Walking the Path to Citizenship

Rebecca Kaplan
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Rebecca Kaplan
Sept. 2, 2013, 8:09 a.m.

It has been 13 years since Car­los Crespo crossed the bor­der from Mex­ico in­to the United States in the desert near No­gales, Ar­iz. The “coyote” he paid $1,000 to help him cross later went to pris­on. Crespo went to Bal­timore.

And there, he built a life that would look fa­mil­i­ar al­most any­where in the U.S. He met and mar­ried Christina, who is also from Mex­ico. They had a daugh­ter, Veron­ica. At 43, Crespo spends his days work­ing at an auto body shop, where he has held a job for the last 11 years, and vo­lun­teer­ing at Casa de Mary­land, an ad­vocacy group that helps im­mig­rants.

And he watches the im­mig­ra­tion de­bate tak­ing place 39 miles away in the U.S. Cap­it­ol, which will largely de­term­ine his fam­ily’s fu­ture.

“I have faith that we are go­ing to pass im­mig­ra­tion re­form,” he said in Span­ish, speak­ing in Casa de Mary­land’s Bal­timore of­fice. “There is a lot of pres­sure now … we don’t want to sleep. We want to keep fight­ing, keep push­ing the Re­pub­lic­ans be­cause we know it is their de­cision. They’ll do what they want, but we are send­ing the mes­sage that if they don’t pass im­mig­ra­tion re­form, those who can vote won’t vote for them.”

As the year goes on, the pro­spects of Con­gress passing an im­mig­ra­tion bill that in­cludes a path­way to cit­izen­ship have grown dim­mer. The Sen­ate backed a bill in late June that out­lines a roughly 13-year pro­cess. That’s likely to be even more ar­du­ous in the House — if the House ap­proves any­thing at all. (So far, com­mit­tees have passed five im­mig­ra­tion bills, but none deals with a path to cit­izen­ship.)

While Con­gress ad­dresses many vi­tal is­sues — from food stamps to de­clar­a­tions of war — few have the type of dir­ect im­pact that a path­way to cit­izen­ship would have on the 11 mil­lion people liv­ing il­leg­ally in the United States. For them, the abil­ity to be­come U.S. cit­izens could change everything, from wheth­er they can drive leg­ally and buy a home to where they can work and wheth­er their chil­dren can af­ford col­lege.

There’s also the fear of de­port­a­tion, which, however low the chances, is a ma­jor is­sue for Crespo. His daugh­ter, now 3, has Down syn­drome, and Crespo is wor­ried about hav­ing to leave the U.S. be­cause he says the level of health care in Mex­ico is not as good. Here, his daugh­ter was able to get in­sur­ance, but their doc­tor at Johns Hop­kins told Crespo that her life de­pends on the treat­ment she is re­ceiv­ing.

However, an op­por­tun­ity for cit­izen­ship would af­fect Crespo in many ways. He would like to buy a house. He would like to stay act­ive in U.S. polit­ics. He’s been vo­lun­teer­ing with Casa de Mary­land for eight years, help­ing to do out­reach in his com­munity, and he loves that he can go to An­na­pol­is and talk dir­ectly to the state’s law­makers. In Mex­ico, he said, you can’t do that.

Per­haps most im­port­ant, Crespo said, he wants the op­por­tun­ity to demon­strate that he’s not here to live off the gov­ern­ment. “We want Re­pub­lic­ans to give us the op­por­tun­ity to demon­strate that we want this coun­try, we want to move this coun­try for­ward, really. We’re not a bur­den,” he said. “Many con­ser­vat­ives think that people are liv­ing off the gov­ern­ment be­cause they don’t pay taxes. So this is what we want to demon­strate to them, that we can move the coun­try for­ward to­geth­er.”

No Easy Path

Any path­way to cit­izen­ship passed by Con­gress will not be easy.

Un­der the Sen­ate bill, people like Crespo would have to spend 10 years as a re­gistered pro­vi­sion­al im­mig­rant and be sub­ject to a host of re­quire­ments. If they are con­tinu­ously em­ployed; speak or are learn­ing Eng­lish; study U.S. his­tory; pay a pro­cessing fee, a fine, and back taxes; and pass a back­ground check, they can ap­ply for a green card — provided the back­log has been cleared. After three years of law­ful per­man­ent res­id­ent status, people may ap­ply to nat­ur­al­ize as cit­izens.

Yet Crespo, like many oth­ers, says that the even a long, com­plic­ated, and ex­pens­ive path­way to cit­izen­ship is worth­while. He’s more com­fort­able com­mu­nic­at­ing in Span­ish, and he doesn’t think he could pass an Eng­lish test right now. But if a re­form bill makes it all the way to the pres­id­ent’s desk, Crespo said he’ll be ready.

That won’t be the case for every­one. Even if a law is passed that of­fers il­leg­al im­mig­rants the chance to gain leg­al status and cit­izen­ship, his­tory shows that many will not take ad­vant­age of the op­por­tun­ity.

