In The News
October 4: Join Bradford & Anthony in Washington
By Rachel Tiven on 09/12/2011 @ 05:21 AM
After a summer of sharing their story in major news outlets like CNN, MSNBC, Countdown with Keith Olbermann and in front page news stories across the country, Bradford Wells and Anthony Makk will be joining Immigration Equality in Washington. They will be meeting with key Congressional leaders ... and they’d like to meet you, too.
Please join them — and the Immigration Equality team — on Tuesday, October 4th, for our Third Annual Capital Reception & Fundraiser, hosted by Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams. We’ll have important updates on our work to help families like Bradford & Anthony ... celebrate the successes of the past year ... and build the support we need to continue our critical work on Capitol Hill.
Tuesday, October 4th
6-8:30 pm
Mitchell Gold + Bob Williams
1526 14th Street, NW
(between P & Q Streets, NW, in Logan Circle)
Washington, DC 20005
The event is free, however your support is welcome, and critical to our success. We hope that if you're moved by our work, you'll help us reach our goal of $15,000 for our on-going work on behalf of LGBT immigrant families. Donations can be made online at ImEqActionFund.org/DCevent
Please RSVP by September 30th to Maria at mbooth@imeqactionfund.org or on Facebook.
Thank you for being part of the Immigration Equality family. I look forward to seeing you in Washington on October 4th.
Join Bradford & Anthony for a Special Call This Friday
By Bradford Wells & Anthony Makk on 08/17/2011 @ 07:36 PM
We hope you will join us for a special conference call this Friday, August 19th at noon eastern time to learn about what’s next for us and other families in our situation.
The extraordinary support you have shown our family over the past few weeks has meant so much. From the thousands of messages you’ve sent to the White House on our behalf, to the notes of support you’ve left online, we have moved beyond words by your actions and well wishes.
With your help, we know we can win. Just this week, the Washington Post editorial board published a powerful editorial calling for help not just in our case, but for every lesbian and gay family facing separation because of discriminatory laws. Make no mistake: This is a turning point for our families, and it is imperative that we seize it.
Please join us this Friday at noon eastern time to learn more about how you can help. To join our call, simply dial (800) 868-1837 and use access code 393639#.
We look forward to talking with you — and thanking you — on Friday’s call.
Please join us.
P.S. Can't make the call? Please make a contribution. The legal intake hotline is running at four times — 4x! — its volume just six months ago, and your support allows Immigration Equality to continue providing free, expert immigration advice to the community. Thank you!
What did our Founders say about immigration?
By Rachel Tiven on 07/04/2011 @ 12:41 PM
“He has endeavoured to prevent the Population of these States; for that Purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their Migrations hither ...”
— The Declaration of Independence, July 4, 1776
King George’s refusal to pass comprehensive immigration reform helped spark the American Revolution. Our Founders knew that the nation’s future lay in robust immigration, and England’s failure to encourage and regulate it was one of the top ten grievances in the Declaration of Independence.
Two-hundred and thirty-five years later, we must again demand that our leaders take responsibility for naturalizing foreigners and encouraging migration to this great country. On this Fourth of July, here are three reasons why:
- Frances Herbert and Takako Ueda are going to be separated by immigration laws that don’t respect their marriage and their 11 years together. Sign our petition asking the President to keep them together.
- Jose Antonio Vargas can’t be a citizen, even though he grew up in the U.S., graduated from high school and college here, and won a Pulitzer Prize. As a gay man, he proudly came out of two closets in his incredible article “My Life as an Undocumented Immigrant.”
- New York, the Empire State, can’t fix this problem with marriage equality. Nor can Vermont, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Iowa, Connecticut or the District of Columbia. To free Frances and Takako, Jose, and every other LGBT immigrant family, we need to repeal the so-called “Defense of Marriage Act” and pass comprehensive immigration reform.
