Running Head: PORTFOLIO PROJECT
HR 52; The Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015
Rebecca Diemer, Jenika McCrayer, Brenda Palacios
George Mason University
April 13, 2015
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
2
Examining HR 52 (Titles I-V) The Save America, Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015
Description of the Underlying Problem:
Immigration laws and policies have existed in the US since 1790, when then President
George Washington signed the Naturalization Act which began a long history of limiting
immigration and citizenship by race and ethnicity (Kao et. al., 2013). Throughout history
immigration policy has targeted groups of individuals deemed undesirable or inferior (Kao et.
al.). The current law governing immigration, the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA),
allows for a total of 675,000 permanent immigrants per year to the US (Immigration Policy
Center, 2014). This number excludes immigrants seeking refugee status, and temporary visas
such as student and diplomatic visas (Immigration Policy Center, 2014). Since the beginning of
immigration policy, the “fear” of immigrant populations consuming “American” resources has
been present. Kao, Vaquera and Goyette (2013) explain,
The laws and policies that were crafted in response to changing immigration rates and the
shifting profile of the immigrant population reflected the fears that US-born residents had
about immigrants. Many worried that new immigrants of that period were too different
from US-born residents of the country and were therefore “unassimilable”’. United
States-born residents worry about competition for resources with race, ethnic, or nationalorigin groups that remain “separate” in US society (p. 74).
These fears remain clearly present today in the rhetoric surrounding immigration policy debate.
There are two recent advances in immigration policy : The Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals (DACA) executive order announced by President Obama in 2012 gives
temporary deferred legal status for undocumented youth under the age of 30 who were brought
to the states prior to the age of 16 (Managan, 2014). President Obama’s second executive order
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
3
on immigration announced on November 20, 2014 will expand the deferred action, providing for
limited legal status, for approximately five million additional undocumented immigrants
increasing the opportunities for undocumented immigrants to pursue higher education (Managan,
2014). In 2006 President George W. Bush signed into law the Secure Fence Act, supported by
73 percent of congress, which authorized the construction of 700 miles of fence on the US
Mexico border, which runs approximately 2000 miles (Kennedy, 2010). This law, was
overwhelmingly supported by congress and their constituents and came at a huge cost to
American tax payers. An estimated average of 500,000 Mexican immigrants have been entering
the United States since 1994, the building of the 700 mile fence authorized by the Secure Fence
Act in 2006 and costing the American tax payers billions of dollars has not reduced the
immigration numbers by 1 person (Kennedy, 2010). As long as the United States demand for
inexpensive labor, and Mexico’s poor economy continues to drive migrant workers to the United
States in search of better opportunities immigration will not slow. The construction of the border
fence has only succeeded in driving Mexican immigrants in to more treacherous crossing areas,
leading to more migrant deaths per year since the fence was constructed (Kennedy, 2010).
Mexican immigrants come to the United States in search of better opportunities in both
employment and education. Both the President’s executive action and Senate Bill 1943 will help
to set up a system that will provide reasonable opportunities for undocumented immigrants and
their children.
The U.S. Immigration code is incredibly complex and is based on the immigration bill
originally passed by a congressional override vote on December 24, 1952, by the 82nd United
States Congress (Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, 2015). The act is named after its cosponsors, Senator Pat McCarran, Democrat from Nevada, and Congressman Francis Walter,
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
4
Democrat from Pennsylvania. The Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA) of 1952 was
vetoed by President Truman who said the bill was discriminatory and not how the U.S. should be
welcoming new citizens to America. The Immigration and Naturalization act instituted a quota
system and set up a system of worthy and unworthy immigrants which overwhelmingly persists
in U.S. immigration policy today. The 1952 Immigration bill is still the overarching policy
governing immigration today. It has been amended many, many times, but most significantly in
1965 and 1990. In 1965 the quota system was adjusted to allow immigrants from India, Asia and
Latin/South America to receive visas other than refugee visas. The Immigration and Nationality
Act of 1965, also known as the Hart-Cellar Act, was passed in the height of the civil rights
movement by the 89th congress of the United States (Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965,
2015). In 1990 the bill was amended to increase the total number of non-refugee visas from
170,000 to 750,000 per year. The INA, also known as the McCarran-Walter Act is codified
under Title 8 of the United States Code and currently governs all immigration and citizenship in
the United States (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2015).
