Category Archives: Immigration Equality

Leahy withholds amendments for gay couples in immigration bill

Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) withheld UAFA as a committee amendment. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) on Tuesday withheld amendments to include gay couples as part of immigration reform in the aftermath of speeches — sometimes tearful — from Democrats on the panel who said they couldn’t support the measures.

After an extended speech on why he believes discrimination against gay couples is wrong — Leahy said “with a heavy heart” he wouldn’t introduce the amendments before the Senate Judiciary Committee. They would have made bi-national same-sex couples equal under the law to straight couples for immigration purposes.

“In the immigration context, if you’re an American and fall in love will someone of the same sex from a different country and you get married legally, your spouse will not be treated like any other immigrant spouse would be by your federal government,” Leahy said. “My amendments would change that. I don’t want to be the senator who asks Americans to choose between the love of their life and the love of their country.”

During his remarks, Leahy asked members of the “Gang of Eight” who produced the base bill and were also members of the Senate Judiciary Committee why they decided to exclude gay couples from the initial legislation.

Under current law, gay Americans are unable to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States — even if they’re married — unlike straight Americans. For couples that are married, that’s because of the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriage. LGBT advocates had been pushing Congress to rectify this issue as part of comprehensive immigration reform.

Two amendments were proposed by Leahy. One mirrored the Uniting American Families Act, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States. The other would have allowed for the approval of marriage-based green card applications for married same-sex couples.

Democrats who are known for being LGBT rights supporters — Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) — said they were torn on the issue, but couldn’t support the amendments out of fear they would lose Republican support and it would kill the legislative package.

Feinstein said the Supreme Court, which is currently considering the constitutionality of DOMA, may make the issue “moot” because a ruling against the anti-gay law in June would end federal discrimination against married same-sex couples.

“We now know that this is going to blow the agreement apart,” Feinstein said. “I don’t want to lose Sen. Graham’s vote because Sen. Graham’s vote can represent and be used as the rationale for dozens of other [lawmakers] who then will not vote for the immigration bill. … I am for what Sen. Leahy is proposing, I would just implore to hold off on this amendment at this time.”

Schumer, a member of the “Gang of Eight,” said he tried to persuade other senators to support the idea and believes current law is “rank discrimination,” but can’t bring himself to support the amendments because of Republican opposition.

“If we make the effort to add it to this bill, they will walk away,” Schumer said. “They’ve said it publicly, they’ve told me privately — I believe them. The result: no equality, no immigration bill. Everyone loses.”

Prior to the vote, Schumer was targeted by LGBT groups for being the only Democrat on the committee to not voice support for including UAFA as part of the larger package.

Durbin was particularly emotional and had tears in his eyes as he explained why they couldn’t support the measures. A member of the “Gang of Eight,” Durbin said he supports UAFA, but doesn’t see immigration reform as the best vehicle for the measure.

“I believe in my heart of hearts that what you’re doing is the right and just thing … but I believe this is the wrong moment, this is the wrong bill,” Durbin said. “There are approximately 250,000 LGBT undocumented immigrants in America that would benefit from passage of immigration reform. I want to make certain they have that chance.”

LGBT rights groups responded to the committee’s exclusion of same-sex couples from immigration reform with vocal disappointment.

Rachel Tiven, executive director of the LGBT group Immigration Equality, attended the markup and — while she said she’s “proud’ of Leahy for his support — expressed frustration with other Democrats.

“I’m very proud of Sen. Leahy; I’m very dismayed that his colleagues did not stand up with him to talk about the dignity of LGBT immigrant families,” Tiven said. “Only Sen. Leahy talked about the LGBT immigrants that he represents who have dreams, too, and who want to see a good bill passed that will help everyone, and who need immigration reform as badly as any other immigrant.”

Tiven named Democrats on the panel with whom she was particularly disappointed because of their previously articulated support for the LGBT community.

“To hear Sen. Durbin say, ‘Well, this is an outside issue like gun control,’ to hear that Sen. Franken didn’t speak up for families like Ginger and Ness Madeiros, whose visa runs out in August — what are they and their eight-month-old son going to do?” Tiven said. “I can’t imagine how they’re feeling right now about Sen. Franken. How could he not say these are immigrant families, too?”

With the exception of Schumer, Tiven maintained the Democrats on the panel expressed support for including same-sex couples in the reform package, which made their statements during the committee markup surprising.

But Republican members of the panel were most opposed to including the measures. They reiterated their opposition to including the measure in the package and said adopting them would break apart the coalition that helped put it together.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a Republican member of the “Gang of Eight,” said the legislation would lose support from evangelical Christians and the Catholic Church, who’ve supported the measure, if those protections were included.

“I support traditional marriage without animosity,” Graham said. “I’m not married; I guess that means maybe I shouldn’t speak at all about it, but I do believe that the people of my state, and the people of other states who have gone different ways than Vermont, believe it would throw the coalition out of balance.”

When Leahy asked Graham if anything in the amendments would require South Carolina to change its state law on marriage, Graham said no, but maintained it would be making him vote in favor of a concept he opposes.

“You got me on immigration; you don’t got me on marriage,” Graham said. “I can’t just tell any more directly; you want to keep me on immigration; let’s stay on immigration.”

Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), another GOP member of the “Gang of Eight,” also said he expected the coalition that put the bill together to fall apart if same-sex couples were included.

“This is an issue that is being addressed by the courts right now, I think that it would certainly upset the coalition that we have,” Flake said. “Certainly, we in Arizona, like in South Carolina, have spoken on the issue. It would certainly mean that this bill would not move forward. That would be a real shame, given how far we’ve come and the work that’s gone into this.”

Winnie Stachelberg, vice president of external affairs at the Center for American Progress, pointed at Republicans as the reason why same-sex couples weren’t included in the legislation.

“We’re all disappointed that at this juncture in the process, a small handful of Republicans prevented the provision from being voted on, but we’ve got a long way to go in the process and we’ll continue to work hard to secure the votes on the floor if it comes up,” Stachelberg said.

Following the discussion on the Leahy amendments, the committee reported out the legislation by a 13-5 vote. Supporters of immigration reform in the room — largely members of immigrant community — chanted, “Yes we can! Yes we can!” and embraced senators who voted in favor of the legislation as they snapped photos with them.

According to a report from the Williams Institute, an estimated 275,000 undocumented LGBT Americans would have a path to citizenship as the legislation currently stands if it reaches President Obama’s desk and is signed into law.

In a statement after the vote, Obama, who called for a gay-inclusive bill as part of his vision for reform, commended the committee for completing work on the legislation and urged a floor vote as soon as possible.

“None of the committee members got everything they wanted, and neither did I , but in the end, we all owe it to the American people to get the best possible result over the finish line,” Obama said. “I encourage the full Senate to bring this bipartisan bill to the floor at the earliest possible opportunity and remain hopeful that the amendment process will lead to further improvements.”

