Immigration:

Legal tempest threatens to break up family

STEVE MARCUS / LAS VEGAS SUN

Elizabeth Sarkisian, left, 16, and sister Michelle, 17, wipe away tears as they talk about their mother, Anoush, who is in jail awaiting deportation to Armenia.

By Timothy Pratt (contact)

Wednesday, Feb. 25, 2009 | 2 a.m.

Reid’s phone call to Ridge spurs LV sisters’ release from federal custody (1-28-2005)
Sisters facing deportation to remain in custody (1-27-2005)
Girls’ plight sparks community support (1-25-2005)

Four years ago, when she was 10, Patricia Sarkisian wrote a letter to President George W. Bush asking why her two older sisters were jailed in Los Angeles, an order of deportation pushing them toward a flight to Moscow any day.

Now she’s no longer “just a kid,” as she signed off that letter, and as of Feb. 2, another family member is in jail, awaiting deportation — her mother, Anoush.

Her sisters, Emma, now 22, and Mariam, a year younger, were saved from that fate in January 2005, by a cinematic, highly unusual last-minute call from Sen. Harry Reid to then-Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge. Reid asked Ridge to “put personal attention” on the case, which had caught the attention of the media and the public.

Now the Sarkisian family is again in the news, an unfortunate example of the situation faced by an estimated 2 million families in the United States: Some members of those families are born here, others become citizens over time, some remain in limbo, and still others find no legal recourse; the only thing keeping them from being deported is the inability of the federal government to find them.

With an increased emphasis on enforcement, both in workplaces and in neighborhoods, more of those people — like Anoush Sarkisian — are being found and deported. A consequence is that more of those families are ripped apart.

Federal officials found the 50-year-old through a circuitous route. In May 2007, a car hit hers in the rear. Months later she and the other driver engaged lawyers. In August, Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents contacted the defendant in the case and discovered the place and time of Sarkisian’s deposition. On Feb. 2, outside a Rancho Drive law office, several agents ordered Sarkisian out of her car and into handcuffs, in front of Emma, who looked on, stunned. The mother of five, who suffers from diabetes, has been held in the North Las Vegas jail since that day.

To immigration attorney Peter Ashman, in cases like that of the Sarkisians, where a family is involved and the person of interest to the federal government has no criminal history, no national interest is being served by deportation.

“One of the pronounced reasons we have immigration law ... is to unite families,” said Ashman, former head of the local chapter of the American Immigration Lawyers Association. “Here we’re achieving the opposite.”

Virginia Kice, spokeswoman for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the federal government is just enforcing the law.

“This woman has been under a final order of deportation for a decade ... We had been unable to locate her. Now we intend to carry it out.”

For the family, the idea of someone being suddenly detained is nothing new.

In 2005 Emma and Mariam were catapulted in a similar stunning fashion from being teenage hands in their father’s family pizza business at a suburban strip mall to the glare of national media attention.

Their story began years earlier however. Rouben Sarkisian, their father, had come to the United States with Anoush in the early 1990s. They had three daughters together. He divorced Anoush and remarried a U.S. citizen, entering a path to citizenship and, he thought, putting his two older daughters on the same path. Anoush sought political asylum from the U.S. government, being a native Armenian claiming persecution from Ukrainian nationalists in the Ukraine. She lost, appealed, the years piled onand when the appeal was denied in 1999, she was ordered deported. She stayed, unwilling to leave her daughters.

Rouben shared the job of raising them. When he took his two eldest daughters to immigration authorities in July 2004 to inquire about their status, the girls were arrested and sent to a cell in Los Angeles.

The idea that teens who had spent most of their lives in the United States could be sent to a country, Armenia, to which they had no connection, and separated from their parents and sisters seemed outrageous to many people.

After several weeks of dramatic back-and-forth, including a federal judge at one point ordering the jail to give the teens access to cell phones to communicate with family, Reid’s call saved them. The federal government exercised its discretion to offer what’s known as humanitarian relief. Four years later the young women still have no legal status, but they’re allowed to stay in this country as long as they check in with local Homeland Security officials on a regular basis.