Beyond the incredibly limiting overarching immigration policy, the U.S. has passed a
number of amendments to the Immigration and Naturalization Act that creates an almost
criminal status of immigrants in the United States. In 2001 the U.S. passed the Patriot Act, an
amendment to the 1952 act which made it legal to detain and deport any suspected international
terrorist. In 2006 congress passed the Secure Fence Act, again an amendment to the 1952
Immigration policy, which authorized the construction of a 700 mile fence along the 2000 mile
border between the United States and Mexico. The state of Arizona has passed state laws
allowing local law enforcement to detain any individual who is not carrying documentation.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
5
All legislation seeking to advance civil rights for undocumented immigrants currently in
the United States and to improve the immigration system for those seeking to enter the United
States have been stalled in congress. The DREAM act, originally introduced in congress in
2001, and most recently re-introduced in 2010 would create a path to citizenship for the 1.5
generation, undocumented immigrants who were brought to this country by their parents as
children, graduated from U.S. high schools and have enrolled in U.S. colleges or joined the U.S.
military. The 2013 Border Security and Immigration Reform act was introduced and passed by
the Senate but did not come to a vote in the house, this bill called for massive immigration
reform. President Obama has issued two executive orders on immigration creating deferred
temporary status for undocumented immigrants, those subject to deportation, in the last few
years.
Summary and Status of the Bill
The Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act was introduced in the United States
House of Representatives, 114th congress, on January 6, 2015 by Representative Sheila Jackson
Lee a Democrat representing the 18th district of Texas (H.R. 52, 2015). Representative JacksonLee also introduced this bill (H.R. 750, 2007) during the 110th congress in 2007, where it did not
move out of subcommittee. The bill consists of fourteen titles addressing various aspects of the
current Immigration and Nationality Act, passed in 1952. As mentioned before, the Immigration
and Nationality Act of 1952 has been previously amended on a number of occasions 1965, 1986,
and 1990. The current analysis will focus on Titles I (Facilitating Family-Based Immigration), II
(Establishment of a Board of Visa Appeals for Family-Based Visas), III (Elimination of Unfair
Restrictions), IV (Preventing Sex Offenders from Using our Immigration Laws to Bring
Innocent, Unsuspecting Victims into the United States) and V (Legalization for Long-Term
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
6
Residents). Titles VI through XIV of the bill deal with border security, employment visas, and
refugee visas and are beyond the scope of this analysis.
Title I, Facilitating Family-Based Immigration
Title I of H.R. 52 seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to increase the
overall level of visas granted to immigrants being sponsored by permanent citizen family
members. It also seeks to ease the application process and wait time to process the visa for
family sponsored visas. Also covered under this section of the bill are minor children who “age
out” during the process of applying for and receiving the family sponsored visa. Amendments
contained in this bill would base the child’s age on when the process began (application date)
rather than the age of the child when the application was reviewed, thus preventing children
aging out of the process (H.R. 52, 2015).
Title II, Establishment of a Board of Visa Appeals for Family-Based Visas
Title II of HR 52 amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to establish a 5 member
board of appeals for family sponsored and other preference classification visas. This board
would have the ability to review appeals made by any consular officer about the visa application
for a family-sponsored or preference classification immigrant. If appealing a decision from a
consular officer, the immigrant would be required to pay a fee for the administrative costs
associated with the appeal process (H.R. 52, 2015).
Title III, Elimination of Unfair Restrictions
Title III of HR 52 seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide
protections for children and wives of fathers and husbands who are United States citizens. The
act would clarify language granting citizenship status to children born abroad, out of wedlock to
US fathers. The act would also grant citizenship to immigrant spouses and children upon the
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
7
loss of the spouse provided the spouse can prove the marriage was entered into in good faith and
not for the sole purpose of obtaining citizenship. Title III also addresses adoptions by family
members seeking to reunite families after the death of a parent (H.R. 52, 2015).
