The Immigration & Nationality Act (INA) is a protection mechanism that Congress created to protect the American public from the presupposed "negative" impact of unbridled immigration. A variety of competing interests, some altruistic and some base, led to Congress' enactment of the first immigration law in 1892 and its progeny with which we deal today. 

Whether or not one individually agrees with this decision by Congress matters little because, since 1891, the Immigration Service has wielded its authority to implement regulations and policies that determine which people the U.S. will welcome and which people the U.S. will exclude.  As a protection system born of competing interests, The Stevenson Group understands that immigration law is not fair.  It was never intended to be fair because no protection mechanism ever is fair!

The Stevenson Group also understands that The Immigration Service has tremendous difficulty in balancing its dual mission of service (whom we welcome) and enforcement (whom we exclude). Some would say that the agency is unable to balance its own competing interests and should be dismantled.  With too many Congressional mandates, too much inconsistency in its decisions, and too little regard for those it serves, the Immigration Service has become a monster with a siege mentality.

Like The Stevenson Group, the most successful immigration lawyers are those who possess an understanding of the competing interests in immigration law that created INS' dual mission of service and enforcement. These lawyers identify the competing interests at play in each individual immigration case and then correctly balance those competing interests within the immigration framework provided by Congress. 

Does this mean that U.S. immigration law should never be challenged?  Absolutely not! What is does mean is that when choosing to challenge the immigration protection system, a lawyer should do so carefully with eyes wide open in the full understanding that, in the American system of government, while the competitive balance of the administrative law is interpreted by the courts, the immigration law itself is ultimately changed by Congress.