They both have been attending college and spending more time with family at home, since their father sold his pizzeria and now spends part of the year in the Ukraine on business trips.

Rouben has also finally become a U.S. citizen and petitioned for his older daughters to do the same. But that will take years to complete. So his daughters can’t petition for their mother, and neither can Rouben, because he is no longer married to her.

The eldest of the U.S.-born daughters, Michelle, could petition for Anoush to become a citizen, but only after she turns 21 — in four years.

Meanwhile, Anoush waits in jail, refusing to sign a form that would give the federal government permission to seek travel documents from the Armenian government, a move her attorney says makes no sense because the country didn’t even exist when she left it 20 years ago.

Four of the sisters sat on a dark blue leather couch in their northwest valley home on a recent afternoon, awaiting their mother’s daily calls from jail. Her lawyer, Arsen V. Baziyants, says he tried to get Anoush to sign a form that would allow her to have visitors, but she refused because she didn’t want her daughters to see her in jail.

Michelle, sitting in the middle, says she misses her mother’s advice and her strictness with teenage girl issues such as boys, and with homework. To her right sits Patricia, the letter writer, silent. Mariam strokes her hair. The 21-year-old says her mother is “kind of like a fortune teller. She knows what you want, when you want it.” Without her at home, “it feels colder.”

On a wall across the living room, a framed certificate names Elizabeth “student of the month” for March 2004. She’s now 16.

She looks up, as if she senses the hour, about 3 p.m. She remembers a daily ritual, tears welling in her dark eyes.

“(My mom) calls me on my cell every day after school. She asks how I am. She calls each of us, one by one, wherever she is. When I heard that she was in jail, I couldn’t believe it. I kept calling her. She didn’t answer. I couldn’t believe she was gone.”

CORRECTION: A story in Wednesday’s Sun about an Armenian family dealing with immigration issues contained three errors. The last name of the family’s attorney, Arsen V. Baziyants, was misspelled. The story reported that Anoush Sarkisian filed for political asylum because she faced persecution from Russians as an Armenian in the Ukraine. She allegedly faced persecution from Ukrainian nationalists. And the story reported that when Rouben Sarkisian took his two eldest daughters to immigration authorities in July 2004 to inquire about their status, the girls were arrested and sent to a cell in Los Angeles. They were arrested in January.

Discussion: 23 comments so far…

By Sunvisitor

2/25/09 at 6:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is a sad story as I'm sure the stories of most immigrants are. They just want a better life. But if we change the law for this family we should change the laws for everyone. And where does that put all people who obey the law and wait to enter the country? I'm sure we can find plenty of sad stories of people living miserable lives in other countries who would love to be in America. We either need to change immigration laws or enforce them.
By KillerB

2/25/09 at 8 a.m.

Suggest removal

"...and still others find no legal recourse; the only thing keeping them from being deported is the inability of the federal government to find them."

Yet another example of incredibly stupid laws being enforced by our too-zealous police. Nowhere in this article do I see any mention of any real criminal activity by any member of this family, or indicating they are anything but good Americans both in spirit and deeds.

Very troubling to see the mention of "without legal recourse," that recourse being one of our bedrock guarantees in the 5th Amendment.

Welcome to the police state we are allowing America to become, "...a state in which the government exercises rigid and repressive controls over the social, economic and political life of the population. A police state typically exhibits elements of totalitarianism and social control, and there is usually little or no distinction between the law and the exercise of political power by the executive." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_stat... See also the Congressional Record at http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congre...

Sunvisitor, unless you're actually one of the First Nations, you might want to review how and why your family originally came to this country, then ask yourself why the Sarkisians have a less worthy reason to be here and enjoy the same freedoms you do.
By acesbet

2/25/09 at 8:25 a.m.

Suggest removal

This is truly a sad story in todays world. I can think of many United States Citizens who were born in this country and do not deserve to live in this country. From what I have read in this story it sounds to me this family has tried harder to make a good U. S. Citizen of themselves. Most of us take that for granted including me at times. I do hope this story does not fall on deaf ears.
By Sunvisitor

2/25/09 at 9:23 a.m.