Title IV, Preventing Sex Offenders from Using our Immigration Laws to Bring Innocent,
Unsuspecting Victims into the United States
Title IV of HR 52 seeks to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act by increasing
protections against sexual offenders and domestic violence. Findings in the bill point to issues
surrounding applicants seeking to bring family members to the United States on family
sponsored visas being on the National Sex Offender Registry List, for crimes including, but not
limited to sex offences against children. This bill would give the authority to deny family based
petitions for visas if the petitioner is listed on the National Sex Offender Registry. Appeals are
an option, and are heard through the board of appeals established in Title II. The bill would also
provide relief for spouses and children currently seeking citizenship if a spouse was found to be
abusive or listed on the National Sex Offender Registry. In this case, the spouse and children
would not be subject to deportation due to dissolution of marriage (H.R. 52, 2015).
Title V, Legalization for Long-Term Residents
Title V of the bill seeks to amend the Immigration and Naturalization Act to provide
Lawful Permanent Resident Status to immigrants who have resided in the United States for more
than five years and meet a number of additional requirements. All approved applications for
Lawful Permanent Resident Status will not decrease the total number of available immigrant
visas would not decrease (H.R. 52, 2015).
Currently the Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015 has been referred
to the following three committees; The House Judiciary subcommittee on Immigration and
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
8
Border Security (1/22/2015), the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border and
Maritime Security (1/23/2015) and The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee
(1/6/2015) (H.R. 52, 2015).
Analysis of the Playing field
The only sponsor for bill H.R. 52 is Democratic U.S. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee
from Texas. She has always been a firm advocate for the need of a comprehensive immigration
reform. Congresswoman Jackson Lee proposes an avenue for relief and border security in H.R.
52. As a member of the Committee on Homeland Security, she believes the borders need to be
secured to protect the country (“Homeland Security,” 2015). Congresswoman Jackson Lee is
committed to find security gaps in transportation and infrastructures (“Homeland Security,”
2015). Her passion for security and protection explains her extensive border security proposal in
H.R. 52. She also believes that the 12 million undocumented immigrants that reside in the United
States need to be given aid and legal status (“Immigration,” 2015). She believes that American
values need to align with what is being done in Congress such as maintain families united
(“Immigration,” 2015). Congresswoman Jackson Lee has a history of supporting humanitarian
efforts and legislation for victims of civil wars or natural disasters (“Immigration,” 2015). She is
firm believer in keeping families united and preventing wrongful deportations (“Immigration,”
2015). Interestingly, she also advocates for minorities within the undocumented population in the
United States such as those from Africa and the Caribbean (“Immigration,” 2015). This explains
why she outlines amendments for the Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act of 1998. She
has also been an advocate of gender equality and protection for victims of abuse. In the past she
had advocated for amendment changes in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act
of 2000 to include protection for undocumented immigrants and those seeking asylum (Sheila
Jackson Lee’s Political Summary, 2015). Her voting record explains why she outlines protection
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
9
and legislation for victims of sexual assault and abuse in H.R. 52. It is without doubt that
Congresswomen Jackson Lee is an advocate for human rights and equality.
Democratic U.S. Representative Luis Gutiérrez of Illinois is one the key advocates for a
comprehensive immigration reform in Congress. He very passionate about immigration as his
parents migrated from Puerto Rico to Chicago (“Full Biography,” 2015). He has various
professions such as being a teacher, a cab driver, and a fellow social worker (“Full Biography,”
2015). It is without a doubt that he has been in the frontlines of immigration and has wisely used
his various skills to impact legislation. He has been in the center of the immigration debate for
over twelve years since his election in 1992 (“Full Biography”, 2015). His social advocacy is
highlighted through the various leadership positions he has taken in the immigration realm such
as being the Chairman for the Immigration Task Force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus
(“Full Biography,” 2015). Representative Gutiérrez was key in the passing of the Deferred
Action for Childhood Arrivals Program (“Full Biography,” 2015). The immigration expert has
recently spoken out in support of President Obama’s executive order but also dared to say that it
still was not enough (“Immigration,” 2015). He believes that a comprehensive immigration
reform is needed that focuses on providing legalization for undocumented immigrants. His
personal take around fixing the immigration crisis is structured around keeping families united
and tying immigration to the country’s societal and economic need (“Immigration,” 2015). He
believes that if there were a legal system in place that provided visas or working permits it would
decrease the need of illegal smuggling and therefore positively impact border security
(“Immigration,” 2015). He believes that the main reason immigrants come to the United States
is for economic relief therefore he believes that an immigration reform would need to revolve
around addressing employment (“Immigration,” 2015). Representative Gutiérrez would agree
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
10
with Representative Jackson Lee in keeping families united but would probably argue that H.R.