Watch your inbox for an action alert this week on the Senate’s new comprehensive immigration reform bill, which includes the Uniting American Families Act. Better yet, friend us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter.
For Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, have a happy Independence Day!
From CNN a Story on One Couple, Fighting to Stay Together
By Christopher Edwards on 06/28/2011 @ 03:37 PM
Today CNN told the heartbreaking tale of one bitnational couple in Vermont fighting to stay together. Watch the video below or at the CNN site (where you can recommend it to your friends).
Then and stand with us as we join Frances and Takako and tell President Obama: Stop Separating our Families!
Sign the petition now at http://imeqactionfund.org/francesandtakako
VICTORY! Marriage Equality in New York
By Staff on 06/24/2011 @ 08:29 PM
All of us at Immigration Equality, and the Immigration Equality Action Fund, join our families, supporters and allies in celebrating today’s historic vote in favor of full marriage equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender couples. New York joins five other states — plus the District of Columbia — in respecting the commitment and union of all families. We applaud lawmakers who, quite literally, worked overtime to make this legislative victory possible.
As more and more states recognize, and respect, our families, pressure continues to grow for the federal government to repeal the discriminatory and unconstitutional Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). A majority of the American people support marriage equality, and want to see LGBT families given the respect, and legal protections, they deserve.
Until DOMA’s demise – and until our families are recognized under U.S. immigration laws – we will continue to fight for our families.
Immigration benefits — including the ability of an American citizen to sponsor their spouse for residency here in the U.S. — are purely federal. Because DOMA prohibits conferring any of the more than 1,000 federal benefits even to couples who have a marriage recognized at the state level, the estimated 5,000 families in New York with one non-resident partner still face painful, and unconscionable, choices as they fight to remain together.
As our legal director, Victoria Neilson, noted earlier this year, “DOMA is still in force and will continue to bar federal government agencies — including the ones that control immigration – from recognizing valid marriages.” (See our full FAQ on marriage and immigration, online here.)
Even today, our legal team is working to assist married New York couples as they face painful separation. As the Daily News reported earlier this year, Long Island residents Edwin Blesch and his South African husband, Tim Smulian, could be torn apart as early as next month. Despite being legally married in South Africa – and despite the fact that their marriage has been recognized by New York for some time — Edwin has few legal options for keeping Tim in the United States.
As we celebrate today’s progress in New York, we also re-commit to fighting for DOMA’s repeal. Until the federal government follows in the footsteps of states like New York, and provides equal protection to our families, couples will continue to be separated.
Make no mistake, though. Hope is here, and change is on the horizon. A recent memo from Immigration & Customs Enforcement may offer an option to fight for an end to the removal of LGBT immigrant spouses. And our policy and legal teams are continuing to work with the Administration to bring about a moratorium on the separation of our families.
Until every family has an option to remain together, however, we will not rest.
(If you are married, or thinking of marrying, and have questions about how doing so may impact your immigration situation, or contact Immigration Equality’s legal team via our website.)
Coming Out as Immigrant Families
By Christopher Edwards on 06/23/2011 @ 02:47 PM
Last week I joined 2,500 activists, bloggers, journalists and activist/blogger/journalists in Minneapolis for the 2011 Netroots Conference. Amongst strategy sessions and big name keynotes were the personal stories of activists and none were quite as moving as the lesbian and gay DREAM Act students who framed their struggle within the narrative of the LGBT movement. Invoking the words of Harvey Milk and the power of "coming out."
It began on Tuesday with the LGBT Pre-Conference where the DREAM Act students talked about among other things how it was more difficult to come out as a undocumented than to come out as gay:
This conversation led at least one audience member, gay DC blogger Carlos QC, to publicly come out as undocumented.
