See/Read Web-page link:
USCIS’ Un-Constitutional, illegal, immoral previously secret Extreme Vetting program, also known as “Muslims Need Not Apply” – that targets otherwise eligible aspiring Americans with long-term delays, eventual denials, then mandates deportation.
The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services’ (USCIS) Un-Constitutional, previously secret policy called Controlled Application Review & Resolution Program (CARRP) sounds innocuous enough. However, in reality, it is Orwellian double-speak: it says ‘one thing’ but actually means and does something else. It is illegal, unethical, immoral and still all too secret and unknown. When One is subjected to CARRP, the aspiring American does not know s/he is targeted, as agents do not tell her/him. The aspiring American, targeted by CARRP, is left in a quandary about what is going on? why is their application taking so long (in too many cases: for many, many years)? and after many years of waiting (delay), why is the aspiring American denied when they are statutorily eligible? But wait, it doesn’t stop there – after the denial, then there’s deportation. The 3 “D”s – Delay, Deny, Deport.
Today this Un-Constitutional, illegal, immoral SECRET policy targets different demographics, tomorrow it could be You !
“Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program” sounds innocuous enough, but it really means, “Delay, Deny, and Deport.” George Orwell described this twisted talk as “double-speak.”
Chances are, if an aspiring American has filed for naturalization or adjustment of status and comes from a Muslim-majority country, or perceived Muslim country, she/he has been, are, or will be subjected to the illegal, un-Constitutional, immoral, unethical CARRP policy. Because, you see, CARRP’s “other” name is: “Muslims Need Not Apply.”
USCIS initiated CARRP in 2008 and since that time, many thousands of immigration applications have been indefinitely delayed or denied without valid or meaningful explanation. In a recent case (WAGAFE v Trump, Dist. Court, WD Washington 2017), USCIS reported that between July 1, 2013 and September 20, 2013, shocking 2,644 pending applications (Humans) had been subjected to CARRP. That’s merely 2 ½ months !
Assuming that 2008 was actually the beginning year of CARRP, how many applications (innocent Humans) have been subjected to CARRP since it was created or initiated in 2008 and beyond September 2013? If one takes the average of over 1000 per month, the potential total of applicants (that is innocent Humans) is staggering !
The main thrust of WAGAFE Plaintiffs’ case is the legality of CARRP and Plaintiffs alleged the unlawful CARRP practice has been ongoing since the inception of the CARRP program in 2008. Court was not convinced that the alleged unlawful conduct could not reasonably be expected to recur (or continue, or morphed into something similar, if not stopped). Furthermore, acting on applications subjected to CARRP (that were highlighted by a lawsuit challenging it) is very different than VOLUNTARY CESSATION of the CARRP program.
Even court referenced “CARRP’s apparently clandestine nature,” given that it was secret. An otherwise statutorily eligible applicant did not know she or he was subjected to CARRP’s addition of non-statutory and substantive requirements to naturalization (i.e. extreme vetting, etc) (let alone the Public knowing about CARRP). And if known that he or she is subjected to CARRP, no meaningful way to challenge classification as a national security concern – which often leads, after long delays, to denial and deportation.
But why would such a policy as CARRP need to be put in place? When already the Constitution expressly assigns the authority to establish uniform rules of naturalization to Congress – which Congress has done in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).
The INA already contains indicators of NS (national security) concerns for those seeking lawful permanent resident status, asylum, or a visa. (8 U.S.C. §§1182(a)(3)(A), (B), and (F), 1227 (a)(4)(A) and (B)). CARRP creates a substantive regime for immigration application processing and imposes more extreme vetting; arbitrary eligibility criteria that indefinitely delays adjudications and unlawfully denies EARNED immigration rights to noncitizens who are statutorily eligible and entitled by law. If an applicant were statutorily ineligible under the INA rules, then submitting an application to CARRP would be redundant. So why CARRP policy?
CARRP was unknown to the public until, through litigation and FOIA requests challenging a denial of naturalization in Hamdi v. USCIS, 2012 WL 632397 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2012), this previously secret policy was exposed. After waiting over 11 years, Tarek Hamdi was finally granted naturalization by district court in time to vote (2012). See: CARRP
But why did CARRP need to be secret? As long as CARRP was secret and completely unknown except by those implementing it, an applicant did not know she or he was subjected to CARRP’s addition of non-statutory and substantive requirements to naturalization (i.e. extreme vetting, etc), even if he or she were statutorily eligible. The applicant would be told virtually nothing about the delays, and likely was denied without explanation and deported without knowledge of having been subjected to the secret policy. And if, by some chance, the applicant became aware that he or she was subjected to CARRP, classified as “national security concern,” there was no meaningful way to challenge that “national security” classification.
Why is CARRP illegal? Yes, that means AGAINST the laws !
CARRP is illegal because only CONGRESS can create immigration law. CARRP was not authorized by Congress and CARRP provides no deadline to resolve cases subjected to CARRP, not even meaningful way to challenge a classification of NS “national security concern.”