52 is only the beginning steps of truly restructuring the immigration system.
Immigration reform is an issue that both political parties need to partake in to make
effective change. It is important to note that there are Republicans proposing various
Immigration reform bills. Republican Senator Marco Rubio of Florida was one of the eight
members of the infamous bi-partisan “Gang of 8” that proposed S. 744 “Border Security,
Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” in 2013 (“Immigration Reform
Facts,” 2015). The bill he proposed passed the Senate but did not pass the House in 2013
(“Immigration Reform Facts,” 2015). He is an advocate of an immigration reform that
strengthens border security and creates an employment verification system (“Immigration
Reform Facts,” 2015). His bill proposed a strict security plan that would build a bigger fence
along the order and it also argued the need for more funding for border security (“Immigration
Reform Facts,” 2015). Another major argument that Senator Rubio states is the need of a
modern legal immigration system that would create and protect jobs of American workers
(“Immigration Reform Facts,” 2015). He believes that if there are high unemployment rates in
certain areas then there is no need of immigration jobs that Americans are willing to do
(“Immigration Reform Facts,” 2015). He also believes that there needs to be a system in place to
manage and track low-skilled jobs and agricultural jobs in the United States through a visa or
permit approval program (“Immigration Reform Facts,” 2015). Senator Rubio would most likely
agree with Representative Jackson Lee in the need of strong border security but would disagree
in other parts of H.R. 52. He would not agree with the expansion of family visas because he is
against chain migration based on family preference versus economic preference (“Immigration
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
11
Reform Facts,” 2015). Nonetheless, Senator Rubio is a key player in Congress that would need
to be at the negotiation table as a Republican of Cuban decent.
Republican Senator Ted Cruz of Texas would be another major opponent to H.R. 52.
Senator Cruz is the son of a Cuban immigrant that believes in legal immigration (“Immigration,”
2015). As a Texas resident, Senator Cruz feels that the state of Texas is personally dealing with
the negative consequences of immigration (“Immigration,” 2015). He currently is against
President Obama’s executive order on immigration as Senator Cruz argues it is unconstitutional
(“Immigration,” 2015). He believes that President Obama is encouraging more migrants to come
to the United States and reinforcing the number of undocumented children to come to the U.S.
(“Immigration,” 2015). Senator Cruz would argue that H.R. 52 would make the immigration
issue larger by extending visas to family members because it would encourage more migration
into the U.S. Senator Cruz is currently a key name among news highlights due to his recent
involvement against President Obama. He is very vocal against immigration and would most
likely challenge Representative Jackson Lee’s position on immigration as they both are from
Texas.
Republican Representative Ken Calvert of California would strongly oppose H.R. 52 for
its humanitarian clauses. Representative Calvert is a firm believer in deterring illegal
immigration. He “wholeheartedly opposes amnesty” because he believes that no one deserves
legal status if they broke the law to enter the country (“Illegal Immigration,” 2015). He believes
that the illegal immigration needs to be stopped immediately by building a 700 miles fence and
increase deportation (“Illegal Immigration,” 2015). He would argue that H.R. 52’s border
security is useless if there is an expansion of visas for families. Representative Calvert supports
various bills that opposes immigration such as the H.R. 140 “Citizenship Reform” that denies an
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
12
individual born in the U.S. citizenship if both parents are undocumented (“Illegal Immigration,”
2015). He has supported bills that would give local law enforcement power to apprehend
undocumented immigrants for deportation (“Illegal Immigration,” 2015). He believes in
preserving American values and culture therefore has supported H.R 997 that would declare
English the official language in the U.S. (“Illegal Immigration,” 2015). He would major
opponent against H.R. 52.
Organizations
The following are various organizations and coalitions that would most likely support and
advocate for H.R. 52: The Fair Immigration Reform Movement, Latinos United, Reform
Immigration FOR America, and the National Council La Raza. These organizations believe in
empowering immigrants and advocating for legalization. There are also other organizations that
would support the anti-sexual assault portion of the bill. The following are examples of
organizations: Virginia Sexual and Domestic Violence Action Alliance, and Washington, D.C.’s
Polaris Project, Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, and the National Sexual Assault
Resource Center.
