[House Report 106-960]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-960
======================================================================
FOR THE RELIEF OF MINA VAHEDI NOTASH
_______
October 11, 2000.--Referred to the Private Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Smith of Texas, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 869]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
bill (S. 869) for the relief of Mina Vahedi Notash, having
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary........................................ 1
Background and Need for the Legislation.................... 1
Committee Consideration.................................... 2
Committee Oversight Findings............................... 2
Committee on Government Reform Findings.................... 2
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures.................. 2
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate.................. 2
Constitutional Authority Statement......................... 3
Agency Views............................................... 3
Purpose and Summary
S. 869 would allow Mina Vahedi Notash to adjust to
permanent resident status.
Background and Need for the Legislation
Mina Vahedi Notash was illegally brought into the United
States by her former U.S. citizen husband. The husband did not
apply for any immigration benefits on her behalf. They were
married for 7 years. During that time, the husband physically
and verbally abused Ms. Notash on a regular basis. At one
point, during her first pregnancy, the physical abuse left her
with a permanent scar on her forehead. Her husband threatened
to have her immediately deported if she told anyone of the
abuse. Fearful of never seeing her children again, she never
contacted the police. After the birth of their two children,
the husband told her he was ready to petition for her legal
status, but that she had to return to Iran in order for him to
do so. After she arrived in Iran, the husband divorced her
under Iranian law (which meant she could not dispute the
divorce nor challenge any child custody issues).
Ms. Notash stayed in Iran from 1994 until 1999 when she re-
entered the United States on a fiancee visa. However, when her
fiancee learned that she wished to pursue custody of her
children, he called off the wedding. Ms. Notash's ex-husband
refuses to allow her any access to their children. Based on the
abuse she received from the husband, she fears that the
children are suffering similar abuse. Without passage of this
legislation, Ms. Notash will be sent back to Iran, cannot fight
for custodial rights to her children, and may never see them
again.
Committee Consideration
On October 11, 2000, the Committee on the Judiciary met in
open session and ordered reported favorably the bill S. 869
without amendment by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 2(l)(3)(A) of rule XI of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, the committee reports
that the findings and recommendations of the committee, based
on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the
descriptive portions of this report.
Committee on Government Reform Findings
No findings or recommendations of the Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight were received as referred to in
clause 2(l)(3)(D) of rule XI of the Rules of the House of
Representatives.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Clause 2(l)(3)(B) of House Rule XI is inapplicable because
this legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or
increased tax expenditures.
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate
In compliance with clause 3(d)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the committee believes that
the bill would have no significant impact on the Federal
budget. This is based on the Congressional Budget Office cost
estimate on S. 869. That Congressional Budget Office cost
estimate follows:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, October 11, 2000.
Hon. Henry J. Hyde, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
reviewed 11 private relief acts, which were ordered reported by
the House Committee on the Judiciary on October 11, 2000. CBO
estimates that their enactment would have no significant impact
on the federal budget. These acts could have a very small
effect on fees collected by the Immigration and Naturalization
Service and on benefits paid under certain federal entitlement
programs. Because these fees and expenditures are classified as
direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures would apply. The act
reviewed is:
LS. 869, an act for the relief of Mina Vahedi
Notash;
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark
Grabowicz, who can be reached at 226-2860. This estimate was
approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant Director for
Budget Analysis.
Sincerely,
Dan L. Crippen, Director.
cc:
Honorable John Conyers Jr.
Ranking Democratic Member
Constitutional Authority Statement
Pursuant to rule XI, clause 2(1)(4) of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the committee finds the authority for
this legislation in article 1, section 8, clause 4 of the
Constitution.
Agency Views
The comments of the Immigration and Naturalization Service
on S. 869 are as follows:
U.S. Department of Justice,
Immigration and Naturalization Service,
Washington, DC, February 15, 2000.
Hon. Orrin Hatch, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
United States Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: In response to your request for a report
relative to S. 869, for the relief of Mina Vahedi Notash, there
is attached a memorandum of information concerning the
beneficiary.
The bill would grant the beneficiary eligibility for
issuance of an immigration visa or for adjustment of status to
that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon
filing an application for issuance of an immigration visa under
section 204 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or for
adjustment of status to lawful permanent residence. The bill
would also direct the proper visa number deduction.
Sincerely,
Gerri Ratliff, Acting Director,
Congressional Relations.
Enclosure
cc:
Department of State, Visa Office
District Director--Los Angeles, CA
Attn: Private Bill Staff
District Director Los Angeles, CA--Investigations--Mike
Gatti
Memorandum of information from immigration and naturalization service
files re: S. 869
The beneficiary, Mina Vahedi-Notash, A75 963 228, a native
and citizen of Iran, was born on April 26, 1967, in Tehran,
Iran. Ms. Notash currently resides at 6651 Warner Ave.,
Apartment 65, Huntington Beach, California.
Ms. Notash was interviewed by Immigration and
Naturalization Service (INS) Special Agents on November 1,
1999. That interview revealed that her former United States
citizen husband illegally brought Ms. Notash into the United
States. The husband refused to apply for immigration benefits
for her. During their 7-year marriage, he physically and
verbally assaulted her, including an incident during her first
pregnancy which left a visible scar on her forehead. Fearful of
her husband and the belief that she would be immediately
deported from this country--away from her children--she never
called the police. After bearing two United States citizen
children in 1989 and 1991, her husband directed her to return
to Iran so that he could legally petition the INS for her visa.
After arriving in Iran, Ms. Notash received divorce from the
husband. This divorce was according to Iranian laws, which left
Ms. Notash with no recourse to dispute the divorce or challenge
any child custody issues.
Ms. Notash remained in Iran from 1994 through 1999. Ms.
Notash re-entered the United States on a valid fiancee visa (K-
1). When the potential husband discovered that the beneficiary
wanted to obtain custody of her children, he objected and the
marriage never took place.
Ms. Notash is currently in the United States as an overstay
of her K-1 visa.
A neighborhood check, a national criminal history
background check, and a personal interview were conducted. No
derogatory information was discovered.