CARRP

US Citizenship and Immigration Services policy

This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (January 2021)

|

The Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program (CARRP) is a policy within United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) that aims to prevent selected individuals from obtaining citizenship or immigration benefits. The acronym is a hidden derogatory reference to the 'carp' fish, an invasive species.[1] The name appears to have been covertly chosen to equate the fish to the immigrant communities which the program targeted. The policy was created in 2008 and mainly targets immigrants from Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim and South Asian communities,[2] with the top 5 countries being Pakistan, Iraq, India, Iran and Yemen.[3] By law, immigration applications must be adjudicated within 180 days but the program introduces a loop of indefinite delays by citing national security or public safety concerns.[4][5] Applications for naturalization, lawful permanent residency, and asylum are the most common selections for CARRP processing.[6]

Placement of applications into the program depends on a number of subjective factors and associations such as monetary remittances into middle-eastern countries, loose associations through social media or contact with individuals suspected of being involved in terroristic activities, or unsubstantiated allegations sent to immigration authorities by people opposed to the individuals' immigration efforts.[5][7]

As of 2019, close to 42,000 people have had their US immigration applications blacklisted through the CARRP program.[8] While the program has operated largely covertly, the ACLU has compiled a library of documents on the policy obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests.[9]

Currently, the only known remedy is for individuals to sue the involved agencies in federal court. CARRP has been undergoing litigation since 2017. As of 2022, USCIS put a moratorium on denials of green card and naturalization applications while the program works its way through the courts.[10]

## CARRP Processing

[edit]

### Identifying "national security concerns"

[edit]

CARRP divides concerns into "Known or Suspected Terrorists" (KSTs) and "not-Known or Suspected Terrorists" (non-KSTs).

To be considered a KST, a person must have been previously identified as the federal government as a security threat and put on the Terrorist Screening Database.

USCIS relies on three categories of indicators to determine if an applicant is a non-KST.

1. Statutory indicators: The applicant is suspected to have ties to a Tier I, II, or III terrorist organization or an organization "likely to meet" the definition of a Tier III organization, despite not being formally recognized. To be subject to CARRP, the evidence does not need to meet the standard of inadmissibility or removability.
2. Non-statutory indicators: Officers must examine an applicant's professional and educational affiliations, suspicious activities, and personal relationships. Indicators may include military service, education in nuclear physics, unusual travel patterns, or "close associat[ion] with a person who is considered a national security concern.
3. Indicators Contained in Security Check Results: Results found in background checks, including financial transactions with individuals that the U.S. detained in Afghanistan or Pakistan, or individuals whose names appear in an FBI file.

### Deconfliction

[edit]

This process may take place at any point during the adjudication process. USCIS collaborates with the law enforcement agency possesses the information that identified the applicant as a security risk. USCIS must ensure that their processing of the application will not interfere with an ongoing investigation. During this stage, an applicant may receive a Request for Evidence or be approached by law enforcement for questioning.

### Re-examination of application

[edit]

Once a potential threat has been identified, USCIS will review their application again with stricter scrutiny than usual. They will particularly look for any potential inconsistencies that could be indicative of fraud or false testimony.

If no indications of fraud or ineligibility are found, the officer's attention will turn to the evidence that flagged the applicant as a security risk. They will look through the Department of Homeland Security's records as well as anything in the applicant's Alien File.

### Secondary collaboration with law enforcement

[edit]

If still no flags are raised, USCIS will return to the law enforcement agency in possession of the evidence. Any additional information that the agency has on the applicant will be requested.

### Adjudication

[edit]

A KST's application cannot be approved. a Non-KST's application may be approved, but supervising and senior officials must agree with the adjudicating officer's findings. If USCIS determines that an applicant is a KST or non-KST but cannot find a reason to deny the application, the application may be forwarded to USCIS headquarters for final review and issue of denial. An applicant may be denied without ever being told that they are under CARRP review.[11]

## Legal Challenges

[edit]

A number of lawsuits have been filed on behalf of individuals affected by this program, although most have been dismissed after USCIS then approved the complainants applications.[12][4] The ACLU filed a lawsuit in 2017 (Wagafe et al. vs Trump et al.), which has been certified as a class-action lawsuit for all individuals whose application has been unduly delayed. The suit alleges that the program is both illegal under immigration law and unconstitutional on due process violation grounds. The due process claim stems from the fact that applicants are not told that they are being subjected to CARRP, and may not be told the true reason for their case's denial, giving them no opportunity to defend themselves.[13][14] It also argues that the guidelines for being placed on the watchlist are unconstitutionally broad.[15] On April 5, 2021, litigation continued with Joe Biden as defendant.[16]

As of 2022, USCIS put a moratorium on denials of green card and naturalization applications while litigation pends.