A study con­duc­ted by the Home­land Se­cur­ity De­part­ment found that of the 2.7 mil­lion people who were giv­en leg­al per­man­ent res­id­ent status un­der the 1986 Im­mig­ra­tion Re­form and Con­trol Act, only 41 per­cent chose to nat­ur­al­ize by 2009.

Even now, im­mig­rants who are gran­ted leg­al per­man­ent res­id­ency don’t al­ways be­come cit­izens. Ac­cord­ing to a study by the Pew His­pan­ic Cen­ter re­leased earli­er this year, the num­ber of eli­gible im­mig­rants from Lat­in Amer­ica and the Carib­bean who had not yet nat­ur­al­ized by 2011 ex­ceeded those who did seek cit­izen­ship. Rates of nat­ur­al­iz­a­tion are par­tic­u­larly low among Mex­ic­an im­mig­rants, the largest pop­u­la­tion that stands to be­ne­fit from le­gis­la­tion that in­cludes a path­way to cit­izen­ship.

More than nine in 10 Latino leg­al per­man­ent res­id­ents ex­press a de­sire to nat­ur­al­ize, but 45 per­cent have cited per­son­al or ad­min­is­trat­ive bar­ri­ers to ap­ply­ing, such as in­suf­fi­cient Eng­lish (26 per­cent). Nearly all of those who cite ad­min­is­trat­ive bar­ri­ers (18 per­cent) say the $680 cost of a cit­izen­ship ap­plic­a­tion is pro­hib­it­ive — and un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants be­ing offered pro­vi­sion­al status would have to pay ad­di­tion­al fines be­fore even get­ting the chance to nat­ur­al­ize.

Fo­cused on Fam­ily

While get­ting to cit­izen­ship would be dif­fi­cult, life without pa­pers might be even harder.

One com­mon theme is fam­ily sep­ar­a­tion. For ex­ample, Al­b­er­tina — or “Tina,” as her friends call her (she de­clined to sup­ply her last name be­cause of her leg­al status) — came to Bal­timore from Mex­ico nine years ago on a tour­ist visa and stayed. Three of her daugh­ters were born in her home coun­try, but the fourth was born in the U.S. and is a cit­izen.

Tina’s old­est daugh­ter re­turned to Mex­ico to pur­sue a col­lege edu­ca­tion. Mary­land voters had not yet ap­proved a 2012 bal­lot ini­ti­at­ive that would grant in-state tu­ition to un­doc­u­mented stu­dents; without those lower rates, col­lege was out of the ques­tion in the United States.

Now, Tina’s eld­est daugh­ter can’t leg­ally come back to the United States be­cause au­thor­it­ies know that she once over­stayed a visa. But they hope she’ll be able to come back un­der a re­form bill.

For oth­ers, work be­comes a prob­lem. That is the case for So­nia, 50 (who also de­clined to sup­ply her last name), a Per­uvi­an wo­man who lives with her hus­band and two daugh­ters in Broward County, Fla. In her home coun­try of Peru, So­nia had stud­ied psy­cho­logy at Uni­ver­sid­ad Inca Gar­cilaso de la Vega. Her hus­band, Dante, had star­ted law school. They came to Flor­ida on tour­ist visas with their two young daugh­ters in search of a bet­ter life. The fam­ily spent time and money work­ing with law­yers to leg­al­ize their status, but they were un­suc­cess­ful.

So­nia was able to val­id­ate her cre­den­tials, but she couldn’t find work. She was es­pe­cially dis­ap­poin­ted that she couldn’t take a job she was offered as a psy­cho­lo­gist work­ing with chil­dren in her nat­ive Span­ish lan­guage. So she and her hus­band first found jobs clean­ing at the loc­al mall. Now, she cleans houses and Dante works the night shift at a gas sta­tion. So­nia rides her bike to work; the fam­ily made the de­cision that only her hus­band should take the risk of driv­ing without a cur­rent li­cense.

So­nia’s old­est daugh­ter, however, is an ex­ample of someone who has been able to prosper when giv­en a leg­al av­en­ue to do so.

Pres­id­ent Obama en­acted the De­ferred Ac­tion for Child­hood Ar­rivals pro­gram in 2011. It pre­vents un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants between the ages of 15 and 31, who were brought to the coun­try be­fore they turned 16 and who can prove con­tinu­ous res­id­ence since 2007, from be­ing de­por­ted.

Sofia, 19, was gran­ted de­ferred ac­tion status, and was able to start tak­ing classes at Broward Col­lege, al­though she’s lim­ited to two a semester be­cause she can’t af­ford to take a full load with the out-of-state tu­ition rates she must pay. So­nia notes with pride that Sofia also has a full-time job, “not in clean­ing, not in con­struc­tion, not in garden­ing. She got a job at an or­tho­dont­ic lab.”

The Dream­ers

Young un­doc­u­mented im­mig­rants like So­nia’s daugh­ters are the most likely sub­set of the en­tire pop­u­la­tion in the U.S. il­leg­ally to be gran­ted some sort of re­lief. The so-called Dream­ers have be­come one of the rare points of agree­ment in the im­mig­ra­tion de­bate: Few people be­lieve that those brought to the coun­try as chil­dren should be de­por­ted (though a Dream Act died in Con­gress as re­cently as 2010).