During that same session i took the opportunity to tie the story of LGBT immigrants into the narrative of fear and bigotry against all immigrants, explaining how LGBT immigrants were not allowed into the country at all before 1980 and how after that HIV-positive immigrants were legally barred from entering the country. These discriminatory practices were carried out by means of search and intimidation. Officials reviewed luggage for any signs of sexuality or HIV meds. Not unlike some binational couples still face while having their computers searched.
I also came out at the conference as being one half of a binational couple, talking a little bit about my 10-year relationship. By my doing so, others at the conference felt they could do the same to me and others.
There is power in identifying ourselves. Whether we come out as LGBT, undocumented, or part of a binational family. We are saying, that we will not be intimidated to live in fear and hide in the shadows. And we create a space for others to reveal their stories as well.
This week we see how that works when Pulitzer-winning journalist Jose Vargas came out in the pages of New York Times as gay and undocumented. Jose, who won his Pulitzer for his work on the Virginia Tech shootings at the Washington Post, writes of his experience as undocumented:
I decided then that I could never give anyone reason to doubt I was an American. I convinced myself that if I worked enough, if I achieved enough, I would be rewarded with citizenship. I felt I could earn it.
I’ve tried. Over the past 14 years, I’ve graduated from high school and college and built a career as a journalist, interviewing some of the most famous people in the country. On the surface, I’ve created a good life. I’ve lived the American dream.
But I am still an undocumented immigrant. And that means living a different kind of reality. It means going about my day in fear of being found out. It means rarely trusting people, even those closest to me, with who I really am. It means keeping my family photos in a shoebox rather than displaying them on shelves in my home, so friends don’t ask about them. It means reluctantly, even painfully, doing things I know are wrong and unlawful. And it has meant relying on a sort of 21st-centry underground railroad of supporters, people who took an interest in my future and took risks for me.
We hear often about "playing by the rules" as if our lives were a game that if we as binational families could just give try harder, prove to be just a little bit more worthy we will finally be able to live without the fear that our partners will be deported. This is too often the story of immigration in the U.S.
After Japanese were interned during World War II the concept of the "model minority" was born. The idea that if Japanese were better educated, more enterprising, more self-sufficient they would never be treated that way again. Japanese-Americans blamed themselves for the bigotry and hate they experienced.
And they aren't' alone. In my own family, my grandmother was the child of a mother from Ireland and a father from Austria. She hated being an immigrant more than anything. As a family with a German-sounding last name, Kurzweil, they were forced to move to Canada so my grandfather could find work in the face of anti-German backlash after World War I. My grandmother wanted nothing more than to just blend in. To her, her greatest success story was finally being that Republican, suburban housewife she so very much craved. No one could tell she was an immigrant's child then!
We have forgotten our immigration stories in this country because there is so much shame associated with growing up as immigrants in the U.S. So many stories of oppression and bigotry — not to mention working an immigration system seemingly designed to confuse — that are suppressed within our family narratives, we have trouble empathizing with the stories of immigrants we see today. In our national dialogue on immigration we have lost the connection between previous generations of immigrants and the current generation of immigrants. And with that loss, we've lost an understanding not just of the difficulty in integrating but the difficulty in immigrating period. Our families all came here in many, many different ways to seek the American Dream. Undocumented families and our LGBT binational families are no different.
As we head into LGBT Pride weekend, we see the wisdom and the courage our LGBT history in standing up against fear and oppression. The times now for immigrants — with papers or without, LGBT or not — and their families to come out and stand up to tell our stories. It's the only way to help others understand how broken the system is and to identify real people with the statistics. It has been undeniably at the root of the success of our LGBT movement and it must happen to move the U.S. to a more just and humane immigration system for our LGBT families and for ALL families.
Remember to share your story. We collect those stories and use them directly in our conversations lawmakers and those setting policy for immigrants.
'Out in America,' and In the Immigration Equality Offices
By Steve Ralls on 06/08/2011 @ 08:38 PM
In conjunction with tonight's premiere of 'Out in America' on PBS, New York's Channel 13 visits with Immigration Equality and interviews our executive director, Rachel Tiven.