Leahy’s announcement came after an Associated Press report saying the White House had asked the Vermont senator to hold off on offering the amendments until the measure goes before the full Senate.

It’s unclear whether Leahy will introduce the amendments once the legislation reaches the Senate floor, which is expected early in June. Passage on the Senate floor would be significantly more difficult than passage would have been in committee if a 60-vote threshold is necessary to overcome a filibuster.

After the committee reported out the bill, the Washington Blade asked Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) whether he wants to see UAFA brought up as an amendment on the Senate floor.

“You’ll have to ask Sen. Leahy about that,” Schumer replied. “As you heard, I believe strongly in UAFA. I don’t think I have to say anything more; I spoke long enough on it.”

Although the amendment for same-sex couples wasn’t included, the committee on Monday rejected an amendment that would have removed a provision supported by LGBT advocates that was included in the base bill.

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) offered two amendments that would have eliminated the repeal of the one-year filing deadline for asylum seekers. One amendment failed on a vote of 6-12 and the other failed on a vote of 9-9.

LGBT advocates had supported that provision in the base bill because LGBT asylum seekers often don’t know they have a one-year deadline to apply for asylum in the United States, or lack financial resources to make the application.

Tensions high as Senate panel considers immigration reform

Advocates are looking to Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to amend the immigration bill with UAFA. (Blade file photo by Michael Key)

Tensions were high as observers waited to see on Tuesday whether Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) would introduce amendments before a Senate committee to include bi-national same-sex couples as part of comprehensive immigration reform. The committee is expected to wrap consideration of the measure by 10 p.m. Tuesday. The Washington Blade will update this post as developments warrant.

Leahy is facing pressure to withhold the amendments from Senate Republicans who say their introduction will kill the larger package and, according to recent media reports, from other Senate Democrats as well as the White House.

Both amendments were already filed by Leahy. One mirrors the Uniting American Families Act, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States. The other would allow for the approval of marriage-based green card applications for married same-sex couples.

At the start of Tuesday, many advocates were pessimistic about the chances of the amendments passing in the wake of comments from Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who said he won’t commit to supporting the amendments. His vote is necessary for unanimous support among Democrats and a majority vote in committee.

Steve Ralls, a spokesperson for the LGBT group Immigration Equality, said blame will be shared on both sides of the aisle if the committee doesn’t amend the immigration bill to include protections for gay couples.

“If the amendments are not offered for a vote, there will be bipartisan blame: On Senators Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Jeff Flake for making threats and bullying colleagues to abandon our families; and on Senator Schumer, for refusing to stand up, in the face of that bullying, for his own constituents who desperately need him to cast his vote in their favor,” Ralls said.

Lavi Soloway, a gay immigration attorney and founder of The DOMA Project, was anticipating defeat and criticized Schumer as well as Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), who only supports the DOMA carve-out amendment, for what he said was “betrayal” over not providing full support to the LGBT community.

“This was the moment that required courage and leadership,” Soloway writes. “The most vulnerable members of our community relied on Senator Schumer and Senator Feinstein to stand up for us and end decades of catastrophic and irreparable harm to our families caused by DOMA and our exclusion from U.S. immigration law.”

Leahy hasn’t committed to offering the amendments before the committee, although he has promoted their inclusion in immigration reform. A Senate aide said if they were to come up, they’d likely be the last piece of businesses for the final committee vote on reporting out the legislation to the Senate floor.

Adding to the tension was an Associated Press report saying that the White House had asked Leahy to hold off on introduction of the amendments until the legislation reaches the Senate floor. Passage on the floor would be more difficult than in committee and the amendments are unlikely to succeed there.

After the the daily briefing on Tuesday, the Blade shouted a question to White House Press Secretary Jay Carney to verify the accuracy of the report. Carney offered no response.

A Senate Judiciary committee aide also wouldn’t verify the accuracy of the Associated Press article.

“The chairman speaks to the president often but he does not discuss what they speak about in any given week,” the aide said.

The AP report comes of the heels of another report from Politico saying key Democrats on the panel asked the White House to intercede to persuade Leahy to hold off on introducing the amendments. The Vermont Democrat is quoted in the article as saying the issue didn’t come up in his discussion with the White House.

Ralls said the AP report indicates a lack of support and all parties who support LGBT rights should also advocate on behalf of the Leahy amendments.

“There is no pro-LGBT position to take in this debate other than full support for the chairman’s amendments,” Ralls said. “That’s what we expect from the White House, and every senator who has proclaimed their support for the repeal of DOMA and the equal treatment of our families under the law. You can’t say you support equality, and then work to delay or derail it.”

Dems seeking to delay gay-inclusive immigration reform?

Chuck Schumer, Charles Schumer, New York, United States Senate, Democratic Party, gay news, Washington Blade

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) is saying nothing in response to a Politico report that one advocate calls “alarming.” (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Key players in Senate talks on immigration reform are staying mum following a media report that Democrats are working to delay a vote on making the package gay-inclusive — prompting one advocate to call for the White House to intervene.

Late Thursday, Politico reported that Democrats are asking the White House to tell Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to withhold amendments for bi-national same-sex couples until the larger measure reaches the Senate floor — where passage will likely be more difficult.

“They’re increasingly uneasy about risking Republican support but reluctant to tell gay rights advocates that an amendment allowing American citizens to seek green cards for their same-sex foreign partners may not get a vote in the Judiciary Committee,” Politico reported.

Concern over the amendments follows remarks from Republican Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) — as well as comments from Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) to the Washington Blade — that including the pro-gay language would kill immigration reform.

LGBT advocates involved in talks told the Washington Blade they’re unaware of any such conversations between the White House and Democrats. Spokespersons for the Human Rights Campaign and Immigration Equality said the Politico report was the first they’ve heard about any such discussion.

Steve Ralls, an Immigration Equality spokesperson, said the White House should go on the record in response to the reporting — which he called “alarming” — because the LGBT community “has a right to know which particular senators” are “scheming to throw gay families under the bus.”

“The chairman has stuck his neck out for gay families, but I fear Schumer is working to avoid confronting the issue because of Republicans’ threats and intimidation,” Ralls said. “If the president is being asked to help slow down or stop a vote, the White House owes our families an assurance that he is refusing to do so.”

The White House didn’t respond to the Washington Blade’s request for comment on the Politico report.

Leahy has filed amendments before the committee along the lines of the Uniting American Families Act, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States.

One measure mirrors UAFA, the other is restricted to married bi-national couples. According to LGBT advocates, Leahy has given assurances that he’ll bring up the amendments as the committee considers family unification issues for immigration reform.

One group, Immigration Equality, says all Democrats on the committee have given assurances they’d support at least one of the measures — with the exception of Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). That’s just one vote short of a majority vote in committee.

The only Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who offered responses to the Blade on Friday were Sens. Chris Coons (D-Del.), Al Franken (D-Minn.), and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).

Speaking directly with Blade, Blumenthal said he supports the Leahy measures and is unaware of any talks to delay voting on them.

