GOP Proposes Immigration Reform; Now What?

Last week, Republican leaders from the House of Representatives circulated a one page set of principles on immigration reform among rank and file members at a retreat in Cambridge, Massachusetts.  According to Time Magazine, the proposal included a pathway to legalization for undocumented aliens already present in the United States, provided border protection measures are taken and the undocumented meet certain criteria.

Time quotes that GOP leaders proposed that undocumented aliens "could live here legally and without fear in the U.S., but only if they were willing to admit their culpability, pass rigorous background checks, pay significant fines and back taxes, develop proficiency in English and American civics, and be able to support themselves and their families."  The Republicans principles did not include a pathway to citizenship, which the Washington Post reports may be an area where immigration reform advocates are willing to compromise.

Despite the support from Republican House leaders, whether immigration reform will even happen is "in doubt," according to Representative Paul Ryan.  Ryan has been the target of the ire of conservative talk show hosts for his support of immigration reform.  Ryan appeared on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, stating, "Security first, no amnesty, then we might be able to get somewhere."  When asked specifically if Congress would pass an immigration reform bill this year, Ryan responded, "I really don't know the answer to that question. That's clearly in doubt."

After Mitt Romney's loss in the 2012 Presidential elections, the conventional wisdom was that the Republicans had to support some degree of immigration reform that included the granting of legal status to the undocumented aliens already present in the country if they were to remain competitive in national elections.  This was due to the overwhelming majorities that Latino and Asian voters gave the President.  What happened since then?

In truth, House Republicans are focused on the 2014 mid-term Congressional elections.  Most House Republicans come from "safe" districts, where the election of a Republican is almost certain.  Support for any immigration reform that can be seen as amnesty would more likely result in a credible challenge in the primaries, and not in the election of a Democrat.

Add to this situation the President's recent troubles with the cornerstone of his Administration: Obamacare.  With the program becoming increasingly unpopular, there is a real possibility that the Republicans may be able to take the Senate in the mid-term elections too.

Last week, talk show host Rush Limbaugh questioned why the Republicans would push for any immigration reform that includes so-called "amnesty."  Citing an article from the Politico, Limbaugh noted that Democrat may even be conceding control of the House to the Republicans in order to concentrate electoral resources on saving the Senate.  Limbaugh speculated that if the Republicans were poised to have such electoral success in 2014, the only way to derail that success now is if the party pushed for immigration reform.  Specifically, Limbaugh claimed that if Republicans supported "amnesty," that would likely cause faithful Republican voters to stay home on election day.

With this political climate, then, the passage of immigration reform, which seemed to be a sure thing in late 2012, early 2013, is not a sure thing.  Those who may have been waiting to see if reform would pass instead of acting on legal possibilities now may be well advised to re-think that strategy.

To discuss what possibilities may be available under the law, call now for an appointment.

William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
wkovatch@kovatchlegalservices.com

The Boston Bombings Should Not Prompt Us to React out of Xenophobia

Now that this chapter of the Boston Marathon bombings has come to a close, and a new chapter about to open, I'd like to start this blog entry with a prayer.  Dear Lord, thank you for the wisdom and skill of the FBI, and the Boston area police and rescue departments.  Thank you for allowing the authorities to apprehend this man alive.  Be with the family of all the victims and grant them your strength as they learn how to recover from this horrible chain of events. Watch over the souls of all of those who lost their lives this week.  Guide us with your wisdom and your sense of justice as we as a society respond to these events.  Amen.

As I sit here, watching the coverage on CNN and Fox News, I cannot help but feel a certain sense of apprehension.  I am apprehensive that we will allow fear and xenophobia guide our response.

The xenophobia was certainly present in the media coverage during the week.  Thursday, as I was listening to Sean Hannity (yes, I am a fan), he kept harping on the 20 year old Saudi student who was a victim of the bombing but was questioned earlier in the week by the authorities.  Hannity kept insisting that certain unnamed sources, whom he did not identify, had told him that the student was scheduled to be deported on Tuesday, that there was a secret meeting between the President and Saudi officials that afternoon, that because of that meeting the deportation might be placed on hold, and that this was all being kept quiet.

I was immediately struck by the complete ignorance and irresponsibility Hannity had shown.  First of all, having gone through a number of deportations and voluntary departures with my clients, I know that ICE will not divulge when an alien is being deported.  It is considered a security risk, and they just won't do it.  I can't imagine how someone in the know would break that rule by informing Sean Hannity, even if it was off the record, knowing that Hannity would then go on the air and publicize that information.

