Secretary of Labor for certification pursuant to Section 212(a)(14) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(14), under which certain aliens may be eligible to enter the United States for employment purposes if the Secretary of Labor has certified that (a) there are not sufficient workers in the United States who are able, willing, qualified, and available at the time of application for a visa and admission to the United States and at the place to which the alien is destined to perform such skilled or unskilled labor, and (b) the employment of such aliens will not adversely affect the wages and working conditions of the workers in the United States similarly employed.

In support of Bral's application, his prospective employer, Tessie Witt, stated that she wanted a male hairdresser, not a female hairdresser, as he would attract new business for her. The Secretary of Labor denied the application on the grounds that the employment offer would adversely affect the wages and working conditions of United States workers, and that qualified resident workers were available in the person of unemployed female hairdressers.

Plaintiffs Witt and Bral sought review of the Secretary of Labor's decision. The Court upheld the validity of the regulation relied upon by the Secretary of Labor, which provided that prospective employment is deemed to adversely affect wages or working conditions of American workers if the employment involves any discrimination with regard to race, creed, color, national origin, age or sex. Further the Court found that sex discrimination can have an adverse effect on working conditions of American workers and thus the Secretary is justified in denying an alien's labor certification if it involves sex discrimination. It ruled that the application of the regulation in the Bral case was correct since "customer preference does not constitute a basis for concluding that sex is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary for the normal operation of a business or enterprise." Finally, the Court upheld the Secretary's finding that female workers were qualified to perform the job involved since the Secretary has discretion to disregard an employer's job specification if the Secretary deems it irrelevant to the basic job which the employer desires performed. Pesikoff v. Secretary of Labor, 501 F.2d 759, cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1038 (1974). See the 1974 Digest, pp. 85-87.

In Shuk Yee Chan v. Regional Manpower Administrator of U.S. Department of Labor et al., 521 F.2d 592 (1975), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, on September 4, 1975, held that the Regional Manpower Administrator abused his discre

tion when he denied an alien a labor certification under Section 212(a)(14) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(a)(14), on the basis of evidence not sufficient or reliable enough to support such a finding. The Administrator's decision was based on statistical information from the Illinois State Employment Service to the effect that there were people available for social worker occupation, for which the alien sought certification, but with no showing that the persons listed as available were actually able, willing, or qualified and available to perform the particular work.

Parole Authority

On April 21, 1975, L. F. Chapman, Jr., Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), stated in a letter to the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee that in view of the Viet-Nam and Cambodian crises the INS had authorized the parole into the United States of some 2,000 orphans for whom appropriate visa petitions had been filed, some 3,000 Vietnamese relatives who were in Viet-Nam with their United States citizen or lawful resident alien relatives, and about 3,000 Vietnamese relatives for whom visa petitions had already been processed by relatives in the United States. The exercise by the Attorney General of his parole authority under Section 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act had been recommended by President Ford in order to provide for the entry of certain Vietnamese nationals.

On April 22, 1975, the INS announced that it would parole additional categories of persons from Viet-Nam and Cambodia into the United States, as follows:

1. Vietnamese nationals who are close relatives of American citizens and permanent resident aliens for whom petitions for entry had not been filed. This group was estimated to number between 10,000 and 75,000 and included spouses, parents, children and brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens. It also included spouses, children, and unmarried sons and daughters over 21 of permanent resident aliens, plus the parents of permanent resident aliens and unmarried brothers and sisters living with such parents.

2. Certain "high risk" Vietnamese, not to exceed 50,000 in number. Included in this group were past and present U.S. Government employees, Vietnamese officials and significant political and intelligence figures and the spouses and children of those parents.

3. Cambodians formerly employed by the United States in Cambodia and who were evacuated in Thailand. Their number was approximately 1,000.

4. Approximately 3,000 relatives of U.S. citizens and permanent resident aliens for whom visa petitions had previously been filed by relatives in the United States and who would otherwise have been admissible under normal immigration procedures. This group included spouses, parents, children and brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens. It also included spouses, children, and unmarried sons and daughters over 21 of permanent resident aliens.

Cong. Rec., Vol. 121, No. 62, Apr. 22, 1975, pp. H3123–3124 (daily ed.). For the full text of the INS announcement, see Dept. of Justice Press Release, INS, Apr. 22, 1975.

Sec. 212(d)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. 1182(d)(5), provides:

The Attorney General may in his discretion parole into the United States temporarily under such conditions as he may prescribe for emergent reasons or for reasons deemed strictly in the public interest any alien applying for admission to the United States, but such parole of such alien shall not be regarded as an admission of the alien and when the purposes of such parole shall, in the opinion of the Attorney General, have been served the alien shall forthwith return or be returned to the custody from which he was paroled and thereafter his case shall continue to be dealt with in the same manner as that of any other applicant for admission to the United States.

The Senate Committee on the Judiciary voted, in executive session, on Apr. 22, 1975, to concur in a proposal by the Attorney General to exercise his authority under Sec. 212(d)(5) so as to permit the entry of certain South Vietnamese and Cambodians, and voted on Apr. 28, 1975, to concur in the Attorney General's proposal to permit the entry of certain additional Vietnamese orphans. The Committee's concurrence was not required under the law. Cong. Rec., Vol. 121, No. 62, Apr. 22, 1975, p. D426 (daily ed.); ibid., No. 66, Apr. 28, 1975, p. D463 (daily ed.).