“I’ve heard nothing about it,” Blumenthal said. “I haven’t spoken with the White House about it; I haven’t heard of any Democrats talking to the White House.”

Ian Koski, a Coons spokesperson, said, “I’m afraid I haven’t heard anything about that other than press reports.”

Alexandra Fetissoff, a Franken spokesperson, was similarly unaware of the discussions detailed in Politico as she gave assurances on the Minnesota senator’s vote.

“We’re unaware of any conversation and Sen. Franken is definitely not making the request,” Fetissoff said. “He plans to support Sen. Leahy’s provision when it comes up for a vote.

But key players in the immigration talks didn’t push back against the Politico report to say that the assertions are untrue.

Schumer, a member of the “Gang of Eight” that produced the base bill, is the lone Democrat on the panel who hasn’t committed to voting for the amendments in the committee. His office didn’t respond to a request for comment.

The offices of Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), who are also members of the “Gang of Eight,” also didn’t respond.

In the Politico article, Durbin is quoting as saying Obama is “working behind the scenes,” but declined to give additional details. The article doesn’t quote him as saying whether the White House is involved positively or negatively in working toward a gay-inclusive bill.

The only Democratic member of the “Gang of Eight” who responded was Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.). Tricia Enright, a Menendez spokesperson, said she’s “not aware” of requests made to the White House to ask Leahy to hold off on the amendments.

Additionally, the office of Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) didn’t respond to a request for comment. According to Immigration Equality, her vote also was in question, but she’s given assurances she’d support the more restrictive amendment offered by Leahy limited to married bi-national same-sex couples.

As for what Leahy has been told, a Senate aide referred to the Politico article. The Vermont senator is quoted as saying he spoke with Obama regarding immigration reform on Wednesday, but the issue regarding gay couples didn’t come up.

“I am the most senior member of the Senate, I’m an experienced chairman. He’s happy I’m handling immigration,” Leahy reportedly said. “He hasn’t suggested whether I should or shouldn’t do it because he knows I’ll make up my own mind.”

Family unification issues for immigration reform, under which UAFA would fall, are scheduled to come up before the committee next week starting on Monday.

Ralls said he expects the amendments to come up on Tuesday, but cautioned they may not come up at all if Leahy feels he doesn’t have sufficient support in committee.

“We are concerned, given the very weak support of Democrats and ongoing threats from Republicans, that the amendments may not even be given an up or down vote in committee, despite Leahy’s leadership and passion for the issue,” Ralls said.

Blumenthal said the last he heard was that Leahy intended to offer the amendments in committee, but plans may have changed.

“The last I heard from him, he was going to proceed, but that was last week,” Blumenthal said. “I can’t speak for him. I don’t know what he intends to do, but I understood he was going to offer the amendment.”

Obama addressed the issue during a news conference as part of a visit to Costa Rica earlier this month. The president called including the provisions the “right thing to do,” but left the door open to signing a bill that lacked protections for bi-national gay couples.

“I can also tell you I’m not going to get everything I want in this bill,” Obama added. “Republicans are not going to get everything that they want in this bill.”

Eyes on Schumer in push for gay-inclusive immigration bill

Sen. Chuck Schumer‘s vote on gay-inclusion in immigration reform is in question. (D-N.Y.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has become the new focus for LGBT rights supporters seeking gay-inclusive immigration reform in the wake of comments he made suggesting he may not support amendments to include bi-national same-sex couples in the bill.

The senior senator from New York is seen as the only uncertain vote among the 10 Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee for two amendments that would enable gay Americans to sponsor their partners for residency in the United States.

Steve Ralls, a spokesperson for the LGBT group Immigration Equality, said late Thursday that “it has become crystal clear” that the fate of these amendments — proposed by Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) — now “rests entirely” with Schumer because his vote is needed to have majority support in committee.

“Sen. Schumer will determine if our families have the 10th vote they need,” Ralls said. “If he fails to offer that vote to Senator Leahy, and the chairman in turn cannot offer the amendment, it will be his fault, and his fault alone, that LGBT families are left behind.”

Earlier on Thursday, Schumer wouldn’t commit to supporting gay inclusion in immigration reform when speaking with reporters on Capitol Hill — even though he’s a co-sponsor of the Uniting American Families Act — on the basis that he thought their inclusion would derail the larger legislation. His office didn’t respond to the Blade’s request for comment on his position on the Leahy amendments.

According to Buzzfeed, Schumer said, “I’m not going get into speculatives. I would very much like to see it in the bill. But we have to have a bill that has support to get [the language] passed. That’s the conundrum.”

A member of the “Gang of Eight” that produced the base immigration bill, Schumer appears to be wavering amid threats from Republican members of the gang — including Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) — who threatened to kill reform if the amendments are included.

Ralls noted that Schumer voted in 1996 for the Defense of Marriage Act, and said a vote in favor of the amendments would make up for that anti-gay action.

“In 1996, Senator Schumer cast a vote in favor of DOMA,” Ralls said. “Now, he has the option of cleaning up the disastrous mess he helped make. He has so far chosen, instead, to deliver our opposition’s talking points for them.”

Leahy filed two amendments earlier this week that would incorporate same-sex couples as part of immigration reform. One is along the lines of the Uniting American Families Act, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the country, while the other would be restricted to bi-national same-sex couples who are married. The two amendments are among the more than 300 that are on the table.

Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, was more confident Schumer would cast a vote in favor of gay-inclusion if the amendments were brought to a vote.

“If Chairman Leahy offers either amendment he filed, and given Sen. Schumer’s long record of supporting LGBT equality, we would expect the senator to support either of them,” Sainz said.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans in the committee seem united in suggesting that including the amendments as part of comprehensive immigration reform would be unacceptable.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said on Thursday during a brief interview with the Washington Blade on Capitol Hill their inclusion “would kill the bill.”

“You’ve got to have a bipartisan, heavy majority in the Senate to be able to get this bill, and that would make it very difficult,” Hatch said.

Asked whether he’d vote “no” on the amendments, Hatch replied he hopes Leahy doesn’t bring up the amendments.

“If we can change the bill effectively, so that it will work, I would like the bill to go through,” Hatch said. “I don’t want to stop it. I have amendments that would stop the bill, too, but I’m not going to bring them up.”

Gregory Angelo, executive director of the Log Cabin Republicans, dismissed Hatch’s argument that gay-inclusion would kill immigration reform, pointing to the successful passage of the Violence Against Women Act reauthorization with LGBT provisions.

“The notion that something as simple as allowing married same-sex couples to sponsor their partner would kill the bill is preposterous,” Angelo said. ”LGBT provisions didn’t stop VAWA from passing in the Senate — and the House — and it won’t kill the CIR bill, either.”

The committee began consideration of amendments to the immigration reform on Thursday. Consideration of additional amendments is set to continue Tuesday, Thursday, May 20 and every day that follows until there’s a final vote on the bill.