Suggest removal

I do not agree with our immigration laws at all - my point was that we can't keep enforcing them selectively. Either change them or enforce them equally.
By Sunvisitor

2/25/09 at 9:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

And BTW, I think if this exact story were published and the family happened to be from south of our border, many people would be all for deporting the woman. Again, very selective enforcement.
By redferret

2/25/09 at 10:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

I agree with that last one sunvisitor. The fact that they are more or less "white" makes it a tragedy for some. I admit it is sad, but those laws are there for a reason.
It sucks that they got hit with it, but why didn't the person try to get naturalized? Marry in? There are plenty of ways.
Just ask to get in and go through the whole rigamarole.
Also if we just let one person, we'll have to let everyone in. We have some of the laxest immigration laws and citizenship laws in the world, so there really can't be that much complaining.
And yeah sunvisitor, either we enforce what's on the books or we overhaul it. We can't in a half-assed way follow both routes.
By starrynite7

2/25/09 at 11:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

REdferret: I totally agree with you and the fact that we do not have consistency with enforcing the laws is what makes people believe they can come to the US illegally and live here for years and years, knowing they are breaking the law. We can not enforce some laws and not other laws. Should people not have to pay for their tags because they have lost their jobs? No, laws are laws and if we don't follow all the laws, then we will appear wishy-washy and no one will take us seriously.
Follow the path to becoming a legal citizen and then you can achieve the American Dream... or not.
By KillerB

2/26/09 at 11:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

starrynite7 -- Again you have proven how clueless you really are. Unless you support America becoming the police state I mentioned above.

I suggest you educate yourself by reading (in this order) the Declaration of Independence, the federal Bill of Rights, then the invitation inscribed on the Statue of Liberty's pedestal. You know, the part your ancestors (unless you're one of the First Nations) likely responded to when they immigrated here -- "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me ..."
By redferret

2/26/09 at 11:56 a.m.

Suggest removal

There are rules to be followed. Now either we can enforce the laws on the books or we can reform them. It's not a let's do both kind of.
In any case we are the most liberal with immigration, so they can be happy for that.
As for the tired saw of well you were once an immigrant too, I DON'T CARE. My ancestors came here legally, they thrived and gave to this country, and many in my family have served in the armed forces during WWII, the Korean War, and Vietnam. Just follow the rules and come in.
Also when I do break the rules (like speeding, and whatnot), I understand the consequences if I'm caught. I'm not going to boohoo to a paper to get people on my side. I did a crime, and now I'll do the time/fine. It's is that cut and dry.
By daddiesgirlelizabeth

2/26/09 at 1:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

This story is well written, but leaves a lot to be desired. Like many more questions, It seems that someone somwhere asked a senator Harry Reed to intervene for them, can anyone see the senator trying his best for one of us? it was told to a Tom Ridge to give "his personal attention".
Why on earth did she engage a lawyer when it was only a fender bender, anyone of us would have let the insurance companies fight it out. I really cannot see the significance, "she has diabetes", most of America has diabetes, has this anything to do with her not being deported???
Why has she been under a final deportation for 10 years?, why did she loose the appeal, and she did loose in 1999.
She also knew that staying in America was wrong after she lost her appeal.

She loves her daughters so much that she will not sign to have them visit her. If one has done no wrong no one has any worry's
Does she speak English??? There are so many questions and not enough answers.
By Rocco

2/26/09 at 2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

sad.... but...i was born here by fate... we can keep letting everyone in this counrty...sure the girls should be able to stay... but what are we going to do..... when do we stop? we are going to be over run......sorry stay in mexcio and start a revolution.... this is the only issues beside guns that i'm very consevative about...
By azsk8fan

2/26/09 at 3:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

No sympathy on this end - people need to think about the ramifications of their actions BEFORE they sneak into this country and understand that if caught they're gonna get the boot regardless of how many babies they pumped out while living here illegally. Let the kids leave with their mother if they're so distressed. Maybe next time someone will think twice.
By Marina

