The Treason Lobby and its handmaidens in the media are quick to provide all the details when the federal immigration bureaucracy of the Justice Department's Executive Office for Immigration Review actually deports – perish the thought – an illegal alien or criminal alien resident.
Any hint of federal bureaucrats not loving aliens enough gets fast-track media attention immediately. An example: the recent cheerleading story supporting federal appeals court judges in their criticism of the EOIR's immigration judges and appellate body – the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). [Judges Criticize Immigration Courts, David B. Caruso, Associated Press Jan. 27, 2004]
As I've been writing since 2001, the dirty little secret of federal immigration policy is that U.S. immigration laws and the entire federal deportation system is rigged for perpetual litigation. And the litigation is not over until the alien wins.
But worst of all, when the alien wins, no one talks. If an alien loses a case, or feels unloved, a media firestorm erupts.
When EOIR immigration judges, BIA members or the federal courts hand out legal status to an illegal aliens, allow convicted violent criminals to keep their permanent resident status or release them from detention, the aliens and their attorneys are happy. And, since they have nothing to complain about, no one will know what travesty of justice may have happened behind the EOIR's closed doors.
Through it all, government officers are
muzzled from talking to the press as a matter of
policy. The EOIR's cadre of immigration judges and BIA
members aren't talking either – perhaps out of
(INS, now DHS, has a very bad record on whistleblowing.) The EOIR's cadre of immigration judges and BIA members aren't talking either – perhaps out of well-justified shame.
So it's high time that someone starts talking – someone like Loretta Schloerb.
Loretta is a private citizen speaking out for deporting criminal aliens – or at the very least, deporting one despicable criminal alien in particular. [E-mail her your encouragement at: Schloerbski@msn.com]
Loretta's daughter was molested over many years by an uncle through marriage, who is a permanent resident alien. He was convicted in 1995 in state criminal court for endangering the welfare of a child through sexual conduct. But he walked right out onto the streets again—without ever being put in federal deportation proceedings.
Eight years later, in April, 2003, officers from the Customs and Border Protection happened to discover this convicted criminal alien's record during a routine airport inspection when he was re-entering the country. It was only then that the wheels of the EOIR litigation bureaucracy began to turn.
After months and several Immigration Court hearings later, Loretta and her daughter eventually testified as witnesses for Secretario Ridge's Department of Homeland Security (DHS) against the alien. The EOIR hearings were to determine whether the molester was removable under the immigration laws, and to decide whether he should be allowed to keep his green card and remain in the country, in spite of his crimes.
Despite the testimony of Loretta and her daughter, the immigration judge hearing the case decided on December 5, 2003, to allow the molester of Loretta's daughter to keep his green card
But because of Loretta's involvement in the case, the DHS has appealed the immigration judge's decision to the EOIR's appellate body, the BIA.
But that's not all. Loretta is going public about the EOIR.
Loretta filed a complaint with the EOIR's Chief Immigration Judge Michael J. Creppy relating what she and her daughter were subjected to in the EOIR Immigration Court.
If he ignores her complaint, Loretta will plead her case to Attorney General John Ashcroft – Creppy's boss in the Department of Justice.
As Loretta explained in her complaint:
"I have no words to describe how badly [the immigration judge] treated us during these proceedings.
"We actually expected [the immigration judge] to decide in favor of the child molester after witnessing [the immigration judge] in action from the first day in his courtroom.
"His comments and actions were most unprofessional, disturbing and offensive to each one of us during the hearing. Each day we walked away from the courtroom questioning what had just occurred, [asking] how could we be treated like this?
"We understood that the decision would be based on the law, the testimony of the victims and character witnesses. I can't for the life of me see how this convicted child molester should be allowed to stay in this country—but it seems the system has failed another victim.
"While handing down his decision during a ninety-minute monologue [the immigration judge] suggested that the reason we never liked [the molester] was that he was from a "different culture"—so now besides him suggesting we lied about the abuse, we were re-victimized and called prejudiced as well!!!"
"At this point we feel that as many people we can make aware regarding [the immigration judge's] actions and behavior can only benefit our desire to have him either sanctioned or removed from the bench.
"During his testimony the respondent [alien] admitted he lied during the criminal trial about the number of times he assaulted my daughter and that he lied initially to [the immigration judge] about the number as well. He admitted to three incidents when indeed there were [many]. Again, [the immigration judge] would not allow my daughter to testify about any other incidents other than these three.
"When my daughter was on the stand for ninety minutes, [the judge] continually confronted her as to her reasons for her drug and alcohol abuse. The judge asked: couldn't it have been because her parents split up, instead of [because she was] sexually abused for years by an uncle? Maybe the molester was really her father? – The drugs could have clouded her memories of the abuse?...
"During my two hours on the stand, he and the defense attorney continually questioned me as to why my daughter waited so long to disclose—again he had no concept of a victim's pain.
"We are confident the appeals court will overrule this decision based on the testimony and [criminal] character of the respondent."
Because of Loretta's perseverance, though the alien won a round, the case is not over.
It's not over because Loretta is taking a stand.
Immigration enthusiasts like the Cato Institute's Dan Griswold sometimes claim that they are so in favor of deporting criminals.
The case of Loretta Schloerb and her daughter shows that the system just doesn't work like that.
EOIR immigration judges can minimize the seriousness of criminal convictions if they want to. They can put ridiculous theories about "culture" above actual testimony and evidence.
Americans have no idea how bad this situation is at the EOIR. They will only find out if others who know follow Loretta's example and start talking - and if the Establishment media follows VDARE.COM's example and starts reporting it.