Immigrant advocates are cautious, but they see signs of hope for comprehensive immigration reform, given recent political developments.
On June 15, President Barack Obama announced a new policy that the federal government will not deport some young undocumented immigrants, which could help him in an election year with Latino voters, while putting former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, on the defensive.
The president issued his policy just three days after 150 evangelical Christian leaders endorsed an overhaul of immigration policy and called for a bipartisan solution that transcends the polarization, name-calling and misrepresentations that have marred the national debate.
“From study of the Bible’s teaching about immigrants to concern for fixing America’s immigration system, evangelicals are saying, ‘This is the time for immigration reform,’” said Leith Anderson, president of the National Association of Evangelicals.
Catholics who study the immigration issue and work with migrants were pleased with last week’s events, but added that a great deal of work remains to implement lasting reforms.
“It’s too early to say there is a major change under way, but this is really a good sign for those who have been pushing so long for immigration reform,” said Stephen Schneck, director of the Institute for Policy Research and Catholic Studies at The Catholic University of America.
Schneck said the president’s policy and evangelicals’ support for immigration reform could increase the chances of legislation being passed. Immigration activists continue to support the so-called DREAM Act, which would provide conditional permanent residency to some undocumented immigrants who arrived in the United States before age 16. The legislation, which has been supported by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, was stalled last year in the Senate.
“Let’s not get ahead of ourselves, but, still, this is a really good sign for an opening for some kind of bipartisanship on this issue,” Schneck said.
Passing the DREAM Act — which critics have panned as amnesty that would reward and encourage more illegal immigration — is an “ultimate goal” made easier by the president’s new policy, which mirrors the DREAM Act in many ways, said Iliana Holguin, an attorney and executive director of Diocesan Migrant and Refugee Services Inc. for the Diocese of El Paso, Texas.
“It’s definitely a positive step forward. It’s still a long way from the DREAM Act. This is a temporary benefit, which is great. It will allow (immigrants) the ability to enter the workforce and give them a chance to use the degrees they worked so hard to earn,” said Holguin, whose diocesan ministry assists the migrant and refugee communities along the U.S.-Mexico border in western Texas.
Kevin Appleby, director of the Office of Migration and Public Affairs for the bishops' conference, said the president’s announcement was “sound policy.”
“The affected people are a sympathetic group to most Americans,” said Appleby, noting that the policy applies to some undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children and meet certain requirements, such as being college students or military service members.
“A lot of these children are smart, ambitious, hardworking. They want to be Americans, and they will do whatever they are asked to do to attain that,” said Appleby, who called the president’s policy a “good first step.”
“I think it will help build momentum. Certainly, there are those who are upset by it, but, frankly, Congress has been at a standstill on this issue while a lot of these people are being deported,” Appleby said.
Election-Year Move?
Obama’s policy has prompted criticisms from Republicans and conservative commentators, who have accused the president of political pandering and making an illegal end run around Congress.
“It is apparent that the goal of the Obama administration is not to govern, but rule by edict. This again is a reflection of the desperation of President Obama and his liberal-progressive disciples as November draws nearer,” said U.S. Rep. Allen West, R-Fla., on his Facebook page.
Mark Krikorian, executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington-based think tank that supports strict immigration laws and opposes illegal immigration, wrote on his blog that the president had committed a “lawless act.”
“The illegal immigrants in question will receive two-year renewable permits to live legally in the United States and an Employment Authorization Document — that, in English, is what we call ‘amnesty,’” Krikorian wrote.
Romney also criticized the president for not taking action on the immigration issue earlier in his administration. However, Romney dodged questions as to whether he would reverse the policy during interviews on Fox News and CBS’ Face the Nation.
Immigration remains a politically sensitive topic. Still, there are signs of political ferment, with the recent statement in favor of immigration reform endorsed by evangelical denomination leaders, journalists, intellectuals, pastors and activists, among others.
In an “Evangelical Statement of Principles for Immigration Reform,” the evangelical leaders make the case that humane immigration reform should be a moral priority. The leaders also announced the creation of an “Evangelical Immigration Table” to advance a cohesive, pro-immigration reform message and strategy while building political will in the pews.
Jim Daly, president of Focus on the Family, said he signed the statement because immigration reform is more than just an “issue” to families.
“It profoundly affects their stability, structure and quality of life,” said Daly, who added that he was encouraged that evangelical leaders, who have significant theological differences, “have come together to declare with one voice that our government must respect and balance both the rule of law and the God-given humanity of all people in working toward an immigration solution that puts principles ahead of politics.”
Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, said the immigration crisis “touches every level of society.”
“If we as a nation are going to resolve this crisis in fair and equitable ways, we must engage all levels of civic society, perhaps most importantly people of faith," Land said.
Help See Connections
In a way, evangelicals are catching up with Catholics on the issue. The bishops have long advocated for comprehensive immigration reform, calling for laws that would help immigrant families stay together.
Holy Cross Father Dan Groody, a University of Notre Dame professor who has written extensively about and produced documentaries on immigration, told the Register that evangelicals are grappling with the treatment of this issue in holy Scripture and the moral imperative to respond to the migrant’s plight.
“Migration is in our physical and spiritual genes. Our religious traditions are rediscovering these ancient truths,” said Father Groody, who suggested that the faith community can offer a new perspective on the issue.
“Right now, in the mainstream culture, the operative imagination of immigration is a fear of the other, a fear of the foreigner. I think what the mainstream religious traditions can do, especially those drawing from biblical sources, is to help people see the connections to each other. I think what the religious community is now saying is that the politics of fear do nothing to build a better society,” Father Groody suggested.
Holguin said she was not surprised to see evangelicals support immigration reform.
“I think immigration is a human rights, human dignity issue. I think it’s very natural for faith organizations, once they educate themselves on why our immigration system is broken — it becomes easy for people of faith to see why comprehensive reform is needed and why it’s important to move past the harsh rhetoric,” Holguin said.
Appleby added that recent developments show the immigration issue is not going away: “Sooner or later, it will have to be addressed by Congress in a comprehensive way, hopefully in a humane way.”
Register correspondent Brian Fraga writes from El Paso, Texas.
Tom Hoopes: Why Catholics Are Grateful to George W. Bush
Tim Drake: Election Night: Live Blogging
Comments
Post a Comment
This action of the President was clearly a political move on his part designed for maximum timing and benefit to his image and acceptance among Latino voters. While the cause is a worthy one for sure and something does need to be done in regards to the comprehensive immigration issue in this Country, the President has deliberately and with full intent created a Catch 22 for his challenger, Mitt Romney. Worthy cause but disturbing method! Clever and calculated indeed. To work around the legislative process as a kind of bully is far beneath the statesman-like position of a President. As he disrespectfully chips away at the system of legislation in this Country, we need to beware. He will do nearly anything to be re-elected as he patiently waits the results in November. Religious Liberty and the Catholic Church in particular is in for it if this man is given another term because the Church is percevied as the greatest obstacle to the goals of this administration in regards to education, health care, marriage, family life. Do we honestly feel this is the worst we will see?
This is an awful, awful development. Not with regard to immigration, but with regard to our government. Congress passes laws. Congress has put in place laws governing immigration. The President is in effect CHANGING the law. His duty is to execute the laws passed by congress. In acting as he is, he is arrogating to himself powers that the US Constitution reserves to the People’s representatives in Congress. He is, in effect, acting like a king/dictator, rather than a president. It is a horrible precedent to set, no matter the merit of the underlying issue. We are still in the middle of fighting this guy’s HHS power grab, people! But we like it when he declares himself Sovereign when it comes to immigrations? How can this story receive such sympathetic coverage?
While I think this is a good idea, we also live under a constitution and a representative democracy and I don’t think this decision should have been made with one branch of government. Just because us Catholics like this idea does not at all mean we agree with how the law, which is not law, but an excutive order was made. This is similar to the health care law that was passed by congress, but put all the power and authority into the HHS department, an unelected body not responsible to the electorate. So, I think this should go to congress and get passed, not dictated by executive order. Too many executive orders and the big hand of government. This flies in the face of US laws and also is not in line with our Catholic teaching of subsitiarity=keeping power closer to the people.
Open your mind to the fact of “ordered liberty”. None of our freedoms can long survive without the rule of law. Open your mind to the plight of those who sacrificed and did it right only to be cast in with cheaters (illegal aliens). Yes, policies need reform but not in the form of Royal Decree. Don’t be fooled by political shenanigans. Don’t bow to the alter of big-O and the wrecking crew (achem, Holder et al).
But what about the U.S. Constitution??? That is the document that protects all our rights. And President Obama in a TV interview that has been repeatedly shown on some news shows and channels said some months ago that he definitely did not have the power under the law to do what he has now done by dictatorial fiat. Even in the service of what may be a popular or good idea—no president has the right to be a law breaker.
