individual can make the same claims individually and. if he has a matter to which the habeas corpus petition would be applicable. he can bring it on a multiple party basis. All this provision does is add another tool to the hands of those who simply wish to delay and prolong getting final orders of exclusion and deportation and carrying them out. As it now reads. H.R. 1510 extends an existing stay of deportation in an entirely new areaexclusions. Under the present law. as soon as a petition for review of an order of deportation is filed. the deportation is blocked. I have no quarrel with the stay In deportation cases. but it is entirely inappropriate in cases where the question is exclusion of those who are seeking entry into the United States and have been apprehended at the border. My amendment removes the provision that a stay of deportation automatically attaches to the appeal of an exclusion order. A court could still grant a stay. but it would be in the discretion of the judge. not automatic. An automatic stay without judicial discretion simply encourages frivolous appeals in exclusion cases. We must provide the tools to expeditiously and fairly exclude aliens who have no color or right to enter the United States when they are apprehended trying to get in. If they have some kind of documents that they claim give them a right to be in the United States. or they are claiming asylum. then certainly we should afford them an opportunity for a hearing before an administrative law judge. But where there is no claim for asylum. no documents presented. and no reasonable basis for legal entry into the United States. we should turn them away summarily just as we do when they approach our embassies and consuls abroad or seek refugee status without meritorious claim. Otherwise. we can never regain control of our borders. And when somebody has entered the system. he should be given a full hearing and an opportunity for court review. where appropriate. but we should not allow class action suits and automatic stays which are unnecessary to due process and are easily used by those who lack a meritorious case and have only delay on their minds.