On August 19, the Joe Biden administration announced a new initiative offering a pathway to legal status for an estimated 500,000 spouses of US citizens without requiring them to leave the country. The announcement quickly led to a backlash, with sixteen Republican-led states suing to end the federal programme on Friday.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton didn’t hold back, declaring on X (formerly Twitter), “I am suing the Biden Administration for their unlawful ‘parole in place’ policy that incentivizes and rewards illegal immigration.”
Even Tesla CEO Elon Musk jumped on the anti-immigration bandwagon, responding to Paxton’s post with, “As I’ve said before, the Dems are importing voters.”
But what is the policy that’s being criticised so fiercely?
The policy, which began accepting applications last week, allows many spouses without legal status to apply for “parole in place.” This offers them permission to stay in the US, apply for a green card, and eventually pursue citizenship. Named the “Keeping Families Together” programme, it aims to remove barriers that have long troubled non-citizen spouses of US citizens.
Ur Jaddou, Director of US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), explained, “Too often, non-citizen spouses of US citizens – many of them mothers and fathers – live with uncertainty due to undue barriers in our immigration system. This process to keep US families together will remove these undue barriers for those who would otherwise qualify to live and work lawfully in the US.”
The programme isn’t just about granting legal status; it’s also about improving the efficiency of the immigration system, focusing on non-citizens who have deep-rooted connections within American communities.
Who is eligible for the programme?
The programme, announced in June, allows spouses who have lived in the US for at least ten years as of June 17, 2024, to apply. It also extends eligibility to approximately 50,000 children under the age of 21 who have a US-citizen parent.
To qualify, immigrants must have lived continuously in the US for at least ten years, pose no security threat, and have no disqualifying criminal history. They must have been married to a US citizen by June 17 and pay a $580 fee to apply, along with providing extensive documentation.
What impact could this have on families?
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) noted that without this process, hundreds of thousands of non-citizen spouses of US citizens could remain in the United States without lawful status, leading to fear and uncertainty about their futures. DHS also pointed out that forcing spouses to leave the country would be “disruptive to the family’s economic and emotional well-being.”
Once granted permanent residence, eligible spouses can apply for citizenship after three years. During this time, they can also obtain work authorization.
Why are Republican states upset?
The Republican-led states argue that the Biden administration bypassed Congress to create a pathway to citizenship for “blatant political purposes.” In their lawsuit, filed in federal court in Tyler, Texas, they claim, “This action incentivises illegal immigration and will irreparably harm the Plaintiff states.”
Ken Paxton said in a statement, “The plan violates the Constitution and actively worsens the illegal immigration disaster that is hurting Texas and our country.” The lawsuit accuses the Department of Homeland Security of attempting to parole spouses “en masse,” which the states argue is an abuse of power.
How are others responding to the lawsuit?
Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody echoed Paxton’s concerns, stating in a post on X that her state is challenging the policy because the Biden administration “is illegally using parole’ in a systematic way to advance their open-borders agenda.”
On the other hand, the bipartisan immigration and criminal justice organisation FWD.us defended the programme, saying it complies with the law. They also pointed to the timing of the lawsuit, which came as Vice President Kamala Harris accepted the Democratic nomination for president. “The only motivation behind this lawsuit is the cruelty of tearing families apart and the crass politics of hoping a judge might do the bidding of the anti-immigrant movement,” the organisation said in a statement.
Karen Tumlin, founder and director of the Justice Action Centre, described the legal challenge as “unsurprising yet extremely disappointing and cruel.” She reassured that “nothing changes for now, and the process is still open and accepting applications.”
What are the concerns of the Republican states?
The lawsuit contends that states will bear the burden of additional immigrants staying in the country. Texas, for example, claims that it spends tens of millions of dollars each year on a programme that provides health insurance for children, including those in the country illegally. The state also argues that the programme will lead to increased crime, unemployment, and social disorder.
The lawsuit further claims that the additional workers, granted work authorization through the programme, will “drive down the wages of Texas residents, directly harming the State and its citizens.”
First Published: Aug 26 2024 | 1:13 PM IST