Besides Schumer, Immigration Equality says the rest of the Democrats on the panel are “yes” votes. Durbin, another Democrat on the committee and member of “Gang of Eight,” isn’t in the same boat as Schumer because the Illinois senator has articulated support for the amendments. Max Gleischman, a Durbin spokesperson, confirmed for the Blade that his boss supports the measures.

During an interview with CNN on Sunday, Durbin commented on the prospects of including bi-national gay couples as part of immigration reform.

“I happen to believe that it’s consistent with the position we should have marriage equality, and therefore, recognize marriages between people from the same gender,” Durbin said. “Now, this is a hot issue. It’s a contentious issue. If we can find a way through this to protect that basic right of an individual and still pass immigration reform, that’s what I want to achieve.”

For a time, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), one of the Democrats on the committee, was seen as questionable because she expressed concerns over granting affidavits to same-sex couples as written under UAFA. Her office didn’t respond to the Blade’s request for comment on the amendments, but Ralls maintained his organization has received commitments that she’d vote for the Leahy amendment restricted to married bi-national same-sex couples.

Leahy also continues to promote the idea that protections for gay couples should be included as part of comprehensive immigration reform as more states continue to legalize same-sex marriage. He articulated his views in an interview with Politico published on Thursday.

“On this particular issue, you know, at some point we’re going to have to face it, and we have to decide when is the best time to face it,” Leahy said. “You can’t go into a state like mine or — it will be now 11 or 12 states and the District of Columbia — where same-sex marriage is legal, and say to this couple, ‘OK, we can help you with the immigration matter.’ Turn to another couple equally legally married and say, ‘Oh, we have to discriminate against you.’”

At the same time, debate is ensuing within the religious community about support for immigration reform if it includes language for bi-national couples.

According to the Associated Press, leaders from conservative religious groups who previously expressed support for immigration said during a conference call with reporters on Wednesday they would withdraw support if language for gay couples is included. Among the groups on the call were the Southern Baptist Convention and the National Association of Evangelicals

“We’re extremely hopeful that this bill will remain an immigration bill and not get tangled up with the issue of gay rights,” Richard Land, a leader of the Southern Baptist Convention, was quoted as saying. “But if it did, if it did, the Southern Baptist Convention would not be able to support the bill.”

But a letter dated May, 6 2013 to Leahy from a coalition of other religious groups calls for the inclusion of gay couples in immigration reform. Among the 15 signers are leaders from the Lutheran Church, the Episcopal Church and the Unitarian Church.

“More than 2,500 faith leaders from all fifty states, including 57 bishops of the Episcopal, Methodist, and Lutheran churches are part of the Faith Coalition for the Uniting American Families Act,” the letter states. “No reform of that system can truly be called comprehensive unless it includes all immigrant families, including the families of same-sex spouses and partners.”

LGBT groups push back against threats to gay-inclusive immigration bill

Dick Durbin, Chuck Schumer, Marco Rubio, John McCain, United States Senate, gay news, Washington Blade

(From left) Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) have expressed varying positions on LGBT-inclsuive immigration reform (Washington Blade photos by Michael Key)

LGBT groups are urging supporters of the Uniting American Families Act to stand firm in the face of threats from Senate Republicans that inclusion of gay couples in immigration reform would derail the larger legislation.

A number of LGBT advocates made statements this week calling for inclusion of bi-national same-sex couples amid expectations that the vote on including them as part of immigration reform could happen as early as next week. These advocates are seeking the addition of language along the lines of UAFA, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States.

Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign, issued a statement late Wednesday saying Congress must pass an immigration bill that includes gay couples and the notion that their addition would block the legislation from passing is an “offensive ruse.”

“This bluster is nothing more than a political maneuver designed to divide the pro-reform coalition and at the same time appease a small but vocal group of social conservatives that will do anything to stop progress for lesbian and gay couples,” Griffin said. “The LGBT community will not stand for Congress placing the blame of their own dysfunction on our shoulders.”

Another joint statement earlier in the day from a quintet of LGBT organizations — the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, the National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, United We Dream and Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project — expressed a similar sentiment.

“We do not believe that our friends in the evangelical faith community or conservative Republicans would allow the entire immigration reform bill to fail simply because it affords 28,500 same-sex couples equal immigration rights,” the organizations state. “This take-it-or-leave-it stance with regard to same-sex bi-national couples is not helpful when we all share the same goal of passing comprehensive immigration reform that provides a path to citizenship.”

Both of these statements emphasize that LGBT groups support passage of comprehensive immigration reform and take note of an estimate from the Williams Institute that 267,000 of the 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States are LGBT.

The moment of truth for whether UAFA will come up as an amendment when the Senate Judiciary Committee considers comprehensive immigration reform will come soon. The deadline for committee members to submit amendments to the bill is Tuesday at 5 p.m.; the members will decide which to offer during committee mark ups.

LGBT advocates say they’ve received assurances that UAFA will come before the committee — likely from Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), who sponsors the standalone bill. A committee aide wouldn’t say on Thursday whether a decision has been made on whether the amendment will be introduced, but added Leahy believes equality in family unification needs to be part of the reform package.

During a committee hearing last week, Leahy said the first day for voting on amendments will be next week on May 9. Thereafter, the committee will continue to consider amendments on May 14, May 16, May 20 and every day that follows to complete consideration and have a final vote on the bill. Chances are the amendment will come up on one of these later days.

Steve Ralls, a spokesperson for the LGBT group Immigration Equality, said on Tuesday he still expects a UAFA-like amendment to come up during the committee markup and remains confident the measure will succeed.

“Our expectation is still that we have the votes,” Ralls said. “I think, to be totally honest, at the end of the day, this is going to come down to a question of whether our friends on the committee buckle to the bullying of our opposition on the committee. I hope that’s not the case. I hope that’s not the case we’re counseling on all the Democrats to stand strong, but, as I predicted before, the opposition is going to be loud and is going to put a lot of pressure on our friends.”

But Senate Republicans are warning that inclusion of this provision would dismantle the bipartisan coalition and prevent the larger vehicle from finding the necessary 60 votes to pass on the Senate floor.

An article earlier this week in Politico titled, “Gay rights push threatens immigration deal,” quotes Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) as saying inclusion of UAFA will “virtually guarantee” the legislation won’t pass.

“This issue is a difficult enough issue as it is,” Rubio is quoted as saying. “I respect everyone’s views on it. But ultimately, if that issue is injected into this bill, the bill will fail and the coalition that helped put it together will fall apart.”

A similar article in the New York Times quotes Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), another member of the “Gang of Eight,” as saying he believes LGBT-inclusion in immigration reform would lead to failure for the immigration package.

“There’s a reason this language wasn’t included in the Gang of Eight’s bill: It’s a deal-breaker for most Republicans,” Flake is quoted as saying. “Finding consensus on immigration legislation is tough enough without opening the bill up to social issues.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is the only Democrat on the panel who doesn’t co-sponsor UAFA or made a public statement in support of it — even though she’s known as an LGBT advocate and has been the lead sponsor of legislation that would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act.

