Rodrigo de la Rosa was only half a decade old when he entered the United States from Mexico along with his father and three siblings. Raised in South Phoenix, he lived a standard life he naively referred to as ‘just a normal American life’. His realization of his undocumented status happened only in his teen years. As Rodrigo shared, ‘When you turn 16 and cannot land a regular job, that’s when you discern, ‘Ah, I’m not the same’.’
In his mid-twenties, de la Rosa took the marital vows with Ashley de Alba, a native Californian born to Mexican and Salvadoran parents. However, his marriage to a US national didn’t rectify his questionable immigrant standing. To seek a green card, he learned to risk leaving the US, potentially resulting in a multi-year or even permanent stay in Mexico.
Earlier this week, the Biden administration launched a comprehensive immigration program seeking to potentially ‘band-aid’ such troubling immigrant situations. This policy, which, based on the White House’s calculations, could impact half a million immigrants across the United States and 50,000 children, incredibly permits undocumented spouses of US citizens to regularize their status without exiting America. And this is not without its controversies.
To be eligible for the program, applicants must have landed their marital bond prior to the announcement of the program in June. They also must not have a criminal record (including felonies, domestic violence, and a majority of drug-related offenses) and must have continuously lived in America for not less than a decade. This seems undoubtedly designed to cater to a specific demographic.
The individuals whose applications pass the stringent and arguably unbalanced selection criteria will receive a ‘get out of deportation jail free card,’ otherwise known as ‘parole in place’. This clause enables them to secure employment documents, green cards, and subsequent citizenship potential. Even though it appears as a welcome salvation for some, it also reflects poorly on the number of real solutions the Biden administration is willing to provide to address the root issues of immigration.
De la Rosa’s better half, Ashley de Alba, voiced her excitement about the possible changes this might bring. ‘We would finally be able to aim for the milestones we desire,’ she said. While they might have their personal hopes pinned on this policy, it’s important to question what this wide-reaching decision means for the nation as a whole, and why the Biden administration is avoiding tackling the deep-rooted problems causing such issues.
If de la Rosa manages to successfully navigate this bureaucratic process, it would offer them a myriad of benefits. From procuring a stable job with insurance and retirement perks to enabling international travel without the overbearing concern of acceptance back to the United States. While these opportunities are, unfortunately, widely sought-after among immigrants, it does highlight the harsh problematic realities of existing immigration policies and procedures.
This program interestingly also has the potential to affect outcomes in swing states. Advocacy groups like FWD.us report that around 15,000 Arizona citizens could potentially receive this ‘parole in place’. While the affected can’t vote, they are intimately linked with US citizens in their close circle who gain indirect benefits from the policy behavior.
Compile this against the backdrop of the forthcoming Presidential election, the ripple effects are far-reaching and intricate. Erika Castro, an organizer of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, shared her belief that this program boosts Latino voters energy levels. Swing states such as Nevada, with a considerable immigrant settlement, might experience potent forces in motion at the voting booth. How democratic (or undemocratic) this is remains contentious.
The estimates from FWD.us suggest that approximately 60,000 immigrants eligible for parole in place reside in these balancing scales of political power, the swing states. From a policy perspective, it is essential to examine the underlying polarizing strategy of using such programs to swing votes during election periods.
The outcry against this program within the public sphere has been substantial. Republican critics have left no stone unturned in attacking the policy. Trump denounced it as ‘mass amnesty’ on his social media channel Truth Social, while Senator Josh Hawley labeled it as ‘illegal’ and ‘scandalous’ on Fox News. Engagement from the opposition is, perhaps, one of the few ‘correct’ strategies the Biden administration needs to consider.
The possibility of a Trump resurgence also sparks cautionary fires amongst few legal professionals and immigrant advocates concerning encouraging people to appeal under this program. But, the horror story of future rescindment does not readily deter applicants seeking this irregular problem-solving course.
This program stands to alter what some view as a long-standing and unfair norm. Ashley de Alba pointed out that despite her husband’s substantial contributions to the US tax coffers, her undocumented spouse has been denied many rights she enjoys. The argument: ‘Why am I more deserving? Merely because of my birthplace?’
While one can sympathize with her situation, some critics might argue that the debate obscures the bigger issue at hand. Any nation should have the right to safeguard its borders and establish rules individuals must adhere to for entering and residing in that country. The lack of enforcement of such basic principles is invariably leading to tough situations for migrants like de la Rosa.
However, such critics would argue that sidestepping these fundamentals using such programs like ‘parole in place’ makes a mockery of those who have patiently exercised legal avenues to gain citizenship or residency. It seems, unfortunately, instead of working out a comprehensive immigration reform, steps like this signal to the migrants that rules can be bent if the situation suits the leadership’s needs.
In conclusion, the Biden administration has created yet another controversial program that promises to solve a problem without addressing the root cause. As usual, the real victims here are immigrants like Rodrigo de la Rosa, who are fed false hopes and used as political pawns in a game they barely understand.
Biden’s Band-Aid Solution Fails to Address Major Immigration Issues appeared first on Real News Now.
About Author
