FALLS CHURCH, Va. — A Justice Department overhaul of the immigration appeals system, often the last stop for people fighting deportation, has prompted a barrage of unusually fast rulings rendered without explanation -- and an outcry about noncitizens' rights to due process.
The changes, pushed by Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft, direct the beleaguered Board of Immigration Appeals to clear its 56,000-case backlog by March 25. The 23-member board, which reviews the rulings of 220 immigration judges nationwide, is often the last hope for foreigners who contend they face death, torture or other travails if forced to return to their homelands.
To meet the deadline, board members, who usually worked in panels of three and ruled after careful deliberation, are reviewing cases individually and ruling within minutes, often issuing just two-line decisions, according to a review conducted by The Times. And as the number of cases decided by the board has soared, so has the rate at which board members have ruled against foreigners facing deportation.
In turn, immigrants are appealing to the federal court system in unprecedented numbers, creating another backlog, The Times found in a survey of federal appellate courts.
Immigrant advocates say the speedup is the latest in a series of actions compromising the rights of noncitizens in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.
"Does it make sense? The answer is no," said T. Alexander Aleinikoff, a law professor at Georgetown University and former Immigration and Naturalization Service general counsel. "We are already seeing results: Many, many cases are decided at a speed that makes it impossible to believe they got the scrutiny a person who faces removal from the United States deserves."
A Times computer study found that the board began dramatically increasing the number of summary rulings with no elaboration soon after Ashcroft proposed the changes in February, even though the new rules did not go into effect until Sept. 25. In March, for instance, 38% of the board's decisions were summary rulings, compared with just 9% the month before. By August, more than half the board's decisions were summary rulings, virtually all upholding the immigration judges' findings. From March 1 through Sept. 24, board members separately issued 16,275 decisions without explanation.
The denial rate has risen in tandem, The Times found. The board rejected 86% of its appeals in October, compared with 59% the previous October.
"From our perspective, streamlining reforms is working and doing precisely what the reforms were intended to do," said Susan Eastwood, a spokeswoman for the Executive Office for Immigration Review, the Justice Department agency that oversees the appeals board. "Appeals are being adjudicated in a timely manner and are carefully considered to ensure that each appellant receives due process."
Immigrants in the system have violated some U.S. immigration law -- perhaps illegally entering the country for economic reasons or to seek political asylum; overstaying a visa or committing a crime -- and already have been turned down by an immigration judge. Many do not have lawyers.
They can appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, whose members may have little background in immigration law. If immigrants lose there, they can appeal to federal district courts, but that can be expensive; most don't take their cases that far.
The system has long been considered slow and inefficient, enabling illegal immigrants to postpone deportation for months or even years. But the fast pace of recent decision-making has startled even some of those who think the board needed an overhaul.
A Times review of appeals board decisions indicates that some members are dispensing justice at a brisk pace. On Oct. 31, Frederick Hess, a member of the Board of Immigration Appeals, signed more than 50 cases -- a decision nearly every 10 minutes if he worked a nine-hour day without a break.
Edward Grant, Hess' colleague, signed more than 50 cases that same day, The Times found. Altogether that day, the board issued nearly 400 decisions, ranging from complex asylum cases to simple jurisdictional matters.
The Justice Department, contending it is not tracking how many cases each board member is reviewing, says it is unfair to count the number of cases a board member signs each day because that date "reflects the date the case was mailed to the parties," not necessarily the date it was decided. But board members privately do not dispute The Times' findings that some members are deciding as many as 50 cases a day. Neither Hess nor Grant agreed to comment.
Close observers of the process say that although some cases can be decided quickly, the current pace is surprising.
"I think that's a lot of cases to do in a day. We're talking minutes," said Fred Vacca, who was appointed to the board by President Reagan and who retired last year after 20 years. "I hope these decisions go out correctly and we don't trample on people's rights."