The full documentary, chronicling the LGBT movement in American, premieres on PBS stations across the country this evening at 8pm ET.
Watch the full episode. See more Previews.
A Safe Haven Success — Thank you!
By Win Chesson on 06/07/2011 @ 05:57 PM
We did it!
Thanks the tremendous efforts and incredible generosity of our supporters, especially our Host Committee, this year’s Safe Haven Awards was our best yet! We raised half a million dollars and had record attendance, including guests from our pro bono community, business coalition partners, and loyal supporters like you. Thank you.
With not even one empty seat in the gorgeous TimesCenter theatre we were at capacity and able to meet (and exceed!) our first ever $50,000 challenge match from binational couple Martin Chavez and Adam Norbury. Together we raised over $150,000 Tuesday night — more than triple our record for money raised the night of any IE event. This is simply incredible and a testament to each of you.
On behalf of the entire Immigration Equality team, thanks again for to our many donors and supporters who dedicated time, treasure, and talent over the past several months to make the Safe Haven Awards a success.
We are also extremely grateful for the fantastic photography of Charles Ludeke.
Please check out his wonderful photos from the event, below:
In the Matter of Dorman: What Does it Mean?
By Victoria Neilson on 05/06/2011 @ 08:06 PM
Yesterday the Attorney General (pictured) took an unusual step in vacating (setting aside) the removal (deportation) order against a gay man who is in a long-term partnership and civil union with an American citizen. The case has received wide press coverage because this is the first time the administration has set aside a removal order for a gay couple and because it is only the second public statement about DOMA by the attorney general since he announced in February that the Department of Justice will no longer defend DOMA challenges in court.
Does this case mean that foreign nationals in civil unions or marriages can’t be deported?
Unfortunately, at least in the short term, no. The Attorney General (AG) is the head of the Department of Justice (DOJ) and he has the authority to set aside decisions by the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) as he did in this case. The BIA hears appeals from immigration court. In this case, the AG didn’t actually decide anything regarding DOMA, civil unions, and removal proceedings. Instead, he set aside the BIA’s prior decision and asked the BIA to answer questions about whether civil unions are the equivalent or marriage under NJ law; whether without DOMA, a NJ civil union would be the equivalent of a marriage under immigration law; when the couple entered their civil union; and whether they met the legal hardship standard for cancellation of removal.
What is cancellation of removal?
Cancellation of removal is a form of relief that an immigration judge can give to a foreign national who is in removal proceedings. The foreign national can win lawful permanent residence if he can show that he has been in the U.S. for more than ten years, has been a person of good moral character, and his removal from the U.S. would result in extreme, and exceptionally unusual hardship to his U.S. citizen or green card holding spouse, parent or child. Unless a foreign national has a qualifying American relative, he cannot apply for cancellation.
What happened in this case?
In this case the immigration judge found that Mr. Dorman did not have a qualifying relative and the BIA upheld that decision. The AG has now set aside the BIA decision and sent the case back to the BIA.
What will happen in this case?
It’s not clear. The BIA could issue a decision answering the AG’s questions at some point in the next few months, or it could remand the case to the immigration judge for further fact-finding. In the short-term, it’s great news for this couple because it means while the case is being fought further, Mr. Dorman can remain in the U.S. with his partner.
What does this decision mean for other cases?
It remains to be seen what effect this decision will have on other cases pending for foreign nationals in legally recognized relationships with Americans. It is certainly a positive sign that the AG is asking these questions and continuing to think about how DOMA applies or doesn’t apply in the immigration context.
Why did the AG make this decision?
Again, the answer is not clear, but it may have been as a result of pressure that U.S. Senators, led by John Kerry and Patrick Leahy, and Representatives, led by Zoe Lofgren, have put on the Administration to stop deporting the partners of Americans while the Courts and Congress grapple with the constitutionality of DOMA.
