New immigration policy causes concern

By Timothy Pratt

Saturday, Feb. 17, 2007 | 7:15 a.m.

Local attorneys and a university law clinic worry that a new policy at a Las Vegas federal immigration office is stifling their ability to help clients with complex cases.

Attorneys and staff members at congressional offices, law clinics and nonprofit organizations used to be able to pick up the phone, send a fax or even make a visit before office hours or at lunch to get questions answered about lost files, delays or other concerns, they said.

Under the new policy, enacted last month, all requests must be sent by e-mail.

Government officials say e-mails promote efficiency and accountability.

But local attorneys complain that queries now take longer to answer, require repeated attempts or go unanswered.

David Thronson, one of the directors of the immigration law clinic at UNLV, called the new system "a retreat into the bureaucracy."

"I think it is evidence of an unfortunate trend where you centralize and specialize every function," he said.

Marie Sebrechts, spokeswoman for the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services, said the new system is "the fastest, easiest way to respond to inquiries from attorneys and congressional representatives."

Using only e-mail, she said, "is more efficient and better for maintaining the integrity of information."

Louise Zuniga, who helps clients with immigration paperwork at the Nevada Association of Latin Americans, said she favors the new system because queries pass through fewer hands and she is obtaining responses in a timely fashion.

However, attorney Edwin Prudhomme said he thinks the Las Vegas office is less accessible now than at any time in his decade of practicing immigration law in Las Vegas.

He described a case that began when a Taiwanese woman who works in marketing for a Strip casino applied for a change in her immigration status based on her marriage to a U.S. citizen, only to have her attorney at the time send paperwork to the wrong federal office.

In the ensuing delays, the woman's work authorization expired, meaning she could no longer work at the casino. With the couple facing foreclosure on their house, Prudhomme took over the case and began firing off e-mails.

But until now the only response he has gotten is that the woman's file was requested on Feb. 7 from another office.

"It's harder to raise hell by e-mail," said Prudhomme, who has been in practice 47 years.

Peter Ashman, another local attorney and member of the board of governors of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, said the new system makes it harder to deal with such cases.

"Now, when there's a mistake, they're making it as inconvenient as possible to point it out," he said.

He cited the example of a client asking to reopen her case in August after being accused without explanation of fraud in a green-card application. After hearing nothing for seven months, Ashman sent an e-mail Feb. 7 via the new system. He still has heard nothing.

Sebrechts said using only e-mail is a way "to make sure we are accountable and things are streamlined."

Thronson said, "I can understand wanting to streamline things, but they're big enough that local, flexible contacts are useful.

"Overall, I'm seeing the office lose the local autonomy to act flexibly."