PHOENIX, Ariz. - The so-called "Gang of Eight" senators, including Arizona's John McCain and Jeff Flake, are planning to unveil a bipartisan immigration reform bill in the next few weeks. However, one national activist said, the bill's success will depend on how various terms crucial to the immigration debate are defined. One such term is "back of the line," as in requiring undocumented residents seeking a path to citizenship to pay a fine and go to the back of the line.

Lydia Guzman, national immigration chair for the League of United Latin American Citizens, says there is no "back of the line" - because the "line" has not existed since 1996.

"We have no program right now, no process where people can say 'I want to apply to become legal here,'" she said. "Somebody could petition for you, but that's going to take 15 or 20 years or so. And that's like a legal permanent resident can petition for a family member or a citizen. And even then, there's no guarantees."

There is currently a waiting list of more than 4 million family members of citizens and legal residents hoping to gain legal status in the U.S.

Pathway-to-citizenship proposals also frequently include payment of fines and back taxes by undocumented residents as qualifications for legalization. Guzman said most immigrants are okay with paying a reasonable fine, but not thousands of dollars, which would rule out a lot of working families.

"We have a lot of folks who are struggling," she explained. "Entire families are going to need to apply, not just one person. So, making a fine in the thousands of dollars is probably going to keep folks still in the shadows. You know, you have to have something that's attainable, that's reachable."

Another often-heard phrase in the immigration debate is "secure the border first." Guzman said Arizona's border is as secure as it has ever been, both in terms of the numbers crossing and the numbers of Border Patrol agents.

"Border crossings have reduced to the levels of (the) 1970s," she said. "People aren't crossing the border for several reasons: because the border's secure; so much police presence; and at the same time, there's no jobs."

Border security advocates point to a 14-mile stretch of double-fencing near San Diego as their definition of a secure border. But Guzman says securing the nearly 2,000-mile border with Mexico would be cost-prohibitive, with one study estimating $28 billion dollars a year.





get more stories like this via email

Advocates for immigrants are pushing back on a bill signed by Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds in the last few days of the legislative session, modeled on a recent, controversial Texas law.

Senate File 2340 gives local law enforcement officers and judges the authority to deport undocumented immigrants.

Erica Johnson, executive director of the Iowa Migrant Movement for Justice, argued the bill is an overreach, and said Iowa law enforcement officers are not authorized to enforce it.

"This is a pretty clear intervention into federal territory," Johnson pointed out. "U.S. immigration law is governed by federal law."

Much like the author of the Texas bill, supporters in Iowa blame the Biden administration for failing to slow illegal immigration, so the state has decided to take matters into its own hands.

Johnson contended the bill and other anti-immigrant sentiment during the just-completed legislative session target the very people Iowa, with its dwindling population, will depend on for its future workforce.

"What we need is communities that are safe, where workers have access to dignified, safe workplaces," Johnson emphasized. "The truth of what Iowa's future could be depends on immigrants and immigrant workers in our state, and unfortunately, this law could take us back, away from that possible future. "

Johnson added her organization will pursue legal ways to block the bill from taking effect in July.


get more stories like this via email

The future of Senate Bill 4 is still tangled in court challenges. It's the Texas law that would allow police to arrest people for illegally crossing the border. But groups are speaking out about the impact of "Operation Lone Star" on the youngest migrants. Governor Greg Abbott continues to bus migrant families to other states, many with young children - more than 100,000 families so far.

Robert Sanborn, CEO of Children at Risk, works to improve the quality of life for boys and girls in Texas, and contends the policy has put trauma on top of trauma.

"We never want children to be political pawns. We don't want maximum chaos on the backs of children. We want children to grow up and be assets for our community," he contended.

Sanborn points out that 2.2 million children in Texas are immigrants, and said it would be less stressful for kids if families were not bused in the middle of the night, and if they were allowed to pick their destination.

When immigrants arrive at the border, they are evaluated to determine if they're eligible for asylum.

Beatriz Zavala, clinical coordinator at El Paso-based Humanitarian Outreach for Migrant Emotional Health, or "HOME," said the children in this situation are at higher risk for mental health disorders.

"What is particularly troubling is the profound disregard for the stability and protection these families need. The impact on their mental health is undeniable. These are not just statistics. These are children, real children," she said.

As part of Operation Lone Star, families have been bused to Chicago, Denver, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. The governor has said the practice is needed to keep the Texas-Mexico border safe.


get more stories like this via email

Legislation in Albany would create the first right to counsel for people in immigration court.

The Access to Representation Act would provide immigrants the right to an attorney in their New York immigration cases, ending the tendency to represent themselves if they cannot afford one.

Estimates show a backlog of more than 330,000 immigration court cases, and fewer than half have attorneys. Studies show without legal counsel, migrants are less likely to remain in the U.S.

Marlene Galaz, director of immigrant rights policy for the New York Immigration Coalition, described what the bill would do.

"It has a six-year ramp-up to start implementing and building infrastructure," Galaz outlined. "Having a pipeline between law schools for law students to go into immigration practice, and getting to nonprofits and so on."

Galaz noted most opposition centers around the $150 million to fund the program but pointed out the total expenditure is less than 1% of the state's $229 billion budget. She added anti-immigrant rhetoric has also damaged support for the bill. Currently, it is in the state Senate Finance Committee.

The New York City Comptroller's office said enacting the bill would benefit the state financially. It could keep about 53,000 people from being deported, which would result in almost $8.5 billion in local, state and federal taxes over the next 30 years.

Galaz emphasized the influx of migrants has saturated the court system, leading to what could have been an avoidable backlog.

"I firmly believe that if these investments had been made when we first asked for them, I believe, like, three years ago, then we wouldn't be struggling," Galaz contended. "We would have had the infrastructure built to address an increase in welcoming our newest neighbors."

A Vera Institute survey showed 93% of New Yorkers across party lines and regions support access to attorneys for all people, including those in immigration court, and government-funded attorneys for them.


get more stories like this via email