To read the full (two paragraph) decision, click here.
277 Tickets for our Safe Haven Awards. Do you have yours yet?
By Staff on 05/06/2011 @ 05:00 PM
Thanks to a slew of recent successes, Safe Haven tickets are selling faster than ever. The Uniting American Families Act is back in Congress with more Day One support than ever before. A separate bill, the LGBT-inclusive Reuniting Families Act, was reintroduced earlier today. We won asylum for 22 people this spring with the help of our amazing pro bono teams, continuing our 100% win-rate. And our DOMA-challenge litigation for binational families is pending.
While we have not won yet, we have much to be proud of. We hope you will join us, and the entire Immigration Equality family, as we celebrate this progress at the Safe Haven Awards on Tuesday May 31st at TheTimesCenter in Manhattan.
As co-chairs of this year's gala, we've joined with Immigration Equality's staff, legal fellows, and board chair to offer a $15,000 match called the Safe Haven Challenge. We pooled our donations together to encourage new people to join us for our biggest celebration of the year, as well as to deepen the support of our loyal and longtime patrons.
Here's how the Safe Haven Challenge works. Every new Host Committee sponsor counts towards the match. Former Host Committee members that renew their sponsorship at an increased level also qualify for $15,000 challenge. Since we announced the Safe Haven Challenge we've raised nearly $11,000 in new $589 sponsors.
Will you buy your tickets today to help us reach our goal? Do it today before they sell out!
On the cases we've worked on, including two asylum wins last week for gay men from Jamaica, as well as safe haven for someone in the midst of deportation proceedings to a country where he had been brutalized for his sexual orientation, Immigration Equality was behind us every step of the way.
If you've already reserved your tickets, thank you. We are so grateful to the generous sponsors listed below who have helped ensure the success of the 2011 Safe Haven Awards by joining this year's Host Committee. We couldn't do this without you.
Thanks again. We hope to see you for the big event on May 31st.
Joe & Heidi Co-chairs, Safe Haven Awards
P.S. You are also invited to join us this coming Monday at Immigration Equality's Wall Street office for our annual Safe Haven Awards phone bank from 6-9 PM. It's a fun, productive way to meet staff and supporters, check out the home base, and contribute to the success of the event. Please RSVP to Win at wchesson@imeqactionfund.org by Monday so we can plan accordingly.
Is Your Laptop Being Searched?
By Victoria Neilson on 04/25/2011 @ 02:53 PM
On Saturday, the New York Times featured an editorial criticizing the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for allowing airport inspectors to seize laptops, hold them, sometimes for weeks, and search their contents.
Unfortunately, this is a practice we've heard about from some binational couples. It is very disturbing to think that Courts have upheld these warrantless searches.
If you're in a binational couple, you should be cautious about traveling with a laptop or even a blackberry or smart phone; an inspector could confiscate it and use what he or she finds to determine that you have immigrant intent.
UAFA and LGBT Immigration on MSNBC
Posted on 04/18/2011 @ 04:08 PM
Immigration Equality advocate, author, and one-half of a binational couple Judy Rickard took to MSNBC with her partner Karin to discuss the fight for immigration rights for our families and their immigration battles and how the Uniting American Families Act would help.
Watch now:
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Thank you to Judy and Karin for their continued outreach for our families.
You can purchase Judy's book on binational families and donate to fund the fight here.
More on Marriage
By Victoria Neilson on 04/12/2011 @ 02:00 AM
Our legal team is fielding 20 times as many calls and emails as usual, and we are updating and expanding these FAQ's very frequently. Our counsel is always free to the community thanks to the thousands of people who donate to the organization. Please keep in mind that the surge in demand means we cannot answer every email and phone call immediately.
From reading the comments on the blog, it appears that many readers have questions about who should marry and who should not. I will try to answer some of the most common questions we’ve been seeing.
So, is USCIS currently holding marriage-based applications for lesbian and gay couples in abeyance?