The following are various organizations and coalitions that would most likely not support
and advocate for H.R. 52: American Immigration Control, ProEnglish, Americans Have Had
Enough, Americans For Legal Immigration, and United For A Sovereign America.
Arguments in Favor
One of the main arguments in favor of this bill it aims to protect the family unit. The bill
would establish a Board of Family-Based Visa Appeals that would oversee the cases of visas for
spouses and children of a permanent resident or citizen of the United States. This immigration
reform would positively impact those residing in the U.S. by providing a legal pathway for
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
13
family members of already legal immigrants. This could decrease the number of incoming
immigrants who cross the border illegally to be united with their families. This would alleviate
the costs and work of Border Patrol. It is common sense to keep families together and not break
them apart.
H.R. 52 adds a unique protection for the country as a whole by denying a visa of sex
offender that wants to come to the United States. The creation of the Task Force to Rescue
Immigrant Victims of American Sex Offenders will both protect citizens of the United States and
immigrant victims. Sex trafficking is major concern in the United States and H.R. 52 would
prevent sex offenders from bringing innocent victims into the U.S.
Current law does not provide for authorization to deny family-based petitions on the basis
of the petitioner’s conviction for sex offense, even when the conviction record indicates that a
spouse or child beneficiary may be in grave danger. H.R. 52 would allow denial of visa if
petitioner is on the national sex offender registry for a conviction that resulted in incarceration
for more than one year. Petitioner would have 90 days to appeal decision and H.R. 52 provides
instructions about “determining danger.” It also provides protections to immigrants in cases
where immigrant spouse or child is subject to sexual abuse.
The following proposal of earned legalization can be seen as an argument in favor.
“Earned access to legalization” has six requirements to petition for “adjustment of status on
the basis of earned access to legalization:
1. Physically present in the US for a continuous period of not less than 5 years
immediately preceding the date on which this provision was enacted and has
maintained continuous physical presence since then.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
14
2. Has at all times been a person of good moral character
3. Has never been convicted of a criminal offence in the US
4. Has successfully completed a course on reading, writing, and speaking in English
5. Has accepted the values and cultural life of the US
6. Has performed at least 40 hours of community service
Permanent resident statuses granted under this provision will not reduce the number of
visas authorized under any other provision.
Arguments Against
H.R. 52 is giving more power and control to immigrants that are permanent residents or
U.S. citizens by granting them special visas for their families. This does not take into
consideration or assess current economic needs of the country. There would be a greater influx of
immigrants and that means it would cost more for the country. If more children more that means
that education sector needs to invest more in the new children instead of continuing much needed
support for American-born children. If more spouses come it will impact the employment sector
as they will most likely enter the workforce and take jobs away from Americans. H.R. 52 is not
taking the lives of Americans into consideration by giving preference to immigrant families.
H.R. 52 highlights the need to protect immigrant victims from sexual assault and abuse. It
also shows the need to have a system with a clear background check to filter incoming criminals
into the country. The simple fact that this is included in the bill shows how dangerous
immigrants can be already residing in the United States. Why could H.R. 52 want to bring in
more people into the United States when there needs to be a focus on evaluating the already 12
million undocumented immigrants that currently reside here? The main protection has to be U.S.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
15
citizens. Resources needed to be invested towards investigating all the unknown people that
currently reside in the country instead of investing into a system that favors incoming
immigrants.
Other arguments that can be used against H.R. 52 are the following: Involvement of
trained mental health care professionals in process of “determining danger,” possible use of new
classification to deny petitioners, when justification may not be present (falsely
accused/convicted), and requiring victim of sexual assault to provide evidence of legitimacy of
marriage and that immigrant was not at fault (knowledgeable about conditions prior to filing
petition).
Strategy of Moving Forward
Our group’s adjective is to get parts of this bill amended before it is passed. Currently
H.R. 52 is a robust bill that is sitting in four committees and has not been voted on, which gives
an opportunity to be fined tuned before it is passed.
We would mainly advocate amending vague language incorporated in the bill. When it
comes to naturalization, the stipulations include “accept[ing] the values and cultural life of the
United States” and “has at all times been a person of good moral character.” Other provisions
include English courses and 40 hours of community service. These are vague and limiting to
those who may not have access to ESL courses or volunteer opportunities because of work and
family constraints.
