I'm not going to say much in the reply, but Thanks for your detailed and courteous reply posts, Brooke Schreier Ganz -- explaining in more detail what your organization is asking for -- and why. : )
(As I have mentioned, I have been working with the National Archives Catalog online (nearly completely on materials having absolutely nothing to do with my own family, and almost-as-completely having nothing to do with immigration) -- and I have also been a paid subscriber to (I am currently one) to Ancestry.com; I have noticed that while cards related to the naturalization of 2 of my great-grandparents (my father's mother's parents -- the Halperins ("Gelperin" at Ellis Island in 1916) ) are available in the Catalog, quite a few other Federal court documents and immigration documents (actually, the ones with the most information -- including the naturalization document which told me the place that my maternal grandfather (Kornhauser) had come from as a boy in 1913) are totally *not* visible in the Catalog.
I think that I did not realize that this had something to do with contracts/licensing between Ancestry.com and NARA as "partners". )
Thanks for educating me a bit. [Smile.]
(And Good Luck.)
Ethan W. Kent in New York City
(mostly researching Paat/Pat/Patt/Pate (emigrated from Bialystok (now in Poland) , Kornhauser (emigrated from Turka (now in Ukraine) and (it seems) Stefkowa (husband seems to have claimed 1 town (Stefkowa), and (later-emigrating) wife and children another (Turka) ) , Gelperin/Halperin (emigrated from Vilna (today's Vilnius, Lithuania) ), and Kantor (seemingly emigrated from Podolia guberniya; probably from Bratslav (now in Ukraine) )
PS: I gather from another thread from JewishGen that New York City government has proposed rules for use of the New York City Municipal Archives which could drive out all but the richest users who might wish to consult New York City records (including birth, marriage, and death records) related to genealogy; as someone who used these records a few years ago and was grateful to *not* have to pay (relatively-speaking) "an arm and a leg" for the privilege (?) of seeing these records, I sympathize with Reclaim the Records's dismay at these new proposals (which I fear may end up leaving the *very few* staffers at the Archives left more to themselves (not visited by researchers, physically) than they were when I was there.