An open letter to Filipino officers at the California Service Center re: Humanitarian revalidation

Ordinarily, I write this Immigration Column to advise and inform people about immigration news, laws, benefits, and procedures. However, this week, I am writing directly to the Fil-Am officers and adjudicators at the California Service Center (CSC) about the apparent assembly line, form denials of Humanitarian Revalidation requests. 

Although you may not work in the Humanitarian Revalidation “denial” Department, I hope that you would at least bring this column to the attention of the supervisors in that department. In essence, the way that the humanitarian revalidation requests are being adjudicated, it is virtually impossible for any Filipino in the Philippines to qualify. Little or no discretion is being exercised, and it seems the Humanitarian Revalidation adjudicators have forgotten the “humanitarian” portion of humanitarian revalidation.

The CSC concedes that, “Neither the public law nor USCIS memoranda give guidance in the application of discretion to reinstate a relative petition that is being automatically revoked due to the death of the petitioner.” In other words, there are no rules or guidance to evaluate eligibility. That would seem a tad bit arbitrary: expecting people to apply for a benefit for which there are no guidelines. 

Because of the absence of CIS regulations, the CSC relies on seven factors listed in the Department of State’s (DOS) Foreign Affairs manual (FAM) in “evaluating” eligibility for Humanitarian Revalidation. (Ironically, the FAM states that it is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that has considered these factors. So who originally came up with these factors, DHS or DOS??) Those factors include:

(1) Disruption of an established family unit;

(2) Beneficiary is elderly or in poor health;

(3) Beneficiary has had lengthy residence in the United States;

(4) Beneficiary has no home to go to;

(5) Undue delay by DHS or consular officer in processing the petition or visa;

(6) Hardship to U.S. citizens or lawful permanent residents; and

(7) Beneficiary has strong family ties in the United States.

In evaluating these supposed “eligibility” factors, virtually no Filipino in the Philippines could ever qualify for humanitarian revalidation, as at least 5 of these 7 factors would not even apply! For example, if the applicant is relatively young and healthy and living in the Philippines, there is technically no “disruption” of the family unit in the U.S., and they would obviously not have “lengthy residence” in the U.S., but instead have a “home” to go to. Since it typically takes many years for the priority date on most petitions to become current, obviously there would be no “undue delay” by the USCIS.

With respect to the “hardship” and “strong family ties in the U.S.”, some of the denials cold-heartedly state that if the family members in the U.S. miss “the beneficiary so much, they could easily visit the beneficiary back home considering the [family members] do not appear to be financially distraught and most likely could afford to travel one time or another”. In other words, these adjudicators believe that if the family in the U.S. is so distraught over the separation, then buy a plane ticket and visit the family member in the Philippines. They also suggest in these denials that U.S. Citizen siblings could file a new petition, oblivious (or indifferent) to the fact that such a petition would take another 25 years! (I guess by then, the beneficiary would be “elderly and sickly”?) 

But family reunification is supposed to be a critical factor, which the CSC simply ignores. In fact, in a June 2002 memo, Johnny Williams, the Executive Associate Commissioner, stated that in exercising discretion, adjudicators should give special consideration (or leniency) particularly for “those cases in which failure to reinstate would lead to a harsh result contrary to the goal of family reunification”.  

It appears that the CSC has set up and relied on Humanitarian Revalidation factors that are virtually impossible to meet or satisfy. If so, why even bother having these factors? Why not just simply flip a coin?

What makes this situation more frustrating for Filipinos is that if the beneficiary happened to be in the U.S. when the petitioner died, (even if TNT) then, under the “Survivor Law,” the petition is automatically revalidated, without anyone having to prove any of these unachievable factors. Thus, if a person came to the U.S. years ago as a visitor, overstayed his or her visa, worked without authorization, and otherwise violated the immigration laws, that person would be quickly and easily entitled to pursue his or her green card, despite the death of the petitioner. But, if they obeyed the laws, and patiently waited in the Philippines for their petitions, then they have to satisfy these seven factors, which are virtually impossible to satisfy.

 In conclusion, the relief is called Humanitarian Revalidation and the goal is family reunification. The CSC needs to inject a little more humanity in adjudicating these requests. The goal should be to evaluate and exercise discretion, and not to see how many form denials can be generated.

I hope that the Filipino officers at the CSC take this to heart, and speak to the officers in the Humanitarian Revalidation “denial” department, that they should start exercising discretion, and have some compassion, rather than issuing form, template denials.  

*      *      *

WEBSITE:www.gurfinkel.com

Four offices to serve you:  PHILIPPINES: 894-0258 or 894-0239; LOS ANGELES; SAN FRANCISCO; NEW YORK: TOLL FREE NUMBER: 1-866-GURFINKEL (1-866-487-3465).