We are also advocating for the passage of this bill because it protects vulnerable
populations and sexual assault victims. It unites families by letting American citizens adopt child
does not punish children abandoned, orphaned, or aged out of the system. The bill also blocks
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
16
those on the sexual offender registry from sponsoring immigrants, which could curb sexual
assault and human trafficking.
In order for the bill to be amended, the bill’s sponsor Sheila Jackson, and other members
of Congress who are sympathetic to the issue of immigration should be targeted in our advocacy.
This bill targets a sensitive population of immigrants and their families that may not have the
means or ability to advocate for themselves due to citizenship constraints, so the bulk of the
work would rest with allies and advocates within organizations that help this population. Social
media might be the best tool for advocacy-- since immigrants can’t mobilize on the steps of
Capitol Hill themselves; we have to think of more creative ways to mobilize the population this
bill is affecting. Social media is also a prolific way to educate the public on issues such as
immigration reform. When it comes to lobbying legislators, it would be best to talk dollars and
cents about the costs of supporting illegal immigrants in this country versus citizens. We would
also lobby toward reuniting families and keeping children out of the hands of sexual predators,
which are bipartisan issues. We would also lobby for omitting vague language within the bill by
pointing out the red tape and bureaucracy it would create, which would drain federal money and
resources.
This bill is consistent with social work values because it aligns with the six core values of
Social Workers, which are: service, social justice, dignity and worth of the person, importance of
human relationships, integrity, and competence. This bill deals with social justice because it
provides resources for a vulnerable and often overlooked population to attain equality. H.R. 52
champions the importance of human relationships because it pushes to unite families and keep
them together. Dignity and worth of the person is highlighted in this bill because it keeps would
be sexual assault victims out of the hands of predators by blocking those on the sex offender
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
registry from sponsoring an immigrant. Integrity and competence are also essential for those
seeking naturalization as well.
17
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
18
Fact Sheet
This fact sheet is developed for members of congress who will be debating and voting on
this piece of legislation. The objective is to focus on current trends in immigration that this bill
is seeking to ameliorate. Facts include current immigration statistics, information about past
immigration legislation and its impact (as this bill is amending past immigration legislation), and
information about how legislators can and should be advocates for immigrants. Also included
are the findings from the actual bill about sexual assault statistics involving immigrants, as a
large portion of this bill seeks to amend immigration policy to deal with sexual assault and
domestic violence affecting the immigrant population.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
19
HR 52- Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015







An estimated average of 500,000 Mexican immigrants have been entering the United
States since 1994, the building of the 700 mile fence authorized by the Secure Fence Act
in 2006 and costing the American tax payers billions of dollars has not reduced the
immigration numbers by 1 person (Kennedy, 2010)
The U.S. Immigration code is incredibly complex and is based on the immigration bill
originally passed by a congressional override vote in 1952
The 2013 Border Security and Immigration Reform act was introduced and passed by the
Senate but did not come to a vote in the house, this bill called for massive immigration
reform
Immigrants can be a particularly vulnerable population because many may not speak
English, are often separated from family and friends, and may not understand the laws of
the United States. For these reasons, immigrants are often afraid to report acts of
domestic violence to the police or to seek other forms of assistance. Such fear causes
many immigrants to remain in abusive relationships (Department of Homeland Security,
2015).
Currently there are three ways immigrants who become victims of domestic violence,
sexual assault and some other specific crimes may apply for legal immigration status for
themselves and their child(ren). A victim’s application is confidential and no one,
including an abuser, crime perpetrator or family member, will be told that the applicant
has applied (Department of Homeland Security, 2015).
o Self-petitions for legal status under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA)
o Cancellation of removal under VAWA
o U-nonimmigrant status (crime victims)
o These immigration benefits each have specific requirements that must be
established (Department of Homeland Security, 2015)
While numbers are difficult to estimate, undocumented immigrants face unique
difficulties. Abusers often threaten to have their victims deported if they try to seek help,
making immigrant survivors less likely to report these crimes. Immigrant survivors may
also be unaware or confused by the services that are available, particularly if service
providers lack linguistically or culturally appropriate resources. (White House Council on
Women and Girls, 2015).