Ralls said another Democrat on the committee that’s of concern is Sen. Chuck Schumer, another member of the “Gang of Eight” — even though the New York Democrat is among the co-sponsors of UAFA because of his desire to see the overall immigration bill passed.

“The bill is Sen. Schumer’s baby; he’s part of the ‘Gang of Eight,’” Ralls said. “We know that he wants to see it passed. I know that probably, to be honest, Sen. Schumer is getting some of the biggest pressure from Republican colleagues on the committee because of his role in crafting the bill. Now, he has told families in New York that have met with him that he really wants to get this done. I don’t doubt that, and I hope that that’s the message he’s delivering to Republicans on the committee as well.”

Schumer’s office didn’t respond to the Blade’s request for comment for this article. An article earlier this month from Gay City News quotes the senator as saying, “I believe strongly in UAFA and I’m going to do everything I can to get it into the bill,” but also says he declined to speculate on how that would be accomplished.

Still, at least seven of the 10 Democrats on the committee have offered strong statements in favor of including UAFA as part of immigration reform, such as Senate Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), who said during a committee hearing that supporters of the bill will do “everything we can” to make sure UAFA is included in the bill.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the lone GOP co-sponsor of UAFA in the Senate, is pledging to take an active role in determining whether UAFA should be included in the bill. Kevin Kelley, a Collins spokesperson, told the Blade she’ll work with Leahy to determine “the best way to bring their bill before the Senate for consideration.”

“Sen. Collins’ Maine offices have been contacted by same-sex couples who have found themselves forced to choose between the person they love and the country they love due to our current immigration laws,” Kelley said. “More than two dozen countries already recognize same-sex couples for immigration purposes. The Uniting American Families Act would simply update our nation’s immigration laws to treat bi-national, same-sex permanent partners fairly.”

With questions over whether gay couples will be included in immigration reform, attention may turn to President Obama and whether he’ll push to make sure a provision for them is included. The White House has said Obama’s vision for immigration reform includes gay couples, but at the same time Obama has said he doesn’t want to be “heavy-handed” in telling Congress what the legislation should entail.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said during a press gaggle abroad Air Force on Thursday that Obama has been in contact with the major players on comprehensive immigration reform, but doesn’t have a read on whether LGBT inclusion was among the topics that were discussed.

“The legislation crafted by the ‘Gang of Eight’ broadly reflects the principles that the president has laid out, but it is not word for word in keeping with all of what he would do if he were to write it himself,” Carney added. “And we have said that we support that provision, but we also think it’s very important to recognize that the overall bill here accomplishes what the president believes needs to be accomplished and is in keeping with his principles.”

Should the amendment pass as part of the bill in committee, the next hurdle for UAFA will be making sure that it remains in the bill when it comes to the full Senate floor. But Immigration Equality’s Ralls anticipated that the 60-vote threshold to remove the provision wouldn’t be met and was confident it would remain intact.

The more daunting issue is the Republican-controlled House. That chamber hasn’t been amenable to pro-LGBT legislation, although it did pass an LGBT-inclusive bill to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act at the start of this Congress. Moreover, how the House will approach immigration reform remains in question. House Judiciary Committee Chair Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) has said he plans to handle immigration reform as a series of bills as opposed to a larger package at one time.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who sponsors UAFA in the House, said in a statement to the Blade on Thursday he’s talking with Senate colleagues about including UAFA as part of immigration reform, but the process in the House is still in an early phase.

“Inclusion in the Senate, or in the conference report that ultimately reconciles the Senate and House bills, may be our best chance for passage,” Nadler said. “It’s too early to speculate about the House process, as there is no bill, nor clarity from the Republican Leadership on its intentions. I have spoken directly with the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and others about UAFA, and I am gathering new cosponsors every day. I can assure you that I continue to work publicly and behind the scenes to ensure that the LGBT community is a part of immigration reform. We cannot solve one of our most pressing social problems – immigration – by leaving out a large and vital segment of our society.”

Gay couples lobby Congress on immigration reform

Shirley Tan, Jay Mercado, gay news, Washington Blade, immigration equality

Shirley Tan, Jay Mercado and children Jorienne and Jashley Mercado. (Washington Blade photo by Blake Bergen)

For Shirley Tan and Jay Mercado, the debate on comprehensive immigration reform in Congress is a make-or-break moment that will determine whether their family can remain together in the United States.

The California couple, among the estimated 36,000 bi-national same-sex couples living in the United States, paid a visit to Capitol Hill on Wednesday along with other couples for a lobby day bearing a singular message: include the Uniting American Families Act as part of larger immigration reform.

Tan, a 47-year-old Philippines native who was denied asylum in 2009 and has since been threatened with deportation, said the inclusion of UAFA would be incredibly meaningful for her San Francisco-based family — as well as for other bi-national couples.

“My partner Jay, for 27 years, is faced with the problem of whether she has to quit her job and take everybody back to the Philippines,” Tan said. “She has an ailing mother who is on dialysis treatment right now, and I’m the one taking care of her, so don’t know if we have to put her in the home, and what about the kids? The Philippines is a foreign country to them.”

About 50 gay, bi-national couples from 26 states came to Capitol Hill on Wednesday as part of a lobby day effort organized by the LGBT group Immigration Equality.

Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, called the lobbying by the couples “really a huge asset” in ensuring protections for same-sex couples are included as part of immigration reform.

“These families today are here to look their members of Congress [in the eye], especially look their senators in the eye, one more time and tell them how much this matters to LGBT families,” Tiven said. “Everyone here knows that they’re representing not only themselves, not only their state, but they’re representing all the LGBT immigrants around the country, and around the world, that are waiting for change.”

Bi-national same-sex couples, where one individual is a foreign national and another is a U.S. citizen, are threatened with separation under current immigration code once the foreign national in the relationship falls out of legal status.

Straight Americans can sponsor their partners for residency in the United States, but that option isn’t available to gay Americans because of the Defense of Marriage Act and because they can’t marry in many places within the country. UAFA would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency.

The moment for these bi-national same-sex couples will come soon. LGBT advocates are expecting an amendment along the lines of UAFA, which would enable gay Americans to sponsor their partners for residency in the United States, to come up when the Senate Judiciary Committee votes on the comprehensive immigration reform bill that was produced by the “Gang of Eight.”

On Wednesday, the couples met with a variety of lawmakers from across the country. On the agenda for Tan and Mercada was a meeting with staffers for Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). A member of the committee, Feinstein has yet to make a public statement on whether she’ll support UAFA as part of immigration reform.

Mercado, 52, said the meeting went well, but the staffer for the California senator wouldn’t make promises about how she’d vote if a UAFA amendment came before the committee.

“She doesn’t know the exact answer from the senator, but she’s positive that she will be doing the right thing,” Tan said. “They saw a lot of the families that are affected, and most of the families that are affected by, the most bi-national couples, are in California. They say it’s about 10,000 couples in California alone.”