2/26/09 at 4:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

This family broke untold number of US laws. First they overstayed their visa and became illegal aliens. Next, parents got divorce, so that father could enter into fraudulent marriage with an American citizen for the purpose of obtaining a Green card. Mother was in hiding all these years in the hope of amnesty. Two daughters should have been deported, but Harry Reid got involved (try to make Harry do something for you). Now mother is stonewalling the Immigration. Wake up, people, stop crying for lawbreakers. Family doesn't have to be separated. If they love each other so much and can't stay apart, they all can go back to Armenia or any other place where they can reside legally. By the way our Constitution doesn't guarantee that you will live with your extended family forever and ever.
By redferret

2/26/09 at 4:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

The constitution also doesn't guarantee citizenship to anyone who comes here. There's actually sections in the Constitution that deal with how to become a citizen. Sorry I forgot about that stuff, but considering I did teach constitutional history, I should've known better.
In any case she'll be gone. It is tragic from the human perspective, but you reap what you sow.
By KillerB

2/26/09 at 4:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

A lot of your comments make you sound like fat white plantation owners, circa 1860. Your "it won't happen to me 'cuz I'm such a law abidin' citizen" attitudes show how ignorant many of you are.

This story shows a lot of problems with "the laws." What it doesn't show are the much deeper issues pointing to the dangers coming for all of us -- the fact that lawmakers have largely parted moorings from their roots (the organic law which allows them to make law for the rest of us) and along with the police are actively preying on all of us.

Check out a small sampling -- "Criminalization out of Control" at https://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub...

As for the "I DON'T CARE" attitude, redferret -- this is just federal immigration law in defiance of the Supreme Law of the Land, of which the Bill of Rights is an integral part. Wait until you get caught in the gears of this machine. Like suddenly finding your bank account seized for a years-long retroactive child support order for an alleged child you never knew about (this one's a favorite California move). It'll be interesting to hear about how your opinions on injustice and due process have expanded then.
By jfnance32

2/26/09 at 4:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

I hear Democrats complain about cheap labor overseas making cheap goods which are sold here which could hurt jobs here.

But those same Democrats just love the cheap labor that sneaks across the border who sometimes hurt jobs here.

I am confident that young black males wao are entering the job market are the ones hurted the most by illegal immigrant. Does Obama care? Hell no!!!

What is the difference?

Hmmmmm...perhaps they support the second one because it gives them more power at the ballot box.

Democrats could care less about the damage that occurs with illegal immigration. They are corrupt and will do anything to get and hold on to power.
By starrynite7

2/26/09 at 7:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

Killer: You are so paranoid, the police are not out to get you. Get over yourself. The police have a lot more important things to do than sit around trying to ruin your life. Everyone is welcome to come to this country and live and go forth and prosper, legally. If people come here illegally, they should be deported. We are a governed society that has laws, and if we don't follow the laws there will be chaos.
The police try to keep the peace as best they can and sometimes the task is overwhelming given how much crime they deal with everyday. I respect the police and commend them on a job well done.
Killer: BTW my family is from Spain and Ireland and all of the members of my family came to this country the old-fashion way, legally. You have such a "holier-than-thou" attitude and yet you speak utter nonsense.
By LVImmigrationAttorney

2/27/09 at 1:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

A Gestapo style law enforcement of immigration laws no matter what's at stake and with a blind eye to human suffering would, no doubt, produce a flawlessly functioning immigration machine! And you would think you want that, right up until you, or someone you care about has been, or is about to be, processed through that machine... The question is not whether we should bend the rules for Anoush Sarkisian or her five daughters; nor whether she deserves to be in the spot light while others in her situation are quietly deported with no hassle or noise in the media. The question is what does her story, and yes, the story of others similar situated whose voices have not been heard, illustrate? Does it illustrate that the rules fairly balance the interest in enforcing administrative (and not penal!!!) law with the "pain" stemming from deportation in some cases? And to answer that question, do we need to know about that pain? I think so" You see, this story is about that pain, which is not readily understood by a person who has not been through a similar experience. We read an article like this and it's so tempting to get all theoretical and argue legal philosophy... and it's all good, so long we realize that the views we express are limited by our ability to relate to Anoush Sarkisian. Our ability to understand the choice she made by coming to the U.S. in 1991 (legally, by the way), to seek a better life for herself and her family. Our ability to understand that she came here to seek shelter; asylum from persecution in Ukraine. Our ability to understand that she awaited a final decision on her asylum application for 8 years, and during these 8 years she was legally allowed to reside and work in the United States. Our ability to understand that when people receive a shelter for 8 years, they don't stand by the mail box everyday waiting for a decision with their entire lives on hold; they live, they work, they continue to raise a family, and become more and more attached to that shelter which they and their children know as nothing but home. Our ability to understand that people -- immigrant or not, lawfully present in the country or not, - get screwed by lawyers.... a lot. Our ability to understand that by the use of the term "illegal alien" we unjustifiably attach the moral blame we attach to criminals, and if you knew Anoush Sarkisian you would know better... And if we really knew her as a person, knew the kind of mother she is, perhaps then we'd be less territorially possessive and agree that there is something fundamentally wrong in the government's attempt to deport her" And then you would wonder whether the "machine" needs to be adjusted to deal with cases like this. Believe it or not, it does not need to: by law, the Department of Homeland Security already has authority to grant deferred action for humanitarian reasons. Will they?
By redferret