Congressional Findings sited in HR 52 are as follows, Title IV, (H.R. 52, 2015):
o “Immigration law allows citizens and aliens lawfully admitted for permanent
residence to bring foreign family members to the United States on the basis of
immediate relative status or a preference classification” (H.R. 52, 2015).
o “Immediate relative status and preference classifications are obtained by filing
petitions with the Secretary of Homeland Security” (H.R. 52, 2015).
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
20
o “For national security purposes, the Secretary of Homeland Security conducts
background checks on the beneficiaries of such petitions and, since September 11,
2001, on the petitioners as well” (H.R. 52, 2015).
o “The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has determined that, in fiscal
year 2005, at least 398 of the petitioners who filed family-based visa petitions
were on the National Sex Offender Registry maintained by the Federal Bureau of
Investigations” (H.R. 52, 2015).
o “GAO was only able to ascertain the nature of the sex offense for 194 of the 398
petitioners” (H.R. 52, 2015).
o “GAO was able to ascertain, however, that 119 of the convictions were for sex
assault, 35 for child fondling, 9 for strong arm rape, 9 for carnal abuse combined
with a sexual assault, 7 were for statutory rape, 4 for crimes against persons, 3 for
indecent exposure, 2 for kidnapping, 2 for obscene material possession, 1 for
exploitation of a minor with photographs, 1 for incest with a minor, 1 for
sodomizing a boy, and 1 for restricting movement” (H.R. 52, 2015).
o “At least 14 of the 398 petitioners were classified as “sexual predators”, which
means a determination had been made that they are likely to commit additional
sex offenses” (H.R. 52, 2015).
o “At least 45 of the petitioners were convicted of sex offenses against children”
(H.R. 52, 2015).
o “The Immigration and Nationality Act does not provide the Secretary of
Homeland Security with authorization to deny family-based petitions on the basis
of a petitioner’s conviction for a sex offense, even when the conviction record
indicates that a spouse or a child beneficiary may be in grave danger” (H.R. 52,
2015).
HR 52 seeks to address these issues in these ways:




The Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015 allows the Secretary to deny
an immigration petition from a petitioner who has been placed on the national sex
offender registry. (H.R.52, 2015)
The Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015 creates a task force that
seeks to help immigrant victims of American sex offenders.
o Provides protections to immigrants in cases where immigrant spouse or child is
subject to sexual abuse. (H.R.52, 2015)
The Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015 provides a pathway to
citizenship for immigrants who have been in the United States for 5 years (and meet
certain requirements). (H.R.52, 2015)
The Save America Comprehensive Immigration Act of 2015 provides for the permanent
resident status adjustment of certain temporary protected status persons. (H.R.52, 2015)
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
21
Letter to Congress
The Honorable Mark R. Warner
388 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Warner:
As your constituent, I am writing today to urge you to support a comprehensive
immigration legislation that will allow millions of hard-working immigrations a pathway to
earning citizenship and protect the unity of families. It is imperative that Congress works to fix
the broken immigration system that only seems to get to worse as times goes on. A current bill in
the House of Representatives proposed by Representative Sheila Jackson Lee from Texas (H.R.
52) makes an effort to provide legalization to families and protect undocumented victims from
sexual assault. Currently there are insufficient family-based visas and thousands of families
separated. As you may be aware, there has been an influx of minors coming into the country on
their own to be reunited with their families. No family should be separated because of legal
status.
We have made great strides with the DREAM ACT but there are still various barriers and
limitations for the millions of undocumented immigrants that reside currently in the United
States. As President Obama recently announced his executive order in November that would
detain deportation for roughly 5 million undocumented immigrants, primarily parents of U. S.
Citizens or Residents, it is imperative you take a stance for comprehensive immigration
legislation.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
22
Thank you for your consideration of my viewpoint on this matter. I believe it is an
important issue, and would like to see your support in comprehensive immigration legislation, as
it will impact the state of Virginia to ensure the safety and protection of undocumented
immigrant families.
Sincerely,
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
23
Media/Social Media
Generally speaking, a Letter to the Editor, or LTE, must be 200 words or less in order to
be published. They must be concise in order to even be considered for publishing. There are two
types of LTEs: One is in response to a particular article in a recent publication, and the other is
just musing on a particular subject. Here are two examples of the ways we could spin the bill in
order to garner public support. The best LTEs appeal to emotion, general values, or provide hard
facts on a subject that isn’t widely spread.
