The justification for Olsen's termination was that he was taking too long to process visa applications and granting too many because he conducted thorough background checks that his peers did not. But his actions were preventing blanket judgments about entire ethnic groups from preventing fair access to the United States. He did not deserve to be fired.
Last month, a federal court ruled that the visa policies at the consulate in Sao Paulo are illegal because they discriminate against people on the basis of race, socioeconomic status and even appearance and manner of speech in some instances. This ruling could have ramifications around the world, as some other American consulates have similar policies. This decision should help change the ways in which visas are issued, as the current method is blatantly racist.
The visa manuals issued by the Sao Paulo consulate advise employees to pay special attention to applicants of Arab and Chinese descent, as well as those who "appear" to be poor. The U.S. State Department defends this policy as a precaution against terrorism and illegal immigration but it is discriminatory, plain and simple. Whether or not someone is a potential terrorist cannot be determined solely on the basis of ethnicity or appearance. Further, economic status cannot be ascertained with a simple glance - and even if a visa applicant is poor, it does not mean that he or she will attempt to illegally settle in the United States.
The fact that many people are summarily denied visas on the basis of ethnicity and appearance does not speak very well for U.S. national security. Beside the fact that the policy is racist, it is not even an adequate method of preventing terrorism. While it is necessary to protect the country from terrorists, it is wrong to single out an entire ethnic group because of a stereotype. This policy ignores the fact that many of the terrorist acts on U.S. soil in recent years - for instance, the Oklahoma City bombing - were the work of American citizens. Obviously, denying visas to foreigners on a flimsy basis cannot solve this problem. Instead, the U.S. government should require a more thorough background check into people applying for a visa.
The court made the right decision in striking down the visa policies at the consulate in Sao Paulo. Denying visas solely on the basis of appearance is clearly a discriminatory and unfair approach - violating many American ideals of equality. Although State Department officials must make provisions to stop terrorism in the United States, the method used in the consulate is illegal and unjustified as well as misguided and ineffective. The court's decision should mandate changes in policy that will make the process of distributing visas an equitable and legal one.