Brain,
I would invite you to “open your mind” to seeing the importance of having immigrants obey the law as well as countries picking and choosing the immigrants they want based on factors such as having a job/trade, speaking the language, not having a criminal record, wanting to be citizens of the U.S. vs. just coming here for economic benefits, etc. I weary of the foolish immigration policy you espouse being dubbed “Catholic”.
Interesting the POTUS targets 16-30 yo. Why? And after they vote Dem and reelect the most anti-life POTUS ever, where will this country be then? Like HHS, lets not rush into this only to regret it later.
Maybe this country would do better to help our neighbors in making it more liveable in their own countries instead of uprooting themselves. The vaccum they leave just gets filled with more of what they are running from. Hasn’t worked so far. Time for a real change, stay and fight for their own country.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s a 100% bad idea, but I am deeply, deeply troubled at the way it was done.
Why are you calling advocates of illegal immigration “immigration advocates”. There are many people who are big advocates of LEGAL immigration who oppose legal immigration. Please use accurate terminology.
I am an immigrant myself. The end of this policy is good. But it is so infuriating because Mr. Obama has taken away the most pressing and supported element of immigration reform, thus sucking out a good excuse to have a complete and comprehensive immigration reform in congress, members of which were working on just that. I came to this country escaping a dictator, and find myself now under one that completely circumnavigates the branch that actually makes laws just because its election year and can naively increase his popularity.
What if tomorrow he sees that its a good electoral move to dismantle Marriage? One can’t hail such recklessness because the means are good? He had 4 years with 2 of those having the entire power of the White House, Congress and Senate and then he does this on election year in the most dictatorial and pandering way. It is so sickening how this move has hurt the by-partisan immigration effort that was being developed on the hill just because this guy is in tight polls. SICKENING SICKENING SICKENING!!! He has hurt the effort more than helped it.
Posted by enness on Tuesday, Jun 19, 2012 10:55 PM (EST):Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s a 100% bad idea, but I am deeply, deeply troubled at the way it was done.”
**********
My thoughts, too.
Maybe Mitt Romney can offer something better to tip the scale.And offer it in a lawful, constitutional way.
God bless the young people that would be affected by this.I hope one way or the other they can stay & become citizens.
Joannes, I feel the same way. On the one hand, immigration reform is good. On the other, this is frustating real reform, and obama does not have the right to do things as he is doing them. The good thing is a lot of latino voters are not fooled. I listen to the news in spanish and many are skeptical. My fiance is an immigrant to this country as well, and he is sick of the obvious pandering by democrats and the racism from republicans. Its actually all racist (no one ever thinks of illegal bosnians, former soviet countries, or those from africa…) and obama has cleverly dropped a bomb. Besides, we are talking about the president who has deported the most immigrants by targeting families, mothers driving kids to school, and have even flat out threatened greencard holders with deportation if they don’t give the names and locations of people they know to be illegal.
Yet somehow we are to trust this president? He is only pro immigration insofar as it keeps him in power. May he be booted out quickly.
One of group of immigrants getting special treatment over others who spent time filing out paperwork and paying the required processing fees to gain US citizenship. That’s not right.
Other countries have stricter immigration laws. Where are the noises on that?
Fantastic policy. Legally speaking, children could not have formed the mens rea to commit the crime of “crossing the border.” This policy should have developed years ago.
“We are still in the middle of fighting this guy’s HHS power grab, people!”
Please explain how the Affordable Healthcare Act is a power grab? As far as I am aware, it is currently being subjected to our federal system of checks and balances i.e. the Judiciary. If the Affordable Healthcare Act passes constitutional muster, one could hardly label it a power grab. But let’s get to the real issue: this immigration policy is fantastic.
What is so infuriating AND disappointing to me is that OUR church has been kidnapped by those who would use it to gain politcal power. The whole abortion issue has the smell of many years of campaign plotting to use it in THIS way. It is a typical republicon tactic and one they use to divide the country. NOW, the Church will be divided. Our church will be punished because SOME of its leaders have been misguided.
CJ - with all due respect, as a Catholic, abortion is a much bigger issue than immagration. I do hope you stufy your faith. It’s much higher up on the ladder then most other subjects. Let’s apply a little logic. If I am aborted, do I care about my health care, what country I can immigrate to or get deported from. The answer is clearly no, because I was murdered. So, although we can discuss a range of solutions on how to best feed the poor, handle immagration, etc, we must always be pro-life and anyone voting for a pro-abortion candidate when there is a pro-life candidate should not receive communion and is in a state of mortal sin, seperated from the visible boundary of the church. At issue is not the parties, but the fact that both should be pro-life and one has gotten very pro-death and pro gay marriage. Yikes.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.