 |
 |
|
|
| Thousands of gay Americans cannot live in the U.S. with their same-sex partners because federal immigration laws do not recognize their relationships, according to a new report. (Photo courtesy of Immigration Equality) | |
|
By JOSHUA LYNSEN
May 2 2006, 1:23 PM |
|  | 
U.S. immigration laws have physically separated
thousands of gay Americans from their non-American partners and Congress should act so they can legally
reunite, according to a new report.
-IMG-The report — "Family, Unvalued"
released May 2 — evaluates how U.S. immigration policies affect gay Americans and their families. It also criticizes federal officials for
not offering gay foreigners an opportunity to live permanently with their
partner in the United States.
"We want people to understand that this isn't an
accident or an oversight of the immigration law," said Rachel B. Tiven,
executive director of Immigration Equality. "It's not a benign neglect. It's
really a nasty and pointed exclusion."
The 191-page report was prepared by Immigration Equality, a
New York organization that seeks equality for gay and HIV-positive immigrants,
and Human Rights Watch.
"Family reunification is an express and central goal of
U.S. immigration policy and has been for more than 50 years," the report
says. "But, lesbian and gay people's families do not count. Their partners
are excluded from the definition of spouse."
Tiven said the report was written to unveil how difficult
life is for the nation's many binational gay couples, the term used for a relationship involving partners with citizenship in two different countries.
"This is not a minor inconvenience," she said. "This
is really a life-altering situation for the couples that are trapped in it."
According to the 2000 Census, there are about 36,000 gay
couples with one U.S. citizen and one foreign national. This represents about 6
percent of all gay couples in the country.
"Family, Unvalued" urges Congress to pass the
Uniting American Families Act, a proposal that would allow binational gay
couples to permanently live in the United States.
"The United States urgently needs to enact comprehensive
immigration reform," the report says, "ensuring adequate and fair
avenues for immigrants to enter the United States both temporarily and
permanently and offering reasonable roads to legal status for undocumented
immigrants already living and working in the country."
"Family, Unvalued" is considered the first
comprehensive report on this topic. It will be cited frequently as proof of the
discrimination decried by organizations like the Love Exiles Foundation, a group for gay Americans living "in exile" abroad because they cannot bring their partners to live with them in the U.S.
On its website, Love Exiles says UAFA "would make a
huge difference in the lives of gay and lesbian binational families."
107 sponsors, no action
The UAFA is not part of the immigration reform proposals now being debated
by Congress.
Although there is support for UAFA from some members of both parties, no
congressional leaders from either political party have indicated any strong
interest in discussing it.
Introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Rep. Jerrold
Nadler (D-N.Y.), UAFA has 11 Senate sponsors and 96 House sponsors.
Nadler's press secretary, Reid Cherlin, said the UAFA goes "part
and parcel" with the ongoing immigration discussion. But it's unlikely the
gay-positive bill will be part of any reform passed by Congress.
"We're fairly sure the Republican majority has no
intention to bring a bill like this up for a hearing," he said, "much
less a vote."
Leahy's press secretary, David Carle, last month said he's
seen no signal that UAFA will become incorporated into pending immigration
reform.
Calls to majority leaders Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) and Rep.
John Boehner (R-Ohio) were not returned. Neither are sponsoring UAFA
legislation.
Cherlin said Nadler welcomed the attention that "Family,
Unvalued" brings to binational gay couples, and UAFA.
"We're not going to score a win until it's law," he
said, "but every instance of mounting public pressure is a success."
And Tiven said as public pressure mounts, more lawmakers are
swayed. She noted that Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) recently became the
third House Republican to sponsor UAFA.
Tiven said national rallies for immigration reform have given
UAFA advocates new opportunities and allies. UAFA supporters include the
American Immigration Lawyers Association and the National Immigration Forum.
"What we're really trying to capitalize on is the energy
and enthusiasm for immigration law in general," she said. "We can
take the opportunity, while immigration is on everybody's tongue, to push for
this."
Late action stirs resentment
But some political observers said such efforts have stirred
resentment.
Glenn Magpantay, a gay staff attorney for the Asian American
Legal Defense & Education Fund in New York, said some immigrant advocates
have quietly criticized UAFA proponents for "jumping on the bandwagon at
the last minute, and not having done the real alliance building work that came
before."
He said these advocates are consequently reluctant to include
the UAFA in their agenda.
"I don't think we've made the case for it,"
Magpanty said, "and I don't think that we've even shown demonstratively
the gay community's support for immigrants' rights overall."
Although many gays support comprehensive immigration reform
and have participated in some of the recent protests, Magpantay said the "gay
community" has not mobilized to support immigrants.
"It seems like the gay community is not engaged,"
he said. "We should be fighting for the decriminalization of people. We
did that with sodomy laws, why not now with undocumented workers?"
The apparent rift between gay and immigrant advocates was
highlighted last month in a commentary by black lesbian activist and writer Jasmyne Cannick for the
Advocate, a national gay magazine.
In it, Cannick said Congress should provide equal rights to
gay U.S. citizens before "extending rights to people who have entered this
country illegally."
"It's a slap in the face to lesbian, gay, bisexual and
transgender people," wrote Cannick, "to take up the debate on whether
to give people who are in this country illegally additional rights when we
haven't even given the people who are here legally all of their rights."
Several people asked to comment on Cannick's commentary
declined to speak on the record, saying her statements we
|