In the first LTE we are bringing attention to the bill’s attempt to prevent to sexual assault,
an emotionally charged topic that its eradication is something everyone can rally behind. The
second is a bit more risky, depending on the audience. A more conservative audience would
object to the notion of not expecting immigrants to assimilate to American culture, while a more
liberal crowd would be more open to advocating for striking this kind of language from the bill.
We would have to pay attention to a publication’s audience before submitting our LTEs for these
reasons. The first would be generally well received by a wider audience, while the second would
be more likely to win over a more liberal audience.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
24
The Letters to the Editor are as follows:
It’s alarming how little attention is being paid to the Save America Act and it’s attempt to end
human trafficking. The Save America Act puts vulnerable populations first by restricting those
on the sex offender registry to sponsor undocumented individuals, especially minors. Too long
has America been silent on the issue of sex trafficking, and The Save America act can remedy
our complacency. An act like this has the potential to curb human trafficking within the United
States, and end the never-ending cycle of violence victims may face at the hands of their
attacker. The Save America Act is a giant step forward in human rights and the end of the global
culture of violence vulnerable populations (like women and minors) endure.
****
Apparently the American Dream is set at a high price. In the “Save America Act,” there is
nationalistic language concerning the process of naturalization that could lead to a biased
judgment of immigrants vying to become American citizens. This begs the question: do we want
naturalization or assimilation?
In order to become a naturalized citizen, one would have to prove they are aligned with
“American values.” Another stipulation to naturalization is the contender showing that they have
“accepted the values and cultural life of the United States…[and] has performed at least 40 hours
of community service.” I’m sure we can poll average Americans and find that most have not
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
completed a full hour of community service in the past year, let alone come to a consensus on
our “values and cultural life”.
Why should we expect naturalized citizens to uphold our values when natural-born citizens do
not lead by example?
25
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
26
With the Change.org petition, we intend to reach an audience willing to mobilize around
a bill that would protect vulnerable populations, and hopefully spur Congress into action (The
bill is currently still sitting in committee and has not been voted on). We are appealing to
American values of family and protecting innocent people from harm, as evidenced by the tone
and image.
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
27
References
Department of Homeland Security (2015). Information of the legal rights available. Retrieved
from: http://www.uscis.gov/news/fact-sheets/information-legal-rights-availableimmigrant-victims-domestic-violence-united-states-and-facts-about-immigratingmarriage-based-visa-fact-sheet
Full Biography. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from
http://gutierrez.house.gov/about-me/full-biography
Homeland Security. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from
http://jacksonlee.house.gov/issues/homeland-security
H.R. 52, 114 Cong. (2015).
Kao, G., Vaquera, E., & Goyette, K. (2013). Education and immigration. Polity Press: Malden,
MA.
Kennedy, R. (Producer), & Kennedy, R. (Director). (2010). The Fence [Motion Picture]. United
States: HBO.
Illegal Immigration. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from
http://calvert.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=4580
Immigration. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from
http://jacksonlee.house.gov/issues/immigration
Immigration. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=issue&id=33
Immigration Policy Center (2014). Basics of the United States immigration system. Washington,
D.C.
Immigration. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from http://gutierrez.house.gov/issue/immigration
Immigration Reform Facts. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from
http://www.rubio.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/immigration-reform?p=Get-The-Facts1
PORTFOLIO PROJECT
Immigration and Nationality act of 1952. (2015). Retrieved from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1952
Immigration and Nationality act of 1965. (2015). Retrieved from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_of_1965
Managan, K. (2014). How Obama’s action on immigration will affect higher education. The
Chronicle of Higher Education. November 21, 2014.
Sheila Jackson Lee's Political Summary. (2015). Retrieved April 2, 2015, from
http://votesmart.org/candidate/21692/sheila-jackson-lee#.VR1bNJTF9Hg
The White House Council on Women and Girls (2015). Rape and sexual assault: a renewed
call to action.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/sexual_assault_report_1-21-14.pdf
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. (2015). Retrieved from:
http://www.uscis.gov/iframe/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/act.html
28