Lesson 4

The Ongoing Need for Immigration Reform

Immigration Reform – Just out of Reach

Since the publication of Strangers No Longer to the present, efforts to achieve immigration reform have been pursued and found empty. The long shadow of 9/11 continued to hang over reform efforts as concerns related enforcement and national security remained a key framing mechanism. The effort in 2006 to pass immigration reform which included a legalization provision failed to secure enough votes for passage; under pressure to get something done on the issue by the 2006 midterm elections, Congress passed, and President Bush signed into law the Secure Fence Act of 2006. This legislation required additional surveillance infrastructure and the erection of 700 miles of fencing on the southwest border. A subsequent effort the following year to secure immigration reform that would include a legalization process and other more pro-immigrant reforms also failed.

Although it is easy to think of immigration policy as having fallen prey to government gridlock, thus grinding all immigration related legislation to a halt, this is only half true. Although securing any form of relief for unauthorized migrants living in the United States has proven elusive, for the two decades following 9/11 and in the decade preceding it, immigration enforcement took center stage in policy reform efforts. Reflecting on this reality, Marc Rosenblum of the Migration Policy Institute noted that “the lesson of the post-9/11 period is not that the US immigration policymaking system is paralyzed: Congress and President Bush agreed to a total of six immigration enforcement measures in 2001-06 — on the heels of significant new border enforcement measures dating from the 1980s and interior enforcement measures dating from the 1990s.” (Rosenblum, 2011, 10).

In the decade following this observation not much has changed, with immigration enforcement remaining a dominant lens for debates in immigration policy. The election of Donald Trump in 2016 entrenched this enforcement only paradigm, as his Administration took steps to restrict immigration on a variety of fronts. COVID-19 further complicated efforts to provide relief to migrant populations and ensure that admissions processes corresponded to the needs of the country and the well-being of the migrant and his or her family. Taken together, the emphasis on enforcement has resulted in, according to one commentator, “a highly securitized immigration apparatus with vastly increased budgets and large-scale arrests, detention, and removal of noncitizens based on significantly enhanced data-sharing between federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.”

Although more rigorous enforcement measures have become a kind of default response during this period, it should not be forgotten that a vital contingent of advocates continues to support legislation that would provide relief to unauthorized migrants who have been living in the United States for years and sometimes decades. The Catholic Church’s advocacy efforts in this regard continue to emphasize many of the themes that have been of longstanding importance, which include:

Earned Legalization: An earned legalization program would allow foreign nationals of good moral character who are living in the United States to apply to adjust their status to obtain lawful permanent residence. Such a program would create an eventual path to citizenship, requiring applicants to complete and pass background checks, pay a fine, and establish eligibility for resident status to participate in the program. Such a program would help stabilize the workforce, promote family unity, and bring a large population “out of the shadows,” as members of their communities.

Future Worker Program: A worker program to permit foreign‐born workers to enter the country safely and legally would help reduce illegal immigration and the loss of life in the American desert. Any program should include workplace protections, living wage levels, safeguards against the displacement of U.S. workers, and family unity.

Family based Immigration Reform: It currently takes years for family members to be reunited through the family‐based legal immigration system. This leads to family breakdown and, in some cases, illegal immigration. Changes in family based immigration should be made to increase the number of family visas available and reduce family reunification waiting times.

Restoration of Due Process Rights: Due process rights taken away by the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) should be restored. For example, the three and ten-year bars to reentry should be eliminated.

Addressing Root Causes: Congress should examine the root causes of migration, such as under development and poverty in sending countries, and seek long term solutions. The antidote to the problem of illegal immigration is sustainable economic development in sending countries. In an ideal world, migration should be driven by choice, not necessity.

Recalibrate Enforcement at the Border: The U.S. Catholic Bishops accept the legitimate role of the U.S. government in intercepting unauthorized migrants who attempt to travel to the United States, although are deeply concerned about indiscriminate enforcement that separates families and which uses migrant detention as a deterrence strategy. The bishops also believe that by increasing lawful means for migrants to enter, live, and work in the United States, law enforcement will be better able to focus upon those who truly threaten public safety: drug and human traffickers, smugglers, and would be terrorists. Any enforcement measures must be targeted, proportional, and humane.

There are other elements worth considering in the context of any immigration reform legislation. For example, it is important to focus more intentionally on the development of a national immigrant integration policy. The Catholic Church in the United States has, historically, played a prominent role in the reception and integration of immigrants. The Church’s work in the creation of hospitals, schools, and social service organizations played a definitive role this effort and laid the groundwork for an infrastructure that has benefited immigrants and native born individuals alike. These longstanding efforts could be accentuated by federal policies that help in the process of English language acquisition and civics instruction. Doing so would provide an effective counter to the cultural fear that some Americans have toward immigrants.

For those troubled by the lack of progress on immigration reform that includes some of the proposed elements above, it is worth remembering that it took four decades before the political will was present to eliminate the overtly discriminatory national origins legislation, originally enacted in the 1920s. This might be small consolation. Nevertheless, efforts to achieve significant reform in any field, including migration, is often a painstaking process that can offend depend on good timing as much as individual effort.