Under The Red Cover: Congress Can Find Truth About 1986 Amnesty Fraud—And Cover-Up

Last week I suggested a question
VDARE.COM readers should put to their unfriendly local
amnesty advocate: just how many

illegal aliens

in the 1986 amnesty program and cheated their
way to

Lawful Permanent Resident
status and U.S.

The scandalous answer:

Who knows?

But if anyone, especially anyone in
Congress, wants to get to the bottom of past amnesty
fraud once and for all—i.e.

—read on!

The answer lies beneath a veil of

supposedly designed to protect the

3 million
illegal alien amnesty applicants from
deportation while they applied for

green cards
under the 1986 Immigration Reform and
Control Act (IRCA). Of course, the confidentiality that
so nobly protects illegal alien “privacy” also enables
the federal immigration bureaucracy to evade revealing
how many of the

2.7 million successful applicants
were given amnesty
despite being suspected of

. [see OIG report Section III (D)(4)(a)(5) —
the confidentiality provisions of IRCA –posted
on VDARE.com]

So who`s protecting whom?

Is the strict confidentiality
surrounding the 1986 IRCA amnesty a shield to protect
illegal aliens from

, a convenient amnesty fraud cover-up for
the federal government . . . or both?

The 1986 amendments to the
Immigration Act—Sections


— put all
amnesty application information in perpetual lock-down
for both the

Special Agricultural Worker
(SAW) and legalization
amnesty programs.

In the files,

red covers
literally separate out confidential
information and protect amnesty application information
from release to inquiring citizens under the

Freedom of Information Act.
 Nevertheless, the
federal government is permitted to release information
contained in the amnesty files for “immigration
enforcement purposes or law enforcement purposes,”

according  to
Sections 210(b)(6)(C)(i)

of the
Immigration Act.

So the truth about amnesty fraud
lies under those confidential

red sheets
in every applicant`s file. According to
immigration officers who actually interviewed the
illegal aliens, the potential smoking gun in every
amnesty file is called the Form I-696—“The
Legalization / SAW Examinations Worksheet.”

Under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, every
legalization officer conducting interviews used the Form
I-696 to make a record of the type of

presented for the application. The
officers also used the form to make a recommendation on
whether to grant or deny the application, to note
whether they suspected a fraudulent application, and to
explain their findings.

But here`s the kicker—if the
officers suspected fraud during the interview, they were
asked (on the Form I-696) to evaluate their “level of
on a scale from 1 to 5, with 5 being the
highest level.

Amazingly enough, without examining
each Form I-696 one-by-one, there is probably no other
way to find out whether applications suspected of fraud
were really denied after all!

But it could be done.

We could find out how many of the
2.7 million IRCA amnesty winners have a Form I-696 in
their files showing suspected fraud.

We could find out how many of these
aliens, having gotten a Form I-696 recommending denial
based on fraud, received amnesty anyway.

So why don`t we?

Isn`t anyone out there curious

how many
“fraud level 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5”
illegal aliens got amnesty, or eventually

as American citizens?

Congress could find the truth about
amnesty fraud simply by directing

Ridge and

Eduardo Aguirre, Jr
. to get on with it.

Maybe it`s impossible now to revoke

green cards
or U.S. citizenship of suspected fraud
artists (not to mention their

family members
brought in through family

chain immigration
petitioning). But it`s still
imperative that Congress know the magnitude of
application fraud in America`s last massive illegal
alien amnesty experiment.

Even former Immigration Service

Doris Meissner
recognized as

"the commonly held view at the institution"
that the
1986 illegal alien (SAW) amnesty was rife with fraud.

It`s time for Congress to act.

Congressional Immigration Reform
Caucus Chairman

Tom Tancredo
, call your office!

Juan Mann [send him
] is a lawyer and the proprietor of