An internal Homeland Security probe into rubber-stamp approvals of immigration visas — which was revealed by The Daily this week, prompting a congressional investigation — began, in part, as a response to the actions of one senior administration appointee.
Roxana Bacon, a Phoenix immigration attorney who was named chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in October 2009, set off a firestorm of controversy within the agency, beginning when she championed a visa application by a university to which she had close ties.
Backlash against Bacon’s actions culminated in the Homeland Security investigation, which concluded that higher-ups within the USCIS were systematically pressuring rank-and-file officers to approve questionable applications, sometimes “against their will” and under perceived threat of demotion or reassignment, according to a draft report exclusively obtained by The Daily.
Several agency veterans complained to The Daily that agency director Alejandro Mayorkas, who was appointed during the Obama administration’s 2009 push for comprehensive immigration reform, brought with him a mantra of “get to yes” that fundamentally clashed with their own views on when to afford visa applicants the benefit of the doubt.
And the sources said no one pushed this agenda more aggressively than Bacon.
She even faced the possibility of criminal charges for a conflict of interest in the case of the university employee, according to Homeland Security documents. The Justice Department declined to prosecute a month after she resigned in December 2010.
“Unease about this case and others like it still lingers throughout the agency,” according to the Homeland Security report.
The case centered around a request for an “O visa,” a category of visas for foreigners with “extraordinary” ability or achievements in the sciences, arts, education, business, athletics, movie or television industry. The University of Arizona requested an O visa for a visiting scholar from Mongolia, who was slated to become an assistant professor of geography.
The USCIS’ California Service Center denied the visa application, concluding that she had not yet attained “extraordinary achievement” in her field.
Frustrated that a low-level officer was questioning the university’s expertise in deciding who was extraordinary, Bacon emailed senior officials in November 2009: “Let’s find a way to get the adjudicators [officers] out of making judgment calls rather than legal calls on complex research areas beyond their, or our, expertise. We are comfortable knowing that good Universities ... can be given the benefit of the doubt.”
This wasn’t the only time Bacon or her staff had used the denial of an individual visa case to push for broader agency reform. But in this instance, she had close ties with the petitioner, the University of Arizona. Bacon had endowed the university’s Bacon Immigration Law and Policy Program, for example. She also served on a board for the law school.
In January 2010, Bacon emailed two of her staffers complaining that the California Service Center was being overly tough on applicants. “No question we need some serious head changes here ... it’s like Whack A Petitioner here,” she wrote. “Whatever we do to instruct generosity the [California Service Center] finds a way to tie them up in another little loop.”
Internal backlash against Bacon’s aggressive approach led Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General to launch a conflict-of-interest investigation the following month. According to a heavily redacted synopsis, Bacon was accused of using subordinates to prevent the denial of the Mongolian scholar’s visa application. Several sources close to the investigation said that an employee was asked to go into the mail room and intercept the denial letter before it could be sent.
The inspector general found that, after the university’s petition was denied, Bacon’s Office of the Chief Counsel sought a “more flexible and liberal policy” on O visas in general.
“These efforts were not based on reasonable interpretations of the law,” the inspector general said.
But the approach didn’t seem to have raised overall approval rates. According to statistics provided by USCIS, O visa approvals have steadily dropped from 96 percent in fiscal year 2008 to 90 percent so far this fiscal year.
Bacon described herself to The Daily as merely a “friend of the institution.” She said her opining on the University of Arizona case wasn’t a conflict of interest because she has never received money or benefits from the institution.
As the investigation progressed, at least four of the California Service Center officials who spoke against Bacon in the investigation were notified that they would either be involuntarily relocated or demoted — a move they perceived to be retribution.
Citing “privacy policies,” USCIS spokesman Christopher Bentley declined to comment on the circumstances surrounding Bacon or the California Service Center employees, but said any allegations that they had faced retaliation are “categorically false.”
In July 2010, a controversial memo that Bacon co-authored and sent to Mayorkas was leaked. The memo was commonly referred to as the “amnesty memo” because it outlined ways that USCIS could “reduce the threat of removal” for millions of undocumented immigrants, since Congress was not taking up the issue of immigration reform.
In October 2010, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, requested that the inspector general investigate allegations that agency employees were being pressured to approved questionable applications, following a series of complaints to his office.
Of her resignation, Bacon explained to The Daily that, “I only went back to work with Immigration because of comprehensive immigration reform. So when that wasn’t going to happen, there was no reason for me to be there.”
She claimed that she was unaware she was facing possible criminal charges.
A high-ranking USCIS official said “nothing has gotten better. It’s gotten worse” since Bacon resigned.
“People are afraid to report wrongdoing when they see it,” an official said. “People are afraid to speak up when they don’t agree with a decision or a policy and if they are forced to approve things they don’t think should be approved.”