Why is CARRP immoral and unethical? and What does CARRP do?
If all immigration applicants were to be held to higher/different/arbitrary standards and all are considered “national security concerns” then the policy should not be secret; the policy should be made public, debated and voted on.
- CARRP primarily targets aspiring Americans who are Muslim, perceived to be Muslim, from Muslim countries, and/or perceived to be from perceived Muslim countries: AMEMSA: Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian countries. Now, this further includes Pakistan, Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Nigeria and other “Muslim-perceived” countries (Muslim Ban 1.0, Muslim Ban 2.0, Muslim Ban 3.0 and now, Muslim Ban 4.0).
- CARRP discriminates against Muslims (perceived Muslims), it holds Muslim immigration applicants to different arbitrary standards and more extreme vetting.
- CARRP ‘s targeting of aspiring Americans causes unnecessary delays in citizenship processing. These delays are illegal. Immigration law describes specific time line for citizenship processing, but CARRP works around the legal time line. By law, USCIS is expected to process applications for naturalization within six months of receiving them, and it must make a decision on a case within four months of interviewing the applicant.
- After long delays, CARRP policy then directs USCIS agents to deny naturalization to aspiring Americans by finding (or creating) reasons to deny an aspiring American’s application.
- Then, CARRP policy directs USCIS agents to look for (or otherwise create) any reason to DEPORT those aspiring Americans.
So how does an aspiring American figure out if she or he is subjected to CARRP?
There are some clues:
Delays: too much time has passed; told “you’re in the name check loop” over & over; indefinite limbo. (Would immigration applicants know to challenge Department of Homeland Security (the umbrella under which USCIS resides)? And remember, Department of Homeland Security did not exist until after 9/11.)
Additional/extra security “inspections” when traveling within, or in and out of United States. (And includes violent expulsion from planes, perhaps because he or she spoke in non-English language, or dressed “funny,” or talked on a cell phone before take-off.)
Extraordinary questioning by multiple policing agencies (FBI and other federal, state and city policing agencies, interference and harassment).
Denials: perhaps on unfounded “reasons”, or denied without explanation.
Deportations: When the aspiring American’s application is denied, she or he is put into deportation proceedings and without intervention, deported.
CARRP & Lawsuits
There have been some lawsuits brought by immigration applicants (the plaintiffs) who have strong suspicion or knowledge that they have been subjected to CARRP. One of the earliest “CARRP lawsuit” was Hamdi v. USCIS, 2012.
Since then, there have been many other lawsuits about CARRP that included multiple plaintiffs (applicants for naturalization). This has become possible only because it is becoming more known and exposed.
In the recent WAGAFE v Trump (and USCIS) lawsuit, some interesting actions by USCIS emerged:
> A Somali national and former lawful permanent resident met the statutory criteria for naturalization; his application was “CARRP”d for several years, until he became part of the class certification in the lawsuit. (Suddenly) within about 15 days, he became a U.S. citizen.
> An Iraqi refugee waited over 3 years for his naturalization after satisfying all statutory criteria. When he became part of the lawsuit, he too within a month and a half, became a U.S. citizen.
> A Pakistani national, met statutory criteria for naturalization, and in less than a month after being added as a Plaintiff in the lawsuit, became a citizen on the same day his application was (finally) approved.
Those three just mentioned, are mere few examples of some who waited up to 3-4 years for their naturalization. There are countless others who have waited for many more years.
As of August, 2013:
Abrahim Mosavi’s application was still pending after 13 years;
Tarek Hamdi, after 11 years, was granted naturalization by district court;
Jamal Atalla, after 9 years, was granted naturalization by district court;
Mirsad Hajro, after 8 ½ years, was granted naturalization by district court;
and there are many, many more, who waited longer than the 120 days it should have taken. Why? Because of CARRP and its particular vetting processes.
In WAGAFE v Trump lawsuit, some other “CARRP” lawsuits were mentioned: 5 individual applicants joined lawsuit against USCIS in Muhanna v. USCIS, No. 14-cv-05995 (C.D. Cal. July 31, 2014) challenging CARRP, and suddenly, their applications were adjudicated within months of filing the suit. (Muhanna’s, as of August, 2013, had been waiting 6 years for adjudication.) That lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed as “moot.” In another lawsuit, Arapi v. USCIS, No. 16-cv-00692 (E.D. Mo. 2016), 20 individuals filed suit regarding CARRP and soon after, USCIS adjudicated all 20 applications. It was not lost on court that adjudication (of applications) did not appear to be coincidence or happenstance, when applications were acted on almost immediately after joining a lawsuit, even when those applications had been stagnant for up to 4 years (or more, in some cases).
USCIS doesn’t want a federal judge ruling on whether CARRP is legal or illegal. And the more known CARRP becomes, the likelihood that Court will rule on the legality of CARRP becomes greater. So USCIS tries to eliminate all plaintiffs in a lawsuit by either quickly approving or denying their applications when an applicant joins a lawsuit, and/or getting the lawsuit dismissed (such as: the lawsuit is ruled “moot”).