Feinstein’s office is staying quiet about whether she will support UAFA. Asked by the Washington Blade whether she’ll vote in favor of the legislation as an amendment to comprehensive immigration reform, Brian Weiss, a Feinstein spokesperson, said on Wednesday, “Sen. Feinstein is taking a look at the legislation. No announcement at this time.”

The California senator’s silence on UAFA is striking because the former San Francisco mayor is known for being a strong supporter for LGBT rights. She’s been the lead sponsor of legislation aimed at repealing the Defense of Marriage Act. Feinstein has also introduced a “private bill” limited to Tan and Mercado to keep them together in the United States.

The couple also met with Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), another UAFA co-sponsor, who gave her personal assurances that she’d vote in favor of a UAFA amendment as part of immigration reform once the legislation comes over to the House.

Tan and Mercado have made their case on Capitol Hill before. In 2009, Tan testified before the Senate on the importance of passing UAFA. Her testimony at the time, in which she recalled her arrest in 2009 when immigration officials took her from her home, was considered moving. It inspired tears from her children, to whom Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) said their mother was a brave woman.

Jorienne and Jashley Mercado — now 16 — accompanied their parents for the lobby day on Capitol Hill to help make the case for UAFA and had an audience with Leahy himself, the sponsor of UAFA in the Senate, four years after that hearing.

“We thanked him for supporting our families and being a champion for our families, that he’s helping out all of us,” Jashley said. “He said, ‘I’m glad that I’m helping you guys because you guys are really an inspiration.’”

Jorienne said passage of UAFA as part of immigration reform would offer his family assurances that his mother would be able to stay in the country without fear of deportation.

“It would mean a tremendous amount to our family because our mom is such an integral part of our family,” Jorienne said. “If we don’t have her here with us, then we’re not a family.”

Despite words from supporters like Leahy, it’s not clear UAFA will ultimately be included in immigration reform. The Associated Press reported earlier this week that Democrats are “treading carefully” because they’re wary of adding another issue to immigration reform that has already been attacked by conservatives like Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.).

Still, Tiven maintained inclusion of same-sex couples in the larger vehicle would motivate the LGBT community to act.

“The LGBT community is a tremendous asset to pushing comprehensive immigration reform forward to the finish line,” Tiven said. “The LGBT community has proven over and over again — at the state level, at the federal level — we know how to get things done. We know how to pass legislation and we are bringing our power to LGBT-inclusive immigration reform.”

‘We still live in a very uncertain and scary place’

Also among the couples on Capitol Hill was Sam Conlon and Gary Wanderlingh, who reside in New Fairfield, Conn. Wanderlingh is seeking the opportunity to sponsor Conlon, a British national, for residency in the United States. Married in Connecticut in 2011, the couple has twice filed spousal petitions that were both denied on March 29.

While relocating to the United Kingdom is an option for the couple, Wanderlingh, 43, said he doesn’t want to leave New Fairfield because he’s taught in the same school district for 18 years. He’d lose his pension and would have to renew his teacher certification if he moved overseas.

“The most compelling thing is my elderly mother, where unfortunately my father passed away on what would have been our wedding day, our scheduled wedding day,” Wanderlingh said. “I made a promise to him that I would take care of mom, though now I’m being faced with the choice of breaking the promise that I made to Sam to be together for the rest of our lives.”

Upon their visit to Capitol Hill, the couple visited the office of Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), who’s already a UAFA co-sponsor. Conlon said they also spoke with staffers for Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Rep. John Larson (D-Conn.), and while they were supportive, received no commitments. Neither Murphy’s office nor Larson responded to the Blade’s request for comment on UAFA.

Conlon, 36, said he’s glad there’s an opportunity to have immigration reform passed that would help his family.

“We’re glad to see that there is a buzz around this,” Conlon said. “It’s very encouraging to see the winds changing in our direction in the last few months. But there’s never any guarantees, until it’s passed, until we know we have rights, we still live in a very uncertain and scary place.”

There could be another option for bi-national same-sex couples who are married. If the U.S. Supreme Court issues a ruling that strikes down Section 3 of DOMA, gay Americans could begin sponsoring their same-sex spouses for residency within the country. However, it’s not certain the court will strike down DOMA and other issues could arise in which UAFA would be needed.

Ben Story, Brandon Perlberg, gay news, Washington Blade, immigration equality

Ben Story and Brandon Perlberg (Washington Blade photo by Blake Bergen)

Brandon Perlberg, 35, and Benn Storey, 31, who are living in exile in London after Perlberg, a U.S. citizen, had lived in New York City for 15 years and Storey, a British national, lived there for seven years. Although they aren’t married, they’re engaged and planning a London wedding.

Perlberg, an attorney, explained he chose to live in exile with Storey, who couldn’t remain in the United States after his work visa expired and he couldn’t get a green card through his employer.

“Because I can’t sponsor him for a green card, it became clear that Benn was going to have to move to the U.K., and that meant that I had to make a decision over whether I was to live my life in the country, or move to England with the person that I love,” Perlberg said. “I chose the latter. We moved to the U.K. in 2012. UAFA is the bridge; UAFA is the instrument that gives us the ability to return to the United States.”

The couple met with staffers for lawmakers from New York — Reps. Hakeen Jeffries (D) and Carolyn Maloney (D) — and had plans to meet with staffers for Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), who co-sponsor UAFA.

“When you meet with a staffer, they can’t give you a firm position,” Perlberg said. “But I think that the meetings were generally positive. People seemed to understand our position, and as well, they seem to get that it’s not just about the couple, it’s about the couple’s family, it’s about the couple’s employers, it’s about the people that the couple relates to.”

Not every individual lobbied members of Congress with their significant other. Michael Upton, a gay 49-year-old South Hero, Vt., resident, came to Capitol Hill by himself because his partner of more than five years, a Brazilian national, is unable to come into the United States.

“It’s awful,” Upton said. “We’ve never been able to be together. He’s never met my family. My dad actually recently passed away. We petitioned for humanitarian parole so he could be there in Vermont, so we would have to choose. It was denied. I was in Brazil when my father died, so I couldn’t be with my family.”

Because the two live apart in different countries, Upton said he had to give up his job at the Veteran’s Administration caring for troops coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan to become a federal contractor so he could he have more flexibility to travel to see his partner.

Upton said he met on Capitol Hill with Leahy, and said the senator told him he’d do everything he could to ensure immigration reform is amended to include UAFA. Upton said he also met with staffers for gay Rep. Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) and Rep. Bill Owens (D-N.Y.), who also expressed support.

For Upton, passage of UAFA as part of immigration reform is the last hope for him and his partner to stay together in the United States. While he’s hopeful, he also realizes there’s no guarantee.

“This is the difference between whether or not we can continue,” said Upton as his eyes welled with tears. “I’m hopeful, but I’ve been hopeful about a number of opportunities for John to come and they’ve fallen flat. My state has the champion for this issue, and I think he’s completely committed, and he’s one of the most powerful men in the Senate, so if anybody can do it, he can.”

