Matter of Anderson

ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT: ON BEHALF OF SERVICE: Howard Rosengarten, Esquire George Masterton 853 Broadway Appellate Trial Attorney New York, New York 10003

代表答辩人： 代表移民局： Howard Rosengarten律师 George Masterton 百老汇853号 上诉审判律师 纽约，纽约州 10003

In a decision dated November 4, 1977, an immigration judge found the respondent deportable as charged, denied his application for suspension of deportation under section 244(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1254(a), but granted him the privilege of voluntary departure in lieu of deportation. The respondent has appealed. The appeal will be dismissed. The respondent, a 55-year-old native and citizen of the Dominica-11 Republic, entered the United States on August 3, 1969, as a nonimmi- grant visitor. He has conceded deportability as a visitor who has re- mained here beyond the period authorized. The finding we are asked tc zeview on appeal concerns the denial of suspension of deportation.

在1977年11月4日的一项决定中，一名移民法官认定被申请人可如所指控般被驱逐出境，驳回了其根据《移民与国籍法》第244(a)条、8 U.S.C. 1254(a)提出的暂停驱逐出境申请，但准许其以自愿离境代替驱逐出境的特权。被申请人已提出上诉。上诉将被驳回。 被申请人，一名55岁的多米尼加共和国（Dominica-11 Republic）本土出生公民，于1969年8月3日以非移民访客身份进入美国。他已承认作为访客在获准期限届满后仍滞留于此而可被驱逐出境。我们在上诉中需审查的认定涉及暂停驱逐出境申请的驳回。

Interim Decision #2669

临时决定第2669号

In order to establish eligibility for section 244(a)(1) relief, an alien must prove that he has been physically present in the United States for the last seven years, that he has been a person of good moral character for the same period, and that his deportation will result in extreme hardship to himself or to his United States citizen or permanent resident spouse, children, or parents. The immigration judge appears to have found that the respondent failed to establish two of the three statutory criteria, continuous physi- cal presence and extreme hardship. The issue of the respondent's good moral character was not challenged by the Immmigration and Natu- ralization Service. In view of our conclusions on the hardship issue, we find it unnecessary to reach the question of continuous physical pres- ence. In testimony given at the hearing, the respondent contended that the economy of the Dominican Republic is so severely depressed that he will find it difficult to support himself and his wife, who is also in the United States illegally. Medical treatment for her psychological maladjust- ments could not be afforded, according to the respondent. The immigra- tion judge concluded that the thrust of the respondent's argument was that he would suffer economic detriment if deported. The judge cor- rectly noted that under the prevailing interpretation of the extreme hardship requirement, financial hardship in the absence of substantial additional equities has not been a persuasive factor. See Mutter of Uy, 111. & N. Dec. 159 (BIA 1965); Matter of Sangster, 11 I. & N. Dec. 309 (BIA 1965); Matter of Gibson, Interim Decision 2541 (BIA 1976). At oral argument, counsel for the respondent directed our attention to recent comments by the House Judiciary Committee on the issue of extreme hardship. Counsel was referring to a report by the committee in the 94th Congress on §4 of H.R. 8713, a bill which provided for discretionary adjustment of status for certain aliens whose deportation would result in "unusual hardship". The committee report contains the following discussion:

为了确立获得第244(a)(1)条救济的资格，外国人必须证明其在过去七年内一直实际居住在美国，在同一期间内一直是品行良好的人，并且其驱逐出境将对其本人或其美国公民或永久居民配偶、子女或父母造成极端困难。 移民法官似乎认定，被申请人未能确立三项法定标准中的两项，即连续实际居住和极端困难。被申请人的良好品行问题未受到移民和归化局的质疑。鉴于我们对困难问题的结论，我们认为没有必要触及连续实际居住的问题。 在听证会上提供的证词中，被申请人主张，多米尼加共和国的经济严重萧条，他将难以养活自己和同样非法留在美国的妻子。据被申请人称，她心理适应障碍的医疗治疗将无力承担。移民法官得出结论认为，被申请人论点的要旨是，如果被驱逐出境，他将遭受经济损害。法官正确地指出，根据对极端困难要求的通行解释，在缺乏实质性额外衡平因素的情况下，经济困难从来不是一个有说服力的因素。见Mutter of Uy, 111. & N. Dec. 159 (BIA 1965); Matter of Sangster, 11 I. & N. Dec. 309 (BIA 1965); Matter of Gibson, Interim Decision 2541 (BIA 1976)。 在口头辩论中，被申请人的律师提请我们注意众议院司法委员会最近关于极端困难问题的评论。律师指的是该委员会在第94届国会关于H.R. 8713第4条的一份报告，该法案规定对某些驱逐出境将导致“异常困难”的外国人进行酌情调整身份。委员会报告包含以下讨论：