Unfortunately, no. After stating that they were doing so, USCIS quickly changed course and stated clearly that they are, again, denying I-130s based on DOMA. Immigration Equality is continuing to push the Administration to do the right thing and stop separating families based on an unconstitutional law.
You’ve said that the scales have tipped in the favor of marriage. Who should marry?
At this point, there are still no tangible immigration rights that come from marriage to your lesbian or gay partner. However, as the tide appears to be turning on marriage and couples’ recognition, we do feel like there are some couples who should marry including the following:
- If your partner entered the U.S. lawfully (with a visa) and overstayed -- If your partner has overstayed her visa, we are recommending getting married. There is no issue of “immigrant intent” in this situation, and being married could, theoretically, provide a defense if your partner is placed in removal proceedings. Please be aware, however, if you live in a state that does not perform marriages for lesbian or gay couples, and you intend to travel elsewhere to marry, there is a risk for a person without lawful status to travel on public transportation as Immigration and Customs Enforcement frequently boards Amtrak and Greyhound and asks for documents.
- If your partner is applying for asylum – Being married could help prove that your partner is lesbian or gay and could potentially provide another defense if the case goes to removal proceedings.
- If your partner is on a long-term work visa such as an H1B – Some common work visas, such as H1Bs and L visas allow the visa holder to have “dual intent,” that is to be in the U.S. temporarily while pursuing permanent status in the U.S. If your partner is in this situation, and if she feels secure in her employer’s ability and desire to sponsor her for permanent residence, it may make sense for you to marry. If your partner is worried that she may lose her job or have to return to using a tourist visa or student visa to enter the U.S., then there may be a danger of showing “immigrant intent” by marrying.
Are there categories of couples who should not marry?
As many of you are all too well aware, in order to obtain a tourist visa, student visa, TN visa, or to enter under the Visa Waiver Program, a foreign national must prove to Immigration that he does not intend to remain in the U.S. permanently. Having a U.S. citizen spouse may be seen by Immigration as a sign of “immigrant intent” and a reason to deny a visa or entry into the U.S.
You should probably not marry if:
- You are living in exile and hoping to get a tourist of student visa to the U.S.
- You are maintaining a long-distance relationship by juggling tourist and student visas and must continue to show a lack of immigrant intent to Immigration.
- You are in the U.S. on a student visa and you hope to extend the visa or travel and re-enter the U.S. with the visa.
What if my partner entered the U.S. without a visa?
If your partner entered the U.S. without inspection (EWI) by crossing the border, then even in a world without DOMA, she could still not adjust her status from within the U.S. unless she had a visa petition approved prior to April 30, 2001. There is probably no reason not to marry if your partner entered EWI, but if the law changes regarding marriage recognition, she would need to leave the U.S. to apply for lawful permanent residence and would then get hit by a bar (probably of ten years) on returning. There are waivers to this bar available for immediate relatives of citizens but they can take a long time to process. The harsh consequences of illegal entry and overstays is one reason that it’s so important that Congress pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform.
Is there anything special my partner and I should be aware of if we’re traveling to another state to marry?
For specific rules, if any, about state-by-state marriage laws, please contact GLAD or Lambda Legal.
Also, if your partner is in the U.S. without legal status and is planning on traveling across state lines, please be aware that there are very real and serious risks involved in traveling on public transportation. Agents from Immigration and Customs Enforcement regularly board Amtrak trains and Greyhound buses demanding immigration papers from riders. ICE claims that it is “voluntary” to comply with these demands, but we have heard from numerous undocumented immigrants who have ended up in removal proceedings because of these encounters with ICE agents.
If I marry my partner, and the U.S. government doesn’t recognize that marriage, do I need to answer “married” on immigration forms or reveal my relationship to Immigration officials?
