Why the House Proposal makes no sense?

by Rehan Alimohammad

So, we finally have some insight into which way the House group is leaning with its immigration legislation. 3 paths towards a green card. Sounds good so far, right? A quick path for "Dreamers"? No real surprise here. That path would be shared by agricultural workers. All sounds good right?

Then we get to the second and third paths. The second group would be those who have a family or employment connection that would allow them to apply for a green card but they entered illegally, and presumably they do not qualify under 245i. They would have to leave and return to their country and wait out the 3 or 10 year bar before they qualify? Wait…lets compare it to the third path.

The third path does not have the family or employer sponsor that the 2nd path does, and they would have to wait 10 years for a green card, if they meet all the requirements that were set out in the Senate proposal, with citizenship in 5 years instead of 3 years under the Senate. So no sponsor, and still a green card within 10 years just like in the second path? Sounds good and identical to the Senate plan. But here's the KICKER: the people in the third path don't have to leave the country and instead get a provisional status and can work and stay here during the process. Wait? How is this fair? And why would people choose the 2nd path where they would have to uproot their families and break ties they have created after years of living in the United States to get a green card in the same amount of time as people with no sponsor?

I hate to say it but I think someone in the House is confused. Let's hope someone irons out this kink. Or is this in there just to cause more argument and delay possible reform? Time will tell.


About The Author

Rehan Alimohammad, and Attorney and CPA, is the Partner in charge of Immigration and Tax Matters at Alimohammad & Zafar, PLLC and has written over 200 articles on immigration topics in community papers. He has also given over 100 seminars on immigration topics and has a bi-weekly radio show on 1460 A.M. in Houston, Texas discussing the latest in immigration developments and answering immigration questions. He received his undergraduate degree at the University of Texas in Austin, and his law degree in 2001 from the University of Houston.


The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone and should not be imputed to ILW.COM.