The unhappy situation of well-known local chef Chai Chaowasaree has brought into acute public focus serious flaws in the landmark Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996.
The act was designed to bring consistency and equity into our immigration policies.
At that level, it was a good idea.
But the side-effect of the law was to virtually wipe out any discretionary powers to immigration officials or the courts when it comes to enforcing the law.
Plain and simple, if you violate the law you have to leave the country, no matter what compounding factors might be involved.
As a state that has traditionally depended on immigrants for its vitality and success, Hawai‘i should be among the leaders in the effort to fine-tune the new law so that justice can once again be tempered with mercy.
Among other things, the new law says that if you have been convicted of a crime of a certain level (basically above the petty misdemeanor level) you must be deported.
This would apply, in theory, to a 40-year-old green- card-holding, law-abiding, taxpaying resident who was convicted years ago for a youthful indiscretion.
Even some immigration officials are finding the law far too inflexible to cope with the myriad of circumstances that surround the coming and going of foreign nationals.
In the specific case of chef Chai, it is unclear where the balance of justice and mercy would land. Immigration officials say he obtained his residency illegally and is thus subject to deportation.
That may be the case, but in a more flexible system, the charge could be balanced against Chai’s well-documented history of good works and financial success. But under the current law, such a balancing test is impossible.
Hawai‘i’s members of Congress must make reform of this law a top priority. In the meantime, they might ask why Chai, who clearly has demonstrated a desire to stay and work in Hawai‘i, is being held in jail as a potential "flight risk."