Was USCIS successful in “picking off” earlier plaintiffs (applicants) in lawsuits against USCIS by quickly adjudicating applicants’ (plaintiffs) applications in order to insulate CARRP from meaningful judicial review?
WAGAFE lawsuit appears to have been successful in their focus more on the legality of CARRP, rather than on adjudication or delays, even though, like earlier cases, the applicants in WAGAFE had their applications quickly adjudicated soon after joining the lawsuit. However, unlike other lawsuits, court did not dismiss this lawsuit as “moot”. Plaintiff/s defeated USCIS’ motion to dismiss on all but one tiny part (“Adjustment Class”, that class of persons who seeks adjustment of their status; which was dismissed with prejudice).
Muhammad Zahid Chaudhry naturalization application/s has been subjected to CARRP. We weren’t told, but year after year, another missing piece of the puzzle was revealed and put into place. Years and years and years of delays, then denials, then deportation proceedings. CARRP is as illegal, immoral and unethical today as it was in 2008. We don’t want it to be secret or unknown any more. We don’t want any immigration applicants to be subjected to CARRP. We want CARRP stopped. We don’t want CARRP to morph into some other extreme vetting policy or secret program against any other minority in future. Nazi Crimes against humanity and lessons learned at Nuremberg Trials remind us that: NEVER AGAIN MEANS NEVER AGAIN. USCIS should voluntarily stop the use of CARRP, as the INA already provides rules for adjudication.
Zahid’s legal permanent residency was issued April 25, 2001, long before the paranoia and unfortunate events of 9/11.
Zahid has met all the statutory criteria for expedited citizenship since 2002; let alone other additional qualifications in other categories as well, such as marriage to U.S. citizen (over 16 years), family ties (uncle is a reknowned American Scientist, Author, Researcher and Professor Emeritus at Central Washington University, and a U.S. citizen for decades) and others.
A friend couldn’t ask for a better friend than Zahid, who will stand by a friend’s side through “thick and thin,” and guard his/her back as he did to all US service members.
A neighbor couldn’t ask for a better neighbor than Zahid. He’s the one to give the shirt off his back to anyone in need. He’s the one to give a helping hand to all.
A community couldn’t ask for a better community member than Zahid. He loves his community and the many people he has come to know throughout, and so many love him for his uplifting spirit, bringing hope where some may think there is no hope; that helping hand, that listening ear, that broad smile, that shoulder to lean on.
A state couldn’t have asked for a better, more upstanding National Guardsman than Zahid, who proudly served this state and was Honorably discharged.
A country couldn’t ask for a better citizen than Zahid, who loves this country he’s lived in (HIS country) for about 20 years, has fought for this country, given his blood, sweat & tears for this country, and given nearly his life for this country.
And a wife couldn’t ask for a better husband than Zahid – her life companion, mentor, friend, beloved one, spiritual companion in life’s journey, and co-grandparent to 5 grandchildren for all these 5 grandchildren’s lives.
To learn more about CARRP, please watch my presentation here: Ann Chaudhry presents CARRP: Muslims Need Not Apply
This presentation was broadcast on TV over 16 times and has been watched worldwide. It is now being re-broadcast 17 times on local channel 22 (Thurston County, WASHINGTON).
Read on for Ann Chaudhry’s profound additions to Martin Neimoller’s poem, “First They Came…”
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out —
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Native Americans, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not a Native American.
Then they came for the Negro, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not Negro.
Then they came for the Irish, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not Irish.
Then they came for the Japanese, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not Japanese.
Then they came for the Hispanic, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not Hispanic.
Then they came for the alien, and I did not speak out –
Because I thought I wasn’t alien.
Then they came for the Muslims, and I did not speak out –
Because I was not Muslim.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
Adopted from Martin Niemoller’s poem
Even since just a short while ago, many many more lines can be added to this poem as the appalling injustice is revealed.
The preceding excerpts on CARRP are a small drop in the CARRP “bucket” (and what can reasonably be expected to morph from CARRP if not stopped); more information can be found in Ann’s presentation on CARRP [link] and other sources. It is not a far stretch of the imagination that the Muslim Bans 1.0, 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 have fed into and expanded CARRP’s policy from what it was before these “bans”, to what it may be today.
The Public won’t know until (1) future [published] lawsuits reveal additional information; (2) future FOIA requests reveal additional information; (3) USCIS’ voluntary cessation of continued implementation and subjugation on immigration applications; or (4) lawsuit/s prevail in Court and Court order/s USCIS to halt CARRP (without implementing some future program that is CARRP in all but name).
As you comprehend injustice, you must witness against it !
Will you leave a legacy that yes, you saw injustice and acted against it?
What will be your legacy?
Would you find the courage to act on your spiritual and moral values?
May peace and justice prevail for all (no exceptions) !