Immigration Equality has asked USCIS for guidance on how to answer a “married” or “single” question for lesbian or gay couples who are validly married under state or foreign law, but USCIS has never given us an answer. While we do not think that any visa applicant should lie if asked a direct question, we also do not see how U.S. Immigration could require lesbian and gay couples to disclose that they have entered into a marriage which USCIS has stated publicly it will not recognize.
If and when DOMA ends, will a civil union be sufficient for me to sponsor my partner?
No. The Immigration and Nationality Act recognizes spouses as immediate relatives, but there is no provision for recognition of civil unions or domestic partnerships. However, if we gain immigration equality through the passage of the Uniting American Families Act, a civil union or domestic partnership could serve as proof of the relationship.
I still have questions ...
If you have further questions about your situation, please contact Immigration Equality’s legal department.
" ... When You Have Someone Who Loves You."
By Steve Ralls on 04/04/2011 @ 11:41 AM
Sunday's New York Daily News includes a moving, and powerful, profile of Edwin Blesch and his husband, Tim Smulian.
Edwin and Tim - who are being represented by Immigration Equality's legal team - are threatened with imminent separation because of discriminatory immigration laws that threaten to tear them apart. The couple, who are married in South Africa and whose marriage is recognized in Edwin's home state of New York, are currently together on Long Island. Tim's visa expires in July, however ... just weeks after Edwin is scheduled to have surgery.
"Smulian is [Edwin's] primary caregiver," reporter Erica Pearson notes, "but has no way to stay here permanently."
"It's not a good idea for me to be away," Blesch, a retired English professor, told the Daily News. "And it's not a good idea for me to be away from Tim.
"That's the conundrum."
It is also why Immigration Equality attorneys have worked with Edwin to file a spousal petition on behalf of Tim. If the two are separated by immigration, Edwin will lose his caretaker just when he needs him the most.
Rachel Tiven, our executive director, told Pearson that the couple present an especially compelling case for the law to change. "They never overstayed, not by one day, and have always been careful to follow the letter of the law," she said.
In fact, Tim and Edwin have routinely traveled for the six months each year that Tim is unable to be in the United States. Because of Edwin's health, however, travel has become more difficult.
"We need a break from the travel," Smulian said. "It's killing us."
The couple, who made the journey to Washington for visits, arranged by Immigration Equality, with their Senators, told the Daily News they hope the laws that tear couples like them apart will be overturned "in our lifetime."
"This is a basic right - to fall in love with and live with the person you want to. The pursuit of happiness, I guess you'd call it," Blesch said. "We would like to be at home, at our fire, reading...Who wants to grow old alone when you have someone who loves you?"
Read the full Daily News profile online here.
Photo by Roca/The Daily News.
Breaching the Wall, and Staying the Course
By Rachel Tiven on 03/30/2011 @ 02:41 PM
The last week has been a rollercoaster ride.
First, there were reports that some offices of USCIS – the agency that issues green cards – were holding applications of married lesbian and gay couples in abeyance. On Friday, USCIS headquarters denied that was the case. Then on Monday, a spokesperson from USCIS called the press to say that the agency had directed its local offices to hold marriage-related cases in abeyance. Today, the New York Times reports that USCIS has changed course from the position it took on Monday and that “the agency would probably resume action on same-sex marriage cases in coming days and would continue to deny immigration status to foreigners based on those marriages.” And Metro Weekly has just reported “The Hold is Over.”
If the government has changed course, Immigration Equality has not. We strongly reiterate our call for the Administration to stop separating our families. Since the historic announcement that the Department of Justice would no longer defend the so-called Defense of Marriage Act in court, we have been advocating with the Administration to stop tearing our families apart based on an unconstitutional law. We are also putting together our own federal lawsuit to challenge DOMA on behalf of lesbian and gay Americans with foreign national spouses. Our position remains the same.
In the meanwhile, the entire country is talking about our families and our issues. We are breaching the wall that keeps LGBT Americans from taking on the rights and responsibilities of marriage – including the opportunity to keep our families from being torn apart.