## References

[edit]

1. ^ "Invasive Carp". USDA National Invasive Species Information Center. 2013-01-10. Retrieved 2024-10-01.
2. ^ "Muslims Need Not Apply: CARRP". ACLU of Southern California. January 10, 2013.
3. ^ Burke, Daniel (3 October 2019). "A shadowy federal program is ensnaring thousands of Muslim immigrants". CNN. Video by Lauren Cook and Jeremy Moorhead.
4. ^ a b Rathod, Sara. "A new lawsuit claims a secretive, Bush-era program is delaying Muslims' citizenship cases". Archived from the original on 2019-12-30. Retrieved 2019-12-30.
5. ^ a b https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/About Us/Electronic Reading Room/Policies_and_Manuals/CARRP_Guidance.pdf [bare URL PDF]
6. ^ "CARRP Program Creates Long Delays for Muslim-Americans Applying for Immigration Benefits". www.nolo.com. Retrieved 2024-04-24.
7. ^ "Social Media Monitoring". Brennan Center for Justice.
8. ^ Burke, Daniel (3 October 2019). "A shadowy federal program is ensnaring thousands of Muslim immigrants". CNN. Video by Lauren Cook and Jeremy Moorhead.
9. ^ "USCIS CARRP Program | ACLU of Southern California". www.aclusocal.org. 2013-01-10. Retrieved 2024-04-24.
10. ^ "Notice re USCIS Moratorium on Denials of CARRP Naturalization and Adjustment Applications (Wagafe v. Biden)". www.lexisnexis.com. Retrieved 2024-04-24.
11. ^ Traverso, Katie; Pasquarella, Jennie (2016). "Practice Advisory: USCIS's Controlled Application Review and Resolution Program" (PDF). ACLU of Southern California. Retrieved 24 April 2024.
12. ^ "U.S. Immigration Department Sued Over "Unlawful Delay" Of Citizenship Applications Of Muslims". BuzzFeed News. 19 May 2016.
13. ^ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2018-07-26. Retrieved 2019-12-30.`{{cite web}}`: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
14. ^ "Wagafe v. USCIS - Lawsuit Challenging Secret Program Blocking Immigrant Applications". American Civil Liberties Union.
15. ^ "Wagafe v. USCIS - Lawsuit Challenging Secret Program Blocking Immigrant Applications". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2024-04-24.
16. ^ "Wagafe v. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services 2:17-cv-00094 (W.D. Wash.) | Civil Rights Litigation Clearinghouse". clearinghouse.net. Retrieved 2024-04-24.

* v
* t
* e

Immigration to the United States and related topics

Relevant colonial era,
United States and
international laws

| Colonial era|

* Nationality law in the American Colonies
* Plantation Act 1740

|

18th century|

* Naturalization Act 1790 / 1795 / 1798

19th century|

* Naturalization Law 1802
* Act to Encourage Immigration (1864)
* Civil Rights Act of 1866
* 14th Amendment (1868)
* Naturalization Act 1870
* Page Act (1875)
* Immigration Act of 1882
* Chinese Exclusion (1882)
* Scott Act (1888)
* Immigration Act of 1891
* Geary Act (1892)

1900-1949|

* Immigration Act 1903
* Naturalization Act 1906
* Gentlemen's Agreement (1907)
* Immigration Act 1907
* Immigration Act 1917 (Asian Barred Zone)
* Immigration Act 1918
* Emergency Quota Act (1921)
* Cable Act (1922)
* Immigration Act 1924
* Tydings–McDuffie Act (1934)
* Filipino Repatriation Act (1935)
* Nationality Act of 1940
* Bracero Program (1942-1964)
* Magnuson Act (1943)
* War Brides Act (1945)
* Alien Fiancées and Fiancés Act (1946)
* Luce–Celler Act (1946)

