State of Texas et al v. United States of America et al

Filing 64

REPLY in Support of 5 Opposed MOTION for Preliminary Injunction, filed by Phil Bryant, Paul R. LePage, Patrick L. McCrory, C.L. "Butch" Otter, Bill Schuette, State of Louisiana, State of Alabama, State of Arizona, State of Arkansas, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Idaho, State of Indiana, State of Kansas, State of Montana, State of Nebraska, State of North Dakota, State of Ohio, State of Oklahoma, State of South Carolina, State of South Dakota, State of Texas, State of Utah, State of West Virginia, State of Wisconsin. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex 1, # 2 Exhibit Ex. 2, # 3 Exhibit Ex. 3, # 4 Exhibit Ex. 4, # 5 Exhibit Ex. 5, # 6 Exhibit Ex. 6, # 7 Exhibit Ex. 7, # 8 Exhibit Ex. 8, # 9 Exhibit Ex. 9.a, # 10 Exhibit Ex. 9.b, # 11 Exhibit Ex. 10.a, # 12 Exhibit Ex. 10.b, # 13 Exhibit Ex. 10.c, # 14 Exhibit Ex. 10.d, # 15 Exhibit Ex. 10.e, # 16 Exhibit Ex. 10.f, # 17 Exhibit Ex. 10.g, # 18 Exhibit Ex. 10.h, # 19 Exhibit Ex. 10.i, # 20 Exhibit Ex. 10.j, # 21 Exhibit Ex. 10.k, # 22 Exhibit Ex. 10.l, # 23 Exhibit Ex. 10.m, # 24 Exhibit Ex. 10.n, # 25 Exhibit Ex. 10.0, # 26 Exhibit Ex. 10.p, # 27 Exhibit Ex. 10.q, # 28 Exhibit Ex. 10.r, # 29 Exhibit Ex. 10.s, # 30 Exhibit Ex. 11, # 31 Exhibit Ex. 12, # 32 Exhibit Ex. 13, # 33 Exhibit Ex. 14, # 34 Exhibit Ex. 15, # 35 Exhibit Ex. 16, # 36 Exhibit Ex. 17, # 37 Exhibit Ex. 18, # 38 Exhibit Ex. 19, # 39 Exhibit Ex. 20, # 40 Exhibit Ex. 21, # 41 Exhibit Ex. 22, # 42 Exhibit Ex. 23, # 43 Exhibit Ex. 24, # 44 Exhibit Ex. 25, # 45 Exhibit Ex. 26, # 46 Exhibit Ex. 27, # 47 Exhibit Ex. 28, # 48 Exhibit Ex. 29, # 49 Exhibit Ex. 30, # 50 Exhibit Ex. 31, # 51 Exhibit Ex. 32, # 52 Exhibit Ex. 33, # 53 Exhibit Ex. 34, # 54 Exhibit Ex. 35)(Oldham, Andrew)

EXHIBIT 23

App. 0852

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
BROWNSVILLE DIVISION

STATE OF TEXAS, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Civil Action No. I : l 4-cv-00254

DECLARATION OF KENNETH PALINKAS

My name is Kenneth Palinkas, and I am over the age of 18 and fully competent in all
respects to make this declaration. I have personal knowledge and expertise of the matters herein
stated.
I.

I am the President of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council

("NCISC"). I started working for the Immigration and Naturalization Service in 1999. I have
been a member of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) since 2000.
2.

I have also been a member of the National Citizenship and Immigration Services

Council since March 4, 2011, when I was appointed to the position of Eastern Region Vice
President that had been vacated. I was subsequently elected to the position of Executive Vice
President of the NCISC August, 2012, and have served as the NCISC's President upon the
resignation of the former President February 2013. The NCISC is part of the American
Federation of Government Employees and is recognized by the AFL-CIO. NCISC represents
12,000 federal employees at U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services ("USCIS").
3.

The immigration officers and staff who work at USCIS and are represented by the

NCISC are hard-working professionals and proud members of the law-enforcement community.

App. 0853

They are charged with, among many other things, processing adjustment-of-status applications,
managing the E-Verify system, and managing the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements
("SAVE") system.
4.

USCIS adjudications officers and staff are the Nation's front-line defense for a

safe and secure immigration system. They investigate applications, issue requests for evidence
("RFEs"), and conduct interviews.

An interview is one of the most important tools in an

officer's toolbox because it is one of the most effective ways to detect fraud and to identify
national-security threats.
5.

users management, however, has undermined immigration officers' abilities to

do their jobs. Management has transformed USCIS from an agency that serves and protects
national security and the rule of law into one that instead serves undocumented immigrants and
their lawyers. Hence the change in titles for Officers from Adjudications Officers to Immigration
Service Officers. Aliens seeking benefits are now referred to as "customers".
6.

The so-called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals ("DACA") and Deferred

Action for Parental Accountability ("OAPA") programs have further undermined the goals that
USCIS officers pursue every day. The agency has been buried in hundreds of thousands of
DACA applications since 2012. And USCIS management has taken several steps to ensure that
DACA applications receive rubber-stamped approvals rather than thorough investigations.
7.

First, USCIS management routes DACA applications to service centers instead of

field offices. But USCIS officers in service centers (as opposed to those in field offices) do not
interview applicants. Divesting USCIS professionals of their ability to interview applicants
seeking immigration benefits through the DACA and DAPA programs (who have already
demonstrated a disregard for the laws of the U.S. as they have entered the country illegally)

2

App. 0854

further erodes and inhibits an officer's ability to root out fraud and screen out national security
threats. It also promulgates a system that is designed to automatically approve applications rather
than adjudicate each application with all the tools necessary to reach a fair and equitable
decision.
8.

According to the most recent data I have seen, Users reports a 99.5% approval

rate for all DAeA applications. The approval rate is that high because users leadership has
prevented immigration officers from conducting case-by-case investigations of DAeA
applications. Leadership has intentionally stopped proper screening and enforcement, and in so
doing, it has guaranteed that applications will be rubber-stamped for approval, a practice that
virtually guarantees widespread fraud and places public safety at risk.
9.

While DAeA applicants originally were required to pay fees, DHS and USeIS

are now exercising their discretion to waive those fees.
10.

USeIS has announced that it will create a new service center to process DAPA

applications. The new service center will be in Arlington, Virginia, and it will be staffed by
approximately 1,000 federal employees. Approximately 700 of them will be USeIS employees,
and approximately 300 of them will be federal contractors. As explained above, by routing
DAPA applications through service centers instead of field offices, USeIS management has
intentionally created an application process that bypasses traditional in-person investigatory
interviews with trained users adjudications officers.

That management decision prevents

officers from conducting case-by-case investigations, undermines officers' abilities to detect
fraud and national-security risks, and ensures that applications will be rubber-stamped.
11.

users management's approach to DAeA and DAPA is consistent with its

approach to other immigration programs. For example, a new useIS computer system to screen

3

App. 0855

applications known as "Transformation" has proven to be a disaster as the agency has spent
upwards of $2 billion for a system that would eventually allow an alien-now referred to as a
"customer" under current USCIS policy, as I previously stated-to upload their own information
via the internet for adjudication purposes. To date, only one form can be accepted into the
program that has been in the making for close to 10 years. The system is wasteful; it undermines
the role ofUSClS adjudicators and immigration officers who are professionally trained to protect
the American public; and it invites fraud and abuse.
12.

All of the facts and information contained within this declaration are within my

personal knowledge and are true and correct
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is
true and correct.
Executed on this 31st day of December, 2014.

4

App. 0856