Headlines, Human Rights, North America

RIGHTS: "Cure" for Immigration System Could Kill the Patient

William Fisher

NEW YORK, Mar 7 2005 (IPS) - As the U.S. House of Representatives was passing a controversial immigration bill last month – with 96 percent of Republicans supporting it and 78 percent of Democrats opposing – a large coalition of civil liberties, immigration, religious and other advocacy groups were setting their jaws for a major fight to defeat the legislation in the Senate.

Known as the REAL I.D. Act, it would set tougher security standards for the issuance of drivers’ licenses, and would also close the three-mile gap in the fortified U.S./Mexico border fence near San Diego, California.

But it is the asylum provisions that have drawn fire from numerous civil society groups.

"It is particularly alarming for asylum and refugee seekers," Marc Krupanski of the Centre for Constitutional Rights told IPS. "While the (George W.) Bush administration and the U.S. government boast themselves as lovers of freedom and democracy, the REAL I.D. Act will act to eliminate both of these…for those fleeing persecution and oppression."

"They will be forced to ask those that are persecuting them – either based on religious, political, ethnic, gender, or sexuality grounds – to admit what they are doing and help them find sanctuary."

The author of the REAL I.D. Act is the powerful chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, a conservative Republican from Wisconsin.

According to human rights groups, the most objectionable parts of Sensenbrenner’s proposal would allow a refugee to be denied asylum if she is unable to produce documents that confirm her case; require a refugee to prove her persecutor’s "central" reasons for harming her; and give immigration officers and judges broad leeway to deny asylum based on perceived demeanor and statements, ignoring the fact that survivors of rape or similar abuses may appear lacking in emotion. Organisations opposed to the measure are focusing largely on privacy concerns they claim arise from allowing the government to collect national data submitted for the new standardised driver’s licenses, and on the human rights implications of changes to the asylum rules.

Mark Dow, author of "American Gulag", an expose of the largely secret detention system run by the former Immigration and Naturalisation Service (INS), is particularly concerned about the arrests, detention and treatment of immigrants.

"In his first major statement of priorities, the attorney-general described the immigration litigation system as ‘broken’," Dow told IPS. "Illegal immigrants have too many opportunities for appeals, and Congress should act to expedite the process, he said.."

"Unfortunately the system is not broken. On the contrary, it is doing just what it is intended to do – isolating immigration ‘detainees’ while subjecting them to an adversarial process, denying them due process and legal assistance," Dow said.

"Anyone in custody should have a right to appointed counsel. (Attorney-General Alberto) Gonzales should make that a priority; and if he refuses to, then Congress should." Tim Sparapani of the American Civil Liberties Union, a major advocacy group, sees the privacy issues arising from data collection for driver’s licenses as "the beginning of the slippery slope" toward a national I.D. card system.

"The act appears to be an end-around approach to creating a national identification card," he said in an interview. "The bill mandates too many standards for states to implement into their drivers licenses and identification cards, which creates unnecessary uniformity in design and function."

"Second, the bill coerces states into linking the data they acquire on applicants with similar databases from the other states. No one in the government can provide any credible assurances about who will have access to this information and how it will be used."

How the legislation will play out in the Senate remains unclear. Douglas G. Rivlin of the National Immigration Forum told IPS that "Rep. Sensenbrenner says it will be attached to ‘must pass’ legislation. This could be the request for supplemental funding for Iraq, Afghanistan, and tsunami relief."

However, Rivlin points out, "Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Sen. John Cornyn, a Republic from Texas, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Republican from Tennessee, have generally supported a ‘clean’ supplemental bill debate (excluding REAL I.D.), and prefer to consider provisions raised in REAL I.D. in the context of a broader immigration reform debate."

Meanwhile, President Bush has endorsed the REAL I.D. bill, but continues to push his "Guest Worker" programme, which would loosen restrictions on immigrant workers.

In a recent news conference, Bush said his programme would link up "a willing worker and a willing employer. The system right now spawns coyotes and smugglers and, you know, people willing to break the law to get people in our country."

Bush’s proposal would provide temporary legal status to illegal immigrants already in the country and to foreigners abroad to work for three-year intervals in the United States.

Sensenbrenner rejects the idea of putting the two ideas together. He believes Congress should act first to prevent illegal immigrants from getting driver’s licenses and pass other immigration restrictions.

"I think it’s important to get this legislation enacted and we ought to divide the debate between security and immigration. If we mix the two, the word will get out that immigrants are a security threat," Sensenbrenner said.

According to the Associated Press, the contrasting positions of the congressman and the president are expected to trigger "a new immigration debate between social conservatives, who say it’s too easy for would-be terrorists to enter the country, and employers, who say they can’t fill low-paying jobs with American workers." Most of the Sensenbrenner immigration provisions were included in the House version of the Intelligence Reorganization Act at the end of 2004, but were removed because of strong opposition from the Senate and the White House. The intelligence measure enacted into law many of the recommendations made by the 9/11 Commission.