1950-1999|

* UN Refugee Convention (1951)
* Immigration and Nationality Act 1952 / 1965
* Section 212(f)
* Section 287(g)
* Refugee Act (1980)
* Immigration Reform and Control Act (1986)
* American Homecoming Act (1989)
* Immigration Act 1990
* Immigration and Nationality Technical Corrections Act (INTCA) 1994
* Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) (1996)
* Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) (1997)
* American Competitiveness and Workforce Improvement Act (ACWIA) (1998)

21st century|

* American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21) (2000)
* Legal Immigration Family Equity Act (LIFE Act) (2000)
* H-1B Visa Reform Act (2004)
* Real ID Act (2005)
* Secure Fence Act (2006)
* DACA (2012)
* Executive Order 13769 (2017)
* Executive Order 13780 (2017)
* Ending Discriminatory Bans on Entry to The United States (2021)

Visas and policies|

* Visa policy
* Permanent residence
* Visa Waiver Program
* Temporary protected status
* Asylum
* Green Card Lottery
* Central American Minors
* US-VISIT
* Security Advisory Opinion
* E-Verify
* National Origins Formula
* Expedited removal
* Detention
* Family
* Unaccompanied children
* Trump administration family separation policy

Government
organizations

* Department of Homeland Security
* Immigration and Customs Enforcement
* U.S. Border Patrol (BORTAC)
* U.S. Customs and Border Protection
* U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
* Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS)
* Executive Office for Immigration Review
* Board of Immigration Appeals
* Office of Refugee Resettlement

Supreme Court cases|

* US v. Wong Kim Ark (1898)
* Ozawa v. US (1922)
* US v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923)
* US v. Brignoni-Ponce (1975)
* Zadvydas v. Davis (2001)
* Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting (2011)
* Barton v. Barr (2020)
* DHS v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal. / Wolf v. Vidal (2020)
* Niz-Chavez v. Garland (2021)
* Sanchez v. Mayorkas (2021)
* Department of State v. Muñoz (2024)

Related issues
and events

* 2006 protests
* Brooks County, Texas
* Central American migrant caravans
* Economic impact
* Effects
* Eugenics in the United States
* Guest worker program
* Human trafficking
* Human smuggling
* Coyotaje
* Immigration reduction
* Immigration reform
* List of people deported from the United States
* Mexico–United States border crisis
* Mexico–United States border wall
* Labor shortage
* March for America
* Illegal immigrant population
* Reverse immigration
* Unaccompanied minors from Central America
* Illegal immigration to the United States

Geography|

* Mexico–United States border
* Canada–United States border
* United States Border Patrol interior checkpoints

Proposed legislation|

* DREAM Act (2001-2010)
* H.R. 4437 (2005)
* McCain-Kennedy (2005)
* Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act 2006
* STRIVE Act (2007)
* Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act 2007
* Uniting American Families Act (2000–2013)
* Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act of 2013
* SAFE Act (2015)
* RAISE Act (2017)
* US Citizenship Act of 2021

Immigration stations
and points of entry|

* Angel Island
* Castle Garden
* East Boston
* Ellis Island
* Otay Mesa
* San Ysidro
* Sullivan's Island
* Washington Avenue

Operations|

* "Wetback" (1954)
* "Peter Pan" (1960-1962)
* "Babylift" (1975)
* "Gatekeeper" (1994)
* "Endgame" (2003-2012)
* "Front Line" (2004-2005)
* "Streamline" (2005-present)
* "Return to Sender" (2006-2007)
* "Jump Start" (2006-2008)
* "Phalanx" (2010-2016)
* "Faithful Patriot" (2018-present)

State legislation|

* California DREAM Act (2006-2010)
* Arizona SB 1070 (2010)
* Alabama HB 56 (2011)

Non-governmental
organizations

* Arizona Border Recon
* California Coalition for Immigration Reform
* CASA of Maryland
* Center for Immigration Studies
* Center for Migration Studies of New York
* Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles
* Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform
* Community Change
* Federation for American Immigration Reform
* Improve The Dream
* Mexica Movement
* Mexicans Without Borders
* Migration Policy Institute
* Minuteman Civil Defense Corps
* Minuteman Project
* National Immigration Forum
* National Korean American Service & Education Consortium (NAKASEC)
* Negative Population Growth
* No More Deaths
* NumbersUSA
* Save Our State
* Utah Compact

Documentaries|

* Borderland (TV series)
* Missing in Brooks County

*[v]: View this template
*[t]: Discuss this template
*[e]: Edit this template