2/27/09 at 7:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Killer,
I DARE you to find the part in the Constitution that says we have to take in everyone and that they automatically become citizens once here. Really I'll wait.
Until then, the point is that there are legal ways to become a citizen. This lady did not go after them vigorously enough. After her visa expired, she should have sought other ways to stay other than asking politicians who incidentally DON'T represent her. She isn't a citizen; she was a guest.
And Killer, I don't fear law enforcement. I don't worry that ICE or INS is coming after me. Funny I don't have a lot of fear. That isn't being a sheep; that's being a happy natural born American citizen who's happy with his country.
And lawyer person, I'm sure Charlie Manson had some impressive qualities. I'm sure Al Capone had a great family and treated them well. I'm sure various drug dealers have endearing qualities. The simple fact is she broke the laws. They aren't impossible obstacles to staying here. So get over it. The point is everyone has a sob story at the end of it, and that isn't what the law was made for, to listen to those stories. A law was broken.
By KillerB

2/27/09 at noon

Suggest removal

hey, redferret -- "I DARE you to find" the part that says we can keep others from coming here and enjoying the same freedoms we ... uh ... were originally intended to enjoy.

And the point is these laws you're shouting about with the rest of the herd first have to be passed AND administered by constitutional standards.

The rest of your rant is just baseless assumptions and noise.
By redferret

2/27/09 at 12:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hmmm, well for starters there's the requirements for office which state that one has to be naturalized for X amount of years for office. In addition to the President has to be a natural born citizen. Then there are the requirements to get citizenship. As well as copious references to citizens, naturalized citizens, and the overall process to become a citizen.

So all your BS gas about us being unfair to noncitizens is a nonissue. Your utter lack of understanding of the constitution just underlines this with your snazzy conformist/nonconformist dichotomy of the world. Why don't you stop your baseless assumptions and noise defending people who did break the law. If you feel so strongly, why don't you DO something. I know get a case to the Supreme Court. Surely in all the time that there's been deportations, someone would have taken this to the Supreme Court and had these horrible immigration laws struck down.

Uber pwnage.
By KillerB

2/27/09 at 10:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

redferret, et al. -- I took the trouble to quote actual law and provide links. You did none of that, you just opined away like it meant anything more than being a "BS gas bag."

And I have done plenty. Including discovering for a fact -- TWICE -- a trip to the U.S. Supremes is mostly useless, unless you have the $4 million price the big name attorneys now charge.

So I leave you to bleat along with the rest of the herd who congratulate each other how their bare opinions actually have substance.
By redferret

3/2/09 at 9:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Wow not only do you not rebut what I said, but you add ad hominem attacks because your points are withered and useless. It still stands that the law is the law. The Supreme Court hasn't struck it down, and you've done nothing about it. So at the end of it, seeing as you haven't proven the US has to take in everybody, I have to ask,
Is it lonely on your little free thinking pedastel? You've proven nothing, have nothing, and just spout rhetoric. Keep on wearing you Che shirt and acting like you are such an individual. Christ, I got out of the better than thou attitude by freshman year.