INS Inspectors’ Power to Reject Visitors Criticized

Ulrich Peter Bruckner, a Swiss film distributor, arrived in Los Angeles last week for meetings on some movie projects--the kind of business that had brought him here many times before.

However, Bruckner says his first day was spent not on the Hollywood networking circuit but in dingy Immigration and Naturalization Service lockups, much of the time without access to food and water. He faced speedy deportation back to Europe, despite his valid U.S. visa, he says.

“I’m shocked something like this could happen in this country,” said Bruckner, who says he was almost sent back on a plane to London before the INS relented and let him go after some 27 hours in custody. “It’s very dehumanizing. . . . This is like a bad film.”

INS officials, who declined to discuss Bruckner’s case in detail, denied any wrongdoing or mistreatment. “This was handled according to our procedures,” said Rosemary Melville, INS deputy district director in Los Angeles.

The agency accuses Bruckner of coming to the United States not as a temporary visitor and businessman, as his visa allows, but as a prospective permanent resident. INS officials say as many as half of all illegal immigrants residing in the United States initially entered on valid visas but then overstayed or otherwise violated their visa terms.

Bruckner’s case illustrates how Congress’ sweeping 1996 overhaul of immigration laws has given inspectors wide latitude to expel people arriving at borders and airports, largely without administrative and judicial review. The INS is using the new “expedited removal” authority--which supporters call a forceful new weapon against illegal immigration--to send back more than 1,000 foreign nationals each week nationwide, often within hours of their arrival.

At LAX, officials are expelling about 90 arrivals each month, according to INS figures.

*

The provision was largely designed to keep out people lacking proper documents who make spurious claims for political asylum designed to prolong their time in the United States. Attorneys specializing in immigration law say the measure has also been widely used to expel people like Bruckner--business travelers and visitors with valid visas whom INS inspectors deem to be here on false pretenses.

Bruckner acknowledges having spent more time in the United States than Europe during the past two years. But the Swiss citizen says his home and principal bank account--with about $100,000 in savings--remain in Austria. The INS is not convinced: Bruckner still faces expulsion but will be allowed to argue his case at a session with INS officials.

Bruckner was able to rally support and hire a lawyer, David L. Amkraut of Los Angeles. Most of those targeted by the speedy-removal policy, immigration lawyers say, lack his resources and contacts and are quickly sent back home, barred from returning to the United States for five years.

The American Civil Liberties Union is challenging the deportation policy in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., calling it unconstitutional and saying INS officers in effect act as both prosecutor and judge in cases such as Bruckner’s.

“This is a classic case of why immigration inspectors should not have unilateral authority to determine who is and who is not admissible,” Lucas Guttentag, head of the ACLU’s National Immigrants Rights’ Project, said about Bruckner’s situation. “He got lucky because he has access to an attorney and powerful friends, but for every person like him thousands are being excluded summarily, without any review at all.”

Among those suing the INS is a 39-year-old Israeli businessman who was sent home in August and contends that he will lose his home and business in Los Angeles because of the action. Sincha Yechel Avi Ishik says he has a temporary visa to reside in the U.S. but was sent back and barred from reentry for five years after he arrived at JFK Airport in New York in August and the INS contended he was living here permanently, according to court papers. The INS has denied any wrongdoing.

The law does allow people who can convince inspectors that they have a “credible fear” of persecution in their home countries to be referred to trained political asylum officers for further adjudication. However, with INS inspectors examining some 500 million entries each year, officials concede that some mistakes are inevitable.

“We are certainly doing our utmost to implement the law correctly and appropriately,” said Karen Kraushaar, an INS spokeswoman in Washington. “We’re being very cautious.”

Though expedited removal is controversial, it has the strong backing of some lawmakers and others long critical of a system that allowed illegal immigrants to remain in the United States for years by filing appeal after appeal.

“This prevents individuals who want to come into the country illegally from gaming the system,” said U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), head of the House immigration subcommittee, who sponsored the 1996 law that created expedited removal.

Before the law was implemented in April, anyone whose right to enter the country was challenged had the option of seeking a hearing before an immigration judge. That decision could be appealed to a Justice Department oversight board and through the federal courts.

INS inspectors make the decision to send back arrivals who do not demonstrate a “credible fear” of persecution back home, and there is no appeal process in such cases. Supervisory personnel approve all such decision, according to the INS.

Bruckner, a film buff, says he studied marketing at Tulane University. He says he worked for Warner Bros. in Germany for a year until 1994. He says he now arranges to market films abroad and seeks foreign financing for movie projects. He mostly stays with friends and a cousin while in the United States, he says.

On Wednesday, Bruckner arrived from London at Los Angeles International Airport. INS inspectors, he said, seemed immediately suspicious about his many recent visits, this being his fifth U.S. entry since May 1995, according to five-page transcript of his interrogation by the INS, a copy of which was given to The Times.

Bruckner says he was taken to an interrogation room at LAX. Eventually, he contends, the officers coerced him into agreeing to go back to Europe after signing an incriminating statement that seems to indicate Bruckner did intend to remain in the United States.

“They told me if I didn’t sign they would deport me immediately and I could not come back for five years,” Bruckner, 35, said after his release Thursday evening. “The whole situation is very paralyzing. You are basically out there, stripped of all rights, and treated like a criminal.”

The INS’ Melville denied any impropriety in the way Bruckner was handled. “Our policy is not to brow-beat people,” she said, declining to go into detail because of privacy protections.

Bruckner said he was held about five hours at the airport before being taken to a private holding facility in Gardena that is used by the INS. Eventually, he says he was forced to buy a $833 return ticket to London.

Bruckner’s immigration problems stunned the U.S. film people who work with him.

William Mesa, head of Flash Film Works, a Los Angeles special effects and production company, described Bruckner’s role as that of an “international sales rep,” arranging foreign financing and marketing of film rights abroad. Mesa said his company is working with Bruckner on two films, a romance to be filmed in Ireland and an adventure movie. Bruckner’s detention caused the Swiss citizen to miss a meeting Thursday with a German financier who was visiting Hollywood.

“You just can’t do that to people who are coming to this country and bringing millions of dollars in business,” said Mesa, who said he had worked with Bruckner for eight years. “It’s hard to understand.”