The second problem is that people are not just simply deported.  We have a legal system.  Even aliens present in the United States illegally may have certain forms of relief available under the law.  A person with a student visa cannot be deported without going to Immigration Court, and being found in violation of that status.  Hannity's statements seemed to betray an ignorance of how the system works.

Finally, I was deeply disturbed by this focus on the student's nationality.  It played upon the fear and distrust many have for Arabs in this country.  Never mind that the Sa'ud family itself is a close ally with the United States.  Never mind that painting with such a broad brush has the effect of perpetuating fear and bigotry against Arabs, when only a very small minority want to do us harm.

In the end, Hannity's focus on the Saudi student proved misguided, as we later learned that the suspects were ethnic Chechens, not Saudis.

But even then, the reaction I heard from some continued to disturb me.  When tuning in to the Rush Limbaugh Show on Friday, I heard Mark Steyn railing against the immigration system, and how the Government could have let these two live in our country.  I saw some of my "friends" in social media have similar reactions, complaining of how we could let people from these areas of the world come to our country.  Even Senator Grassley has used these chain of events in debating immigration reform.

Has the immigration system failed us?  From what is being reported now, these two men were granted refugee status almost twelve years ago.  They spent their teenage years in the United States.  One became a citizen of the United States.  We are not talking about someone who snuck across our borders illegally.  We are not talking about someone who misused a temporary visa to gain entry to the United States to perpetrate these attacks.  We are talking about a family who escaped violence and persecution overseas, and who has been present here for over a decade.  Whatever hate entered these two men's hearts, entered after they had come to this country.  Overhauls in the immigration system would have not likely prevented the Boston attack.

If there was a failure in the immigration system, it was a failure in enforcement.  Specifically, the older suspect apparently had a conviction for some sort of domestic violence.  Yes, certain crimes of domestic violence make a person, even a permanent resident, deportable.  But, at this point, the only information available on that is vague at best.  Domestic violence encompasses a wide array of crimes, not all of which would necessarily be deportable offenses.  Without more information, I cannot criticize immigration enforcement as it applies to these two individuals.

What I do know is that knee jerk reactions, especially when it comes to the immigration system, are unwise and unwarranted.  We can't simply ban a whole class of nationalities from entering the United States because we think that they are unfriendly to us.  Perhaps those who propose such a thing forgot our shameful past of detaining Japanese families during the Second World War for no reason other than ethnicity.  No.  We are the United States, and we are supposed to rise above such bigotry (a sentiment reinforced in me tonight, after having taken my children to see that fabulous movie about Jackie Robins, 42).

Plus, the politics of the Middle East and the Russian interior have very little to do with one of the main issues to be addressed in immigration reform: the millions of undocumented aliens already present in the United States.  The overwhelming majority of those aliens are Latinos who came to this country simply looking to work hard and send money home to their families.

No, the evil perpetrated upon Boston this week had very little to do with immigration policy.  Putting the brakes on immigration reform now, in reaction to the Boston bombings, would simply be a reaction out of xenophobia and bigotry.  We are better than that.

By:  William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com

Movement on Immigration Reform Expected After Easter

The President predicted that immigration reform could pass by the end of the summer.  The President expected an immigration reform bill to be ready after the Easter break, and New York Senator Chuck Schumer confirmed his belief that a birpartisan group of Senators called the Group of Eight was "90 percent" done with drafting the bill.

The bill is expected to include stronger border security measures, a pathway to citizenship for undocumented aliens already in the country, an expansion of visas available to high-tech workers, and some form of a guest worker program.  Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano stated her expectation that any new reforms would be fee-based so that the costs would not be borne by the taxpayers.  Addressing those aliens present in the country without legal status, Napolitano stated, "They need to get right with the law -- they did break the law."

One big issue that could slow the pace of reform was disagreement over the guest worker program.  Despite this issue, the President stated that he saw "enormous progress over the last month and a half" between Republicans and Democrats, adding that both sides "have been very serious about the negotiations."

The Christian Science Monitor has also reported that border security could be an issue that impedes progress on reform.

Regarding the pace of reform, some Republicans Senators have urged Senator Patrick Leahy, Chiar of the Committee on the Judiciary, not to rush reform without proper debate.  Leahy responded that he intended "to proceed to comprehensive immigration reform with all deliberate speed."

Senator John McCain, however, a member of the Group of Eight, would not commit to a timetable, noting that there were still major points of contention.

By: William J. Kovatch, Jr.
(703) 837-8832
info@kovatchimmigrationlaw.com