In his "Abroad at Home" column in the New York Times on June 15, 1998, Anthony Lewis, one of the nation's most widely-read columnists, presented a story that appears becoming more and more common.  Lewis reported on the case of Zdenek Geres, a Czech national who had finally saved up enough money to come to the US on vacation.

When Geres reached the INS at the airport in Atlanta an INS officer who allegedly claimed to be the President's brother questioned him.  The officer, named Clinton, claimed that the "computer told him" that Geres really had an immigrant intent.  He gave Geres two options -- either confess to coming in with fraudulent intent and going back to the Czech Republic on the next flight or go to jail. 

No matter what Geres told Clinton, it was to no avail, according to Lewis' report.  The immigration officer canceled Geres's visa and barred him from the US for five years.  When a friend of Mr. Geres wrote a letter to Thomas P. Fischer, the District Director of the INS in Atlanta, Fischer replied that he had reviewed the case, there were grounds for refusal and that Geres was not clearly admissible into the US.  Presently the internal audit bureau of the INS is reviewing the case at the request of Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-New York). 

Geres's ordeal occurred under the auspices of expedited removal, which gives INS officers, the power to bar those with fraudulent documents from entering the US.  Unfortunately for Mr. Geres, this rule deprived him of due process and gave him no opportunity to remedy the situation before being sent home.  

Other major publications are increasingly reporting on problems in the just administration of the nation's immigration laws. Recently, the Wall Street Journal, hardly known for a liberal bias, presented a front page report on a Canadian-American couple that has gotten caught up in the broad 1996 Immigration Act expedited removal provisions.