We have never been so close to victory, and our expert advice and analysis has never been more needed. Our legal team is fielding 20 times as many calls and emails as usual, from families who want to know: Are we finally safe? We wish that the answer were yes, because we know that every day of separation or uncertainty is too long to wait to move forward with your lives.
Because USCIS is now saying that they will not put applications on hold, most couples should not file a spousal green card application (known as Form I-130). Until the Administration agrees that no American should be separated from their family based on an unconstitutional law, those will likely be denied.
However, most couples who are considering marrying should do so. Public opinion is turning in our favor, and when we cross the finish line, your marriage – which is a powerful statement about the longevity and commitment of your lives together – will be key to ensuring that you and your husband or wife can remain together.
We are updating and expanding the legal information on our website by the hour. Please consult our legal team's latest FAQs - here - where your family’s questions may be answered. Every case is unique, and couples with complex questions can always contact our legal team via our website. Our counsel, as always, is free to the community. Please keep in mind, however, that the incredible demand for our help means that we cannot answer every question immediately, and please be patient.
Make no mistake: We will soon end DOMA and pass the Uniting American Families Act. Public opinion has tilted in our favor and we are closer than ever to making real policy changes that will keep our families together. Immigration Equality’s commitment to you remains the same. Together, we’ve put our families on the front page. Now, we can work together to win, once and for all.
More FAQs about abeyance
By Victoria Neilson on 03/29/2011 @ 05:56 PM
Our legal team is fielding 20 times as many calls and emails as usual, and we are updating and expanding these FAQ's very frequently. Our counsel is always free to the community thanks to the thousands of people who donate to the organization. Please keep in mind that the surge in demand means we cannot answer every email and phone call immediately.
Does the DHS announcement mean that all green card applications will be held in abeyance until there is a final decision in DOMA?
We don’t know. DHS has said that currently applications are being held in abeyance. They have the authority to do this as a matter of discretion, but, as a matter of discretion, they could begin to deny them again. Thus anyone who files a marriage-based case is at risk that it will be denied at some future point and not held in abeyance indefinitely. The consequences of a potentially denied application are different depending on your immigration status.
So, should I file for my spouse now or not?
You should speak to a qualified attorney who is well versed in LGBT immigration issues before doing anything. Some foreign nationals, such as those who are in the U.S. on long-term work visas (H1bs and Ls) are allowed to have “dual intent,” that is to pursue a permanent immigration status while simultaneously being in the U.S. on a temporary visa. There is relatively little risk for couples in this situation to file. Although if the foreign spouse loses his job and needs to change his status to tourist or student at some future date, filing an I-130 could lead to a denial of the tourist or student visa because of immigrant intent.
If a foreign spouse is in removal proceedings, he or she has nothing to lose at this point by filing an I-130.
The couples who really need to weigh the pros and cons of filing in consultation with a qualified immigration attorney are those who are in the U.S. lawfully with a visa that does not allow for “immigrant intent” that is student visas or tourist visas, and those who are in the U.S. without legal status.
If a foreign national is in the U.S. as a student, marries an American, and files for a green card, that will show immigrant intent. Filing the I-130 would not lead to the student visa being cancelled, but it could lead to a denial of entry into the U.S. if the foreign spouse travels, or it could lead to a denial of an application to extend or change the visa.
For individuals who entered the U.S. legally but overstayed their visas, the question of what to do is most difficult. As of today applications are being held in abeyance, so being in the U.S. with an application pending may be somewhat safer than not. However, there is no guarantee that USCIS will continue to hold applications in abeyance, and filing an I-130 will move the undocumented spouse from off the radar to onto the radar and being in the radar could result in him or her being placed in removal proceedings in the future.
My partner/spouse entered under the Visa Waiver Program. Is there anything special about this program that prevents me from filing an I-130 on her