As their ranks have be­come more vis­ible and vo­cal, they have star­ted to push law­makers to ad­dress their situ­ation, and to keep their fam­il­ies to­geth­er, too.

“To me, as a per­son that con­siders her­self an Amer­ic­an, a cit­izen­ship is not a pa­per, it’s not a nine-di­git num­ber,” said Gaby Pacheco, one of the most prom­in­ent faces of the Dream­er move­ment, who came to the U.S. il­leg­ally from Ecuador with her fam­ily when she was 8. “It means so much more. It means be­ing able to “¦ pur­sue my own hap­pi­ness.”

Un­der the Sen­ate bill, people who can prove they were brought to the U.S. be­fore the age of 16 are gran­ted an ac­cel­er­ated path­way to cit­izen­ship: They only have to spend five years in pro­vi­sion­al status be­fore be­ing eli­gible to ap­ply for a green card, fol­lowed by cit­izen­ship three years later. That could open up op­por­tun­it­ies for thou­sands of young im­mig­rants without pa­pers, just as the de­ferred-ac­tion pro­gram has done so for 22-year-old Ray Jose.

Jose’s par­ents brought him from the Phil­ip­pines to the U.S. when he was 9, in search of more op­por­tun­it­ies and a bet­ter edu­ca­tion. They came on tour­ist visas but did not leave. Jose grew up like the oth­er kids in Rock­ville, Md., at­tend­ing school and play­ing base­ball and lacrosse. It was only when he was a seni­or in high school, and offered a track schol­ar­ship to Vir­gin­ia Tech, that he learned about his status. When he came home to share the news with his par­ents, his moth­er said to him in their nat­ive lan­guage of Ta­ga­log, “My son, please for­give me,” and ex­plained the story of how he had come to the U.S.

With low-pay­ing jobs — his moth­er is a care­taker for the eld­erly, and his fath­er works at a print­ing press — col­lege would be un­af­ford­able for the fam­ily, and he wouldn’t be able to ap­ply for fin­an­cial aid. Mary­land had not yet passed its own ver­sion of the Dream Act that would grant in-state tu­ition to un­doc­u­mented youth.

“Everything that I was taught — if you work hard, get your edu­ca­tion, you can do what you want. I’m not in that same situ­ation,” Jose said. His par­ents were able to scrape to­geth­er enough money to pay for one semester at Mont­gomery Col­lege, the loc­al com­munity col­lege, where he fi­nally met oth­er people like him. In the Filipino com­munity, he ex­plained, be­ing un­doc­u­mented is frowned upon and not widely dis­cussed.

He got in­volved in push­ing the Mary­land Dream Act, and works now as an or­gan­izer for United We Dream, a group that ad­voc­ates for young im­mig­rants and their fam­il­ies. He goes to school part time so he can work to help sup­port his fam­ily, and his ap­plic­a­tion for de­ferred ac­tion was gran­ted. But he wants an im­mig­ra­tion bill that would put him on a path­way to cit­izen­ship so he can have op­por­tun­it­ies, like the chance to do car­di­ology re­search, much of which is fun­ded by the gov­ern­ment and would re­quire him to have leg­al status or cit­izen­ship. Plus, he wants the chance to vote; to have peace of mind that his par­ents won’t be de­por­ted; and he wants them to be able to travel to the Phil­ip­pines to see mem­bers of their fam­ily from whom they’ve been sep­ar­ated for 13 years.

“For my fam­ily over­all, it would mean that we’d ac­tu­ally be Amer­ic­ans on pa­per, be­cause in our minds and in our hearts ever since we left the Phil­ip­pines I think we’ve been pur­su­ing the Amer­ic­an Dream,” he said. “We’ve had that prob­lem where we’re Amer­ic­ans, but it just doesn’t say it on pa­per.”

What We're Following See More »
Pai Officially Announces Intent to Scrap Net Neutrality Rules
2 hours ago
Conyers Denies Settling Harassment Claims
2 hours ago
Mugabe Resigns, Ending Impeachment Debate
3 hours ago
White House to End TPS Program
3 hours ago

"The Trump administration is ending a humanitarian program that has allowed some 59,000 Haitians to live and work in the United States since an earthquake ravaged their country in 2010, Homeland Security officials said on Monday. Haitians with what is known as Temporary Protected Status will be expected to leave the United States by July 2019 or face deportation. ... About 320,000 people now benefit from the Temporary Protected Status program, which was signed into law by President George Bush in 1990."

Federal Judge Blocks Sanctuary Cities Order
3 hours ago

"A federal judge on Monday permanently blocked President Donald Trump's executive order to cut funding from cities that limit cooperation with U.S. immigration authorities. U.S. District Court Judge William Orrick rejected the administration's argument that the executive order applies only to a relatively small pot of money and said Trump cannot set new conditions on spending approved by Congress. The judge had previously made the same arguments in a ruling that put a temporary hold on the executive order."


Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.