Immigration Equality, United States Senate, gay news, Washington Blade

Bi-national same-sex couples lobby Congress to include UAFA as part of immigration reform. (Washington Blade photo by Blake Bergen)

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article incorrectly attributed quotes to Sam Conlon and Gary Wanderlingh. Additionally, the article incorrectly suggested UAFA could be an alternative for gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States after DOMA is struck down if their relationship isn’t a legal marriage. However, UAFA won’t be operative for these couples after DOMA is gone because Section 2, Part D of UAFA states the law doesn’t apply to couples who are able to enter into “a marriage cognizable under the Act,” which would be all bi-national couples in a post-DOMA world. The Blade regrets the errors.

Lavi Soloway, a gay immigration attorney and co-founder of The DOMA Project, explained further the situation for bi-national couples in a post-DOMA world.

“After Section 3 of DOMA is struck down, many unmarried lesbian and gay binational couples will marry in the states or countries where marriage is legal for same-sex couples,” Soloway said. “Those couples already living in ‘marriage equality’ states will be able to marry where they live, while other couples will travel out of state to marry as gay and lesbian couples do every day in this country. Thousands of bi-national couples who are separated or exiled abroad and who are not married, may be eligible to petition for fiance visas so that the foreign partner can come to the United States to marry and to apply for a green card based on that marriage. Because immigration law is so complicated and so much is at stake in these cases, all binational couples are strongly advised not to take any action after the Supreme Court rules on DOMA without first seeking legal counsel. “

LGBT advocates hope to amend immigration bill

Advocates are looking to Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) to amend the immigration bill with UAFA.

The immigration reform proposal advanced by the “Gang of Eight” in the Senate is now public and lacks protections for bi-national same-sex couples, but plans are already underway to include the Uniting American Families Act at a later point during the legislative process.

On Tuesday, members of the bipartisan group working on comprehensive immigration reform unveiled a 19-page outline of the legislation that lays out components of the bill, including enhanced border security and a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants in the United States.

The outline doesn’t mention the Uniting American Families Act, legislation that would enable gay Americans to sponsor their foreign partners for residency in the United States. LGBT rights advocates, speaking to the Blade on condition of anonymity, said staffers for Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the “Gang of Eight,” informed them earlier this week the provision wouldn’t be included, which is consistent with earlier reporting from the Washington Blade.

Attention is now focused on Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the sponsor of UAFA, to see whether he’ll introduce the legislation when the committee reviews the “Gang of Eight” bill over the course of a process that’s expected to last weeks.

A Senate aide said Leahy still needs to review the final “Gang of Eight” legislation before announcing plans, but LGBT rights advocates say they’ve received assurances he’ll introduce UAFA as a committee amendment. Moreover, during a hearing on comprehensive immigration reform, Leahy expressed a commitment to including UAFA as part of comprehensive reform.

The amendment would almost assuredly pass if introduced in committee. The only two Democrats who aren’t co-sponsors on the committee are Assistant Majority Leader Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) — and they’re strong LGBT advocates in the Senate.

Steve Ralls, a spokesperson for the LGBT group Immigration Equality, said his organization has received assurances that UAFA will be amended in committee and all 10 Democratic members will vote in favor of it.

“They expect an amendment to be offered and they expect all their Democratic colleagues to vote in favor of that amendment,” Ralls said.

According to Ralls, Durbin had a phone call with constituents in Illinois earlier this week to talk about the immigration reform bill, and while the senator noted UAFA won’t be in the base bill, he gave assurances he and Schumer were expecting the opportunity to vote on the amendment in committee.

But the conservative makeup of the Republican members of the committee makes it unlikely UAFA will find bipartisan support. Members include Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) who expressed disapproval over including UAFA as part of the bill. The only GOP co-sponsor of UAFA is Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), and she’s not a member of the committee.

Fred Sainz, vice president of communications for the Human Rights Campaign, said on the day the immigration bill is offered his organization will issue an action alert to members and supporters who live in states represented by a Judiciary Committee member asking them to call their senators to urge them to vote for UAFA.

It remains to be seen whether Republicans can find a way to disrupt the amendment process in committee so that UAFA would ultimately not be included.

Ralls said Immigration Equality is speaking to senators from both sides of the aisle to encourage both Democrats and Republicans to vote for the bill and will bring in couples from across the country next week to Capitol Hill to make the case.

“We’re not taking anything for granted,” Ralls said. “There will certainly be loud and vocal opposition from some on the committee. We expect that. We’re not taking the votes for granted until the votes happen, but I can tell you based on our conversations with senators on the committee — and even more importantly, the conversations that senators have had with their constituents about this issue — we’re feeling pretty good that we have the votes to be added in committee.”

Even if the Senate ultimately passes a comprehensive bill that includes UAFA, whether the Republican-controlled House follows suit remains to be seen. According to The Huffington Post, the House may not even pass a comprehensive bill because House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) is considering breaking up the legislation and passing it in several installments.

LGBT rights advocates are pleased with other parts of the “Gang of Eight” bill. Ralls noted the outline includes an expedited pathway to citizenship for young, undocumented immigrants who would be eligible under the DREAM Act, many of whom identify as LGBT, and said he believes the bill will include a repeal of the one-year filing deadline for asylum speakers.

“That’s really critical for a lot of our clients,” Ralls said. “LGBT asylum seekers often do not know when they arrive in the U.S. that they have only one year to pursue asylum, and our legal team hears from many asylum seekers every year. You have really strong cases except they don’t meet they’re filing deadline, and that makes their case really tough.”

LGBT groups take part in D.C. immigration rally

Rea Carey, NGLTF, National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, immigration reform, gay news, Washington Blade

Rea Carey of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force speaks during a rally for immigration reform at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. (Photo by Kathy Plate)

Rev. Sarah Lamming of St. Margaret’s Episcopal Church in Annapolis, Md., moved to the United States from England nearly four years ago. She and her American-born wife married in Maryland in January, but she cannot obtain a spousal green card because the Defense of Marriage Act prevents the federal government from recognizing their marriage for immigration purposes.

Lamming added during an interview at Immigration Equality’s office in Northwest D.C. on Wednesday that the work visas that she had until 18 months ago did not reference her relationship. She even removed her wedding rings each time she went to a U.S. embassy or tried to re-enter the country.

“That’s frustrating because that’s not how I’ve lived my life — we’ve lived our life in the last four years,” Lamming said.

Lamming and her wife were among the tens of thousands of people who attended a rally in support of comprehensive immigration reform on the West Lawn of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday.

Rea Carey, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, addressed the crowd as Immigration Equality Executive Director Rachel Tiven and representatives from the Human Rights Campaign and other LGBT and allied organizations joined her on stage. Freedom to Marry, GLAAD, GetEQUAL, the National Black Justice Coalition, the National Center for Transgender Equality, the Trans-Latin@ Coalition and the Queer Undocumented Immigrant Project are among the 26 LGBT advocacy groups that issued a statement earlier in the day that urged Congress to pass a “fair and comprehensive” immigration reform bill.