Sarah.Ryley@thedaily.com
Roxana Bacon, a Phoenix immigration attorney who was named chief counsel of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services in October 2009, set off a firestorm of controversy within the agency, beginning when she championed a visa application by a university to which she had close ties.
Backlash against Bacon’s actions culminated in the Homeland Security investigation, which concluded that higher-ups within the USCIS were systematically pressuring rank-and-file officers to approve questionable applications, sometimes “against their will” and under perceived threat of demotion or reassignment, according to a draft report exclusively obtained by The Daily.
Several agency veterans complained to The Daily that agency director Alejandro Mayorkas, who was appointed during the Obama administration’s 2009 push for comprehensive immigration reform, brought with him a mantra of “get to yes” that fundamentally clashed with their own views on when to afford visa applicants the benefit of the doubt.
And the sources said no one pushed this agenda more aggressively than Bacon.
She even faced the possibility of criminal charges for a conflict of interest in the case of the university employee, according to Homeland Security documents. The Justice Department declined to prosecute a month after she resigned in December 2010.
“Unease about this case and others like it still lingers throughout the agency,” according to the Homeland Security report.
The case centered around a request for an “O visa,” a category of visas for foreigners with “extraordinary” ability or achievements in the sciences, arts, education, business, athletics, movie or television industry. The University of Arizona requested an O visa for a visiting scholar from Mongolia, who was slated to become an assistant professor of geography.
The USCIS’ California Service Center denied the visa application, concluding that she had not yet attained “extraordinary achievement” in her field.
Frustrated that a low-level officer was questioning the university’s expertise in deciding who was extraordinary, Bacon emailed senior officials in November 2009: “Let’s find a way to get the adjudicators [officers] out of making judgment calls rather than legal calls on complex research areas beyond their, or our, expertise. We are comfortable knowing that good Universities ... can be given the benefit of the doubt.”
This wasn’t the only time Bacon or her staff had used the denial of an individual visa case to push for broader agency reform. But in this instance, she had close ties with the petitioner, the University of Arizona. Bacon had endowed the university’s Bacon Immigration Law and Policy Program, for example. She also served on a board for the law school.
In January 2010, Bacon emailed two of her staffers complaining that the California Service Center was being overly tough on applicants. “No question we need some serious head changes here ... it’s like Whack A Petitioner here,” she wrote. “Whatever we do to instruct generosity the [California Service Center] finds a way to tie them up in another little loop.”
Internal backlash against Bacon’s aggressive approach led Homeland Security’s Office of Inspector General to launch a conflict-of-interest investigation the following month. According to a heavily redacted synopsis, Bacon was accused of using subordinates to prevent the denial of the Mongolian scholar’s visa application. Several sources close to the investigation said that an employee was asked to go into the mail room and intercept the denial letter before it could be sent.
The inspector general found that, after the university’s petition was denied, Bacon’s Office of the Chief Counsel sought a “more flexible and liberal policy” on O visas in general.
“These efforts were not based on reasonable interpretations of the law,” the inspector general said.
But the approach didn’t seem to have raised overall approval rates. According to statistics provided by USCIS, O visa approvals have steadily dropped from 96 percent in fiscal year 2008 to 90 percent so far this fiscal year.
Bacon described herself to The Daily as merely a “friend of the institution.” She said her opining on the University of Arizona case wasn’t a conflict of interest because she has never received money or benefits from the institution.
As the investigation progressed, at least four of the California Service Center officials who spoke against Bacon in the investigation were notified that they would either be involuntarily relocated or demoted — a move they perceived to be retribution.
Citing “privacy policies,” USCIS spokesman Christopher Bentley declined to comment on the circumstances surrounding Bacon or the California Service Center employees, but said any allegations that they had faced retaliation are “categorically false.”
In July 2010, a controversial memo that Bacon co-authored and sent to Mayorkas was leaked. The memo was commonly referred to as the “amnesty memo” because it outlined ways that USCIS could “reduce the threat of removal” for millions of undocumented immigrants, since Congress was not taking up the issue of immigration reform.
In October 2010, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, requested that the inspector general investigate allegations that agency employees were being pressured to approved questionable applications, following a series of complaints to his office.
Of her resignation, Bacon explained to The Daily that, “I only went back to work with Immigration because of comprehensive immigration reform. So when that wasn’t going to happen, there was no reason for me to be there.”
She claimed that she was unaware she was facing possible criminal charges.
A high-ranking USCIS official said “nothing has gotten better. It’s gotten worse” since Bacon resigned.
“People are afraid to report wrongdoing when they see it,” an official said. “People are afraid to speak up when they don’t agree with a decision or a policy and if they are forced to approve things they don’t think should be approved.”
Sarah.Ryley@thedaily.com
PHOTO: Mike Schmidt/The Daily
Immigration officers saw pressure to OK visas.