On August 5, 1975, the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice announced that the Attorney General had expanded the categories of Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees eligible for parole into the United States to include some who did not meet earlier criteria. The Department of Justice also announced the extension of the parole to include Laotians who had fled their country. The expansion of the parole categories and inclusion of the Laotians were at the request of the Department of State. According to the Department of Justice announcement, the total number of refugees from Indochina to be permanently resettled in the United States was expected to remain at or near the 130,000 level previously anticipated.

The Department of Justice stated that the expanded parole would allow the inclusion of Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees in other countries who did not meet the earlier criteria. They were not evacuated by the United States Government; they were not aboard the flotilla of vessels on the high seas at the time of the collapse of the Republic of Viet-Nam; and they were not known to be in third countries at the time of prior discussions with Congress concerning parole.

The Department of State advised that many of those included in

the expanded parole were related to refugees already paroled into the United States. Vietnamese and Cambodians eligible under the additional parole authority must have left their countries between March 15 and July 1, 1975. The Laotians eligible for parole included former members of that country's government, former United States Government employees, military officials and others who had fled their country because of fear of persecution; most were in Thailand.

Leonard F. Chapman, Jr., Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service, stated that all refugees would be screened before entering the United States to assure that they met the parole criteria and were admissible to the United States under law. He also stated that before they would be allowed to enter it must be determined that they were unable to settle permanently in either the country of current location or some other country. See Dept. of Justice Press Release, INS, Aug. 5, 1975.

On October 20, 1975, L. F. Chapman, Jr., Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization, issued an amendment to Title 8, Part 212, of the Code of Federal Regulations, which had the effect of refusing entry under a refugee program or asylum claim to an alien who had ordered, assisted, or participated in the persecution of any person because of race, religion, or political opinion, or if he had refused to make a sworn statement with respect thereto. The amendment took effect November 24, 1975.

8 CFR 212.5(a) and (b) were revised to read as follows:

§ 212.5 Parole of aliens into the United States.

(a) General. The district director in charge of a port of entry may, prior to examination by an immigration officer, or subsequent to such examination and pending a final determination of admissibility in accordance with sections 235 and 236 of the Act and this chapter, or after a finding of inadmissibility has been made, parole into the United States temporarily in accordance with section 212(d)(5) of the Act any alien applicant for admission at such port of entry under such terms and conditions, including the exaction of a bond on Form I-352, as such officer shall deem appropriate. No alien shall be paroled into the United States under a refugee program or under a claim of asylum pursuant to Part 108 of this chapter, if he has ordered, assisted or participated in the persecution of any person because of race, religion or political opinion, or if he refuses to make a sworn statement with respect thereto.

(b) Termination of parole. At the expiration of the period of time or upon accomplishment of the purpose for which parole was authorized or when in the opinion of the district director in charge of the area in which the alien is located that neither emergency nor public interest warrants the continued presence of the alien in the United States, parole shall be terminated upon written notice to the alien and he shall be restored to the status which he had at the time of parole, and further inspection or hearing shall be conducted under section 235 or 236 of the Act and this chapter, or any order of exclusion and deportation previously entered shall be executed. If the exclusion order cannot be executed by deportation within a reasonable time, the alien shall again be released on parole unless in the opinion of the district director the public interest requires that the alien be continued in custody.

Former par. (b) of 8 CFR 212.5, concerning advance authorization, was redesignated (c). See Fed. Reg., Vol. 40, No. 207, Oct. 24, 1975, p. 49767.

Representation

On May 22, 1975, Edward H. Levi, Attorney General of the United States, issued revised regulations concerning representation of persons in proceedings before the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and the Board of Immigration Appeals. Part 1, "Definitions," and Part 292, "Representation and Appearance," of Title 8 of the Code of Federal Regulations were amended in the following major respects;

(1) Law students and law graduates not yet admitted to the bar may serve as representatives, under certain specified conditions, with the permission of the presiding official (8 CFR 292.1(a)(2));

(2) Specific criteria are provided for authorizing "reputable individuals" to serve as representatives (8 CFR 292.1(a)(3));

(3) A provision requiring a licensed foreign attorney to obtain permission from the presiding official to serve as a representative is deleted, so that foreign attorneys will be on an equal footing with attorneys in this country (8 CFR 292.1(a)(6)); and

(4) Standards are established for according recognition to organizations and for accrediting representatives (8 CFR 292.2). Revised § 292.1(a) provides that a person entitled to representation may be represented by:

(2) Law students and law graduates not yet admitted to the bar. A law student who is enrolled in the final year of an accredited law school or a law school graduate who is not yet admitted to the bar, provided that:

(i) He is appearing on an individual case basis, at the request of the person entitled to representation;

(ii) In the case of a law student, he has filed a statement that he is participating, under the direct supervision of a faculty member or an attorney, in a legal aid program or clinic conducted by the law school, and that he is appearing without direct or indirect remuneration; and

(iii) His appearance is permitted by the official before whom he wishes to appear (namely a special inquiry officer, district director, officer-in-charge, regional commissioner, the Commissioner, or the Board), which official, if in his opinion special circumstances warrant it, may require that a law student be accompanied by the supervising faculty member or attorney.

Fed. Reg., Vol. 40, No. 104, May 29, 1975, pp. 23271-23272.

Student Aliens

Employment

On January 30, 1975, the Immigration and Naturalization Service of the Department of Justice announced the discontinuance of the Service policy under which school officials in the past had been authorized to permit nonimmigrant students to engage in summer employment. The INS had announced in the Federal Register of November 15, 1974 (39 Fed. Reg. 40311), its intention to terminate its policy of annually making a determination whether to author