Comment Submitted by Diana Chamberlain
AnonymousOpposeBusiness
Summary: An immigration attorney and owner of a boutique law firm opposes the proposed changes to the AR-11 form, arguing that the new requirements collect extraneous personal information and impose an unreasonable administrative burden. The commenter contends that the form exceeds its legal authority, lacks practical utility, and should remain in its current, simpler format.
I am an immigration attorney and owner of a small, boutique law firm. I represent clients from around the world in family-based, humanitarian, citizenship, and waiver cases. As part of my representation, I submit address changes to USCIS on behalf of my clients.
This proposed "reinstatement" of a previously approved USCIS form is a misnomer as this new form goes way beyond the prior version, which only asked for a name, A number, date of birth, and address. This new form intends to elicit significant personal information that is extraneous to the purpose of the AR-11: to allow a noncitizen to comply with the law that requires an address update. To complete this requirement, the AR-11 should only ask for what it already does - name, A number, date of birth, and address.
To the extent this notice and rule requires the submission of information irrelevant to an address update, and as it also requires answering questions that require legal interpretation, it is ultra vires of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). The proposed rule is wasteful, an abuse of discretion, and is not authorized by law. The rule invokes the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), but it is actually a policy change that requires compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) since the goal of the rule is public charge enforcement. Even under just the PRA, this rule fails because, at a minimum, it lacks practical utility or necessity; it unreasonably burdens the public and the agency; and it grossly underestimates the completion time as the new questions require legal consultation, analysis, and advice. It is essentially a new form with a new purpose.
As I mentioned above, I submit address changes for my clients. My small law firm is not equipped to expend significant amounts of time to complete what has been a fairly straightforward administrative task. Yet I cannot leave this task to my clients without any attorney oversight, analysis, and advice. The agency should strike this proposed form change and continue to use the current version of the AR-11 as that version properly fulfills its purpose of providing a noncitizen a way to update their address to comply with the INA.