In light of these statements, counsel contends that the impoverished economy of the Dominican Republic should be a dispositive factor in this suspension application. 2 Conditions in an alien's homeland are relevant in determining hard- ship, as the. Committee pointed out. It is obvious, however, that laying critical emphasis on the economic and political situation would mandate a grant of relief in most cases for it is a demonstrable fact that despite the beleaguered state of our own economy, the United States enjoys a standard of living higher than that in most of the other countries of the world. For this reason, most deported aliens will likely suffer some degree of financial hardship. Nonetheless, we do not believe that Con- gress intended to remedy this situation by suspending the deportation of all those who will be unable to maintain the standard of living at home which they have managed to achieve in this country. Clearly, it is only when other factors such as advanced age, severe illness, family ties, etc. combine with economic detriment to make deportation extremely hard on the alien or the citizen or permanent resident members of his family that Congress has authorized suspension of the deportation order. We do not dispute the respondent's characterization of the Dominican economy. However, we cannot find a sufficient number of other adverse factors to conclude that deportation will result in the degree of hardship that section 244(a)(1) was designed to alleviate. The respondent has spent most of his eight yearn in the United States as a self-employed carpenter. Prior to his arrival, he also worked as a carpenter for the Dominican Government where his ability was apparently highly - re- garded. While he has several cousins who live in the United States, his brothers, sisters, and ten children all live in the Dominican Republic_ Treatmentof his wife's emotional difficulties can surely be obtained at home, albeit with economic sacrifices. Despite the sympathetic factors in this case, we are not persuaded that the respondent warrants the extraordinary relief authorized in section 244(a)(1) of the Act. The respondent's original voluntary departure time was three months. That period has expired. In keeping with our decision in Matter of Chouliaris, Interim Decision 2572 (BIA 1977), we will grant the respondent thirty days from the date of this order in which to voluntar- ily depart from the United States. ORDER: The appeal is dismissed. FURTHER ORDER: The respondent is permitted to depart frona the United States voluntarily within 30 days from the date of this order

鉴于这些陈述，律师主张多米尼加共和国的贫困经济应成为本暂停申请的决定性因素。2 正如委员会所指出的，外国人原籍国的状况在判定困难时是相关的。然而，显而易见的是，将关键重点放在经济和政治状况上，将在大多数案件中强制批准救济，因为一个可证明的事实是，尽管我们自己的经济状况不佳，美国的生活水平仍高于世界上大多数其他国家。因此，大多数被驱逐的外国人可能会遭受某种程度的经济困难。尽管如此，我们认为国会并不打算通过暂停所有那些无法维持他们在美国所达到的生活水平的人的驱逐出境来补救这种情况。显然，只有当其他因素（如高龄、重病、家庭关系等）与经济损害相结合，使驱逐出境对外国人或其公民或永久居民家庭成员造成极端困难时，国会才授权暂停驱逐令。 我们不质疑答辩人对多米尼加经济的描述。然而，我们无法找到足够数量的其他不利因素来得出结论，认为驱逐出境将导致第244(a)(1)条旨在缓解的那种程度的困难。答辩人在美国的八年中大部分时间作为自雇木匠度过。在抵达之前，他还曾在多米尼加政府担任木匠，其能力显然受到高度评价。虽然他有几个表亲住在美国，但他的兄弟姐妹和十个孩子都住在多米尼加共和国。他妻子的情绪问题治疗肯定可以在国内获得，尽管需要经济上的牺牲。尽管本案中有令人同情的因素，我们并不认为答辩人值得获得该法第244(a)(1)条授权的特殊救济。 答辩人最初的自愿离境时间为三个月。该期限已过。根据我们在Matter of Chouliaris, 临时决定第2572号 (BIA 1977)中的裁决，我们将给予答辩人自本命令之日起三十天的时间自愿离开美国。 命令：上诉驳回。 进一步命令：准许答辩人自本命令之日起30天内自愿离开美国

Interim Decision #2669

临时决定第2669号

and under such conditions as the District Director deems appropriate; and in the event of failure so to depart, the respondent shall be deported as provided in the immigration judge's order.

并在地区局长认为适当的条件下；如未能如此离境，答辩人应按照移民法官的命令被驱逐出境。