People who closely follow immigration law and changes know that the proposed “new law” that may have legalized millions is longer alive.  The “new law” or Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) was a bill that was in the Senate.  The Senate had moved CIR forward and there were a series of debates.  Many Senators added amendments to the proposed law.  People across the country were getting excited that there was going to be some sort of immigration reform that would allow undocumented aliens the right to become legal.  The momentum seemed strong.

As the law progressed to the Senate, many of the changes or amendments to the law were restrictive and would, indeed, hurt immigrants in the long run.  Nevertheless, the immediate benefits that could have been provided to the potential twelve million undocumented immigrants would have been substantial.  Thus, there were people rallying to put their ideas before politicians to make the law work.

The hope was that new immigration law would also reduce a decade or longer waits for family-based immigrants.  Allow U.S. employers to bring people to the U.S. that they need in a viable period of time.  Allow the agriculture and construction industries some relief by allowing immediate availability to foreign workers that actually possess the desire to work long hours in the hot sun.  However, rather than see the wisdom in passing laws that U.S. employers, families and people cry out for, the Senate failed to pass an obstacle to the passage of immigration reform.  This obstacle was a cloture vote, which if overcome would have allowed the proposed law a chance at passage.

However, the proposed law was not all good.  There were many parts of the law that would have broken the immigration system as we know it today.  The employment-based immigration system would have changed to a “point” or “merit based” system.  The family-based system would have suffered the elimination of four out of five of the family-based categories.  There would have been serious obstacles for persons illegally present to convert to permanent resident status.  There was a lack of sufficient employment-based immigrant visa numbers at all skill levels.  There would have been additional restrictions on the H1B1 category and the L1 non-immigrant visas.  Additionally, the persons obtaining “Z” status or temporary legal status would have problems with confidentiality issues and a series of procedural restrictions that would have raised constitutionality issues.

Some of the problems may have been worked out if the law were allowed to go forward.  However, the Senate did not vote the law forward and it died.  As a result, there will probably be no meaningful movement on new immigration law until 2009.  It is the opinion of this writer that politicians in Congress will not risk passing meaningful immigration reform in 2008 in the midst of election campaigns.  The issue of immigration reform is simply too hot.  A politician is likely to lose votes if they pass a law that may become unpopular with the radical right wing that condemns immigration reforms.  Therefore, it would be safer to play it safe and consider the issues after the elections and the initiation of a new administration. 

Written by:
Sanjay S. Mathur
Mathur Law Offices, P.C.
1-866-BE-LEGAL
www.mathurlawoffices.com