“Immigration is a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and human rights issue,” Carey said.

Carey referenced a trans Mexican woman whom she said suffered “horrific abuse” while at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detention facility. She also noted during her speech that bi-national same-sex couples are threatened with “forced separation” because they cannot sponsor their partner for immigration purposes.

“It is cruel and unfair to force loving couples and families to live apart …to make them choose between family and country,” Carey said.

Members of the Latino GLBT History Project and Casa Ruby were among those who also took part in the rally.

Jim Bolas of Brooklyn, N.Y., attended the rally with his partner of five years, Christophe Lepage, who returned to France after he lost his work visa because his company laid him off during the 2008 financial crisis. They told the Blade as they and other Immigration Equality supporters prepared to leave for the Capitol they felt it was important to participate in the event.

“We really want to make sure that LGBTQ families and couples are represented in the immigration arguments,” Bolas said.

The rally took place as a bi-partisan group of U.S. senators appear poised to introduce a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the coming days.

“The ‘Gang of 8’ senators of which I am one — Democrats and Republicans — have come to an agreement on all the major issues,” U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) said as he addressed the crowd. “We are writing the bill as we speak.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to begin considering the proposal next week. Tiven and New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler told the Blade on Monday it is unlikely to contain any LGBT-specific language.

Neither Menendez nor U.S. Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.,) who addressed the march as several of his congressional colleagues stood on stage with him, referenced bi-national same-sex couples during the event.

“There is success only when there is a consistent and persistent demand from the people,” the Illinois congressman told reporters from Spanish-language media outlets during an impromptu press conference after he spoke. “They have once again shown with their cries today that they will be consistent and persistent. And if Congress does not act, you will see the mobilization of our community on every street corner, in every neighborhood, in every house, in every city and in every state in the United States. We will not rest.”

Carey told the Blade during the rally her organization will continue to work to ensure lawmakers include the Uniting American Families Act that would allow gays and lesbians to sponsor their partners for immigration purposes into any final measure.

“We would be very disappointed if it’s not included in the base bill, but we’ve got a long road to go on this bill,” she said. “There are a lot of stops along this train ride and we intend to push for the inclusion of bi-national couples every step of the way.”

President Obama in January unveiled his immigration reform proposal that includes bi-national couples. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano in February told the Senate Judiciary Committee the White House supports a provision that would allow gays and lesbians to sponsor their foreign-born partners for immigration purposes.

Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy is expected to add UAFA as an amendment to the ‘Gang of 8’ bill once the Senate Judiciary Committee begins to consider it next week.

“We will then be pushing our allies on the Hill strongly to protect the language on the Senate floor,” HRC spokesperson Michael Cole-Schwartz said in response to the Blade’s question about whether the organization would publicly endorse an immigration reform measure that does not include bi-national same-sex couples.

Lamming and others who attended the rally said they hope Congress will support an LGBT-inclusive bill.

“This bill does not treat a section of the population with dignity,” she said. “This law precludes me from becoming part of the United States and my family is suffering from that.”

D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray appeared to agree as he spoke at the march.

“We want a law that protects the most vulnerable among us: our women, our children and our LGBT communities,” he said.

Tens of thousands gathered at the U.S. Capitol on April 10 for a rally in support of comprehensive immigration reform. (Washington Blade photo by Michael K. Lavers)

Time for laws to catch up to nation’s values

Chad Griffin, Human Rights Campaign, gay news, Washington Blade

Human Rights Campaign President Chad Griffin. (Washington Blade file photo by Blake Bergen)

By CHAD GRIFFIN

For the LGBT community, equality in immigration is one of the many struggles that have driven our movement since its earliest days. For much of the 20th century, in the days before Stonewall, immigrants to the United States that were deemed to be sexual or gender minorities were labeled “deviants” or “psychopaths” and turned away—often sent back home to even more unfriendly shores.

It seems like we’ve come a long way since then, and in many ways we have. But as conversations around comprehensive immigration reform heat up, the American people shouldn’t overlook the discrimination that is still on the books to this day.

Because of DOMA, bi-national same-sex couples are treated like strangers by the federal government in immigration cases, even if the couple has a valid, state-granted marriage license. LGBT asylum seekers, often from countries with violently anti-gay environments, are denied a safe place to call home because of an arbitrary one-year filing deadline. And undocumented LGBT youth eligible for the DREAM Act are still waiting for Congress to give them a shot at a hopeful future.

Too many families have been torn apart by legal discrimination based on nothing but animus. Too many committed and loving couples have had to make the truly painful choice between the person they love and the country they love. And too many good, upstanding people are denied a chance for a better life because of who they are or who they love.

It is time to take action to right these wrongs. Today, comprehensive immigration reform is back on the table. The American people, members of Congress in both parties and President Obama all agree that it’s time to take lasting and decisive action. These opportunities don’t come along every day. The last major immigration reform bill was signed into law in 1986. It takes an alignment of the political stars to get it done.

But a lot has changed since 1986. It’s no longer an acceptable option to simply sweep LGBT immigrants and their needs on the back burner. That’s why last week the Human Rights Campaign released our declaration of principles on immigration reform—including nine key reforms that must be included in a truly inclusive and comprehensive bill.

Simply put, a “comprehensive” bill must live up to its name. Any legislation that is signed into law must acknowledge that no matter who you are—LGBT or non-LGBT—if you’ve worked hard and paid your dues, you’ve earned a fair and equal shot at the American Dream. This country has a proud history of rolling back laws that treat people differently for no good reason, and immigration reform must continue that proud heritage.

After all, we’re at a historic moment of national consensus. Today, the American people agree on at least two things: treating LGBT people fairly and reforming our broken immigration system. Now it’s time for our laws to catch up to our national values. As a matter of basic justice for all, it’s time for truly inclusive comprehensive immigration reform.

Chad Griffin is president of the Human Rights Campaign. Reach him via hrc.org.

LGBT groups to participate in immigration march

Immigration Equality, gay news, Washington Blade

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The Human Rights Campaign is among the LGBT advocacy groups expected to take part in a rally for comprehensive immigration reform in D.C. on Wednesday.

“We’re going to have terrific participation from a really broad array of LGBT and LGBT immigrant groups,” Rachel Tiven, executive director of Immigration Equality, said during a Monday conference call that previewed the gathering that will take place at the U.S. Capitol. “We’re really going to have a really robust contingent that will be very visible.”

Organizers expect tens of thousands of people from across the country will attend the march.

NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray, SEIU President Mary Kay Henry, Illinois Congressman Luis Gutierrez, Dolores Huerta and Grammy-award winner Olga Tañon are among those expected to attend.

The so-called “Group of 8” senators who include New York Sen. Charles Schumer and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio could potentially introduce a comprehensive immigration reform bill by the end of the week. Tiven said on Monday she does not expect it will include same-sex couples.

Gay What?

NEWS