[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 158 (Thursday, October 12, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S15119]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. HATCH:
  S. 1314. A bill for the relief of Saeed Rezai; to the Committee on 
the Judiciary.


                       private relief legislation

  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce private relief 
legislation on behalf of my constituents, Mr. Saeed Rezai, and his 
wife, Mrs. Julie Rezai.
  As my colleagues are aware, those immigration cases that warrant 
private legislation are extremely rare. In fact, it has been nearly 6 
years since I last introduced a bill to grant such relief. Indeed, I 
had hoped that this case would not require congressional intervention. 
Unfortunately, it is clear that private legislation is the only means 
remaining to ensure a thorough and comprehensive Justice Department 
review of a number of specific unresolved questions in Mr. Rezai's 
case.
  I wish to take a moment, Mr. President, to provide something by way 
of background to this somewhat complicated case and to explain the 
urgency of this legislation. Mr. Rezai first came to the United States 
in 1986. On June 15, 1991, he married his current wife, Julie, who is a 
U.S. citizen. Shortly thereafter, she filed an immigrant visa petition 
on behalf of her husband. Approval of this petition has been blocked, 
however, by the application of Sec. 204(c) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act. Section 204(c) precludes the approval of a visa 
petition for anyone who entered, or conspired to enter, into a 
fraudulent marriage. The Immigration and Naturalization Service [INS] 
applied this provision in Mr. Rezai's case because his previous 
marriage ended in divorce before the conditions on his residence were 
lifted. In deportation proceedings following the divorce, the judge was 
very careful to mention that there was no proof of false testimony by 
Mr. Rezai, and he granted voluntary departure rather than ordering 
deportation because, in his words, Mr. Rezai ``may be eligible for a 
visa in the future.''
  Despite these comments by the immigration judge, the INS has refused 
to approve Mrs. Rezai's petition. An appeal of this decision is 
currently pending before the Board of Immigration Appeals [BIA]. In the 
meantime, Mr. Rezai appealed the initial termination of his lawful 
permanent resident status in 1990 and the denial of his application for 
asylum and withholding of deportation. In August of this year, the 
Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied this appeal and granted him 90 
days in which to leave the country voluntarily or be deported. Under 
current law, there is no provision to postpone Mr. Rezai's deportation 
pending the BIA's ruling on the current immigrant visa petition filed 
by his wife.
  Mr. President, there is no doubt that deportation would be the source 
of extraordinary hardship to both Mr. and Mrs. Rezai. Throughout all 
the proceedings of the past 4 years, no one including the INS, has 
questioned the validity of their current marriage. In fact, the many 
friends and acquaintances I have heard from have emphatically asserted 
that their marriage is as strong as any they have seen. Given the 
prevailing political and cultural climate in Iran, I would not expect 
that Mrs. Rezai will choose to make her home there. Mr. Rezai's 
deportation will thus cause either the destruction of their legitimate 
marriage or the forced removal of a U.S. citizen and her husband to a 
country unfamiliar to either of them, and in which they have neither 
friends nor family.
  It should also be noted that Mr. Rezai has been present in the United 
States for nearly a decade. During this time he has assimilated to 
American culture and has become a contributing member of his community. 
He has been placed in a responsible position of employment as the 
security field supervisor at Westminster College where he has gained 
the respect and admiration of both his peers and his superiors. In 
fact, I have received a letter from the interim president of 
Westminster College, signed by close to 150 of Mr. Rezai's associates, 
attesting to his many contributions to the college and the community. 
This is just one of the many, many letters and phone calls I have 
received from members of our community. Mr. Rezai's forced departure in 
light of these considerations would both unduly limit his own 
opportunities and deprive the community of his continued contributions.
  Finally, Mr. Rezai's deportation would be a particular hardship to 
his wife given the fact that she was diagnosed earlier this year with 
multiple sclerosis [MS]. She was severely ill for some time and was 
taking a number of medications for her condition. Although Mrs. Rezai's 
health since the initial diagnosis of MS has improved, her physician 
has stated that severe symptoms may return at any time and that rapid 
deterioration could ensue as a result of the stress being placed upon 
her by her husband's immigration proceedings.
  Mr. President, I firmly believe that we must think twice before 
enforcing an action that will result in such severe consequences as the 
destruction of Mr. and Mrs. Rezai's marriage and the endangering of 
Mrs. Rezai's already fragile health. At a minimum, the outstanding 
questions regarding the propriety of the denial of Mr. Rezai's current 
immigrant visa petition need to be addressed. The legislation I am 
introducing today will ensure that the necessary information is 
gathered to address these questions, that the Justice Department will 
conduct a comprehensive review of Mr. Rezai's case in light of this 
information and that Mr. Rezai's deportation will be stayed pending the 
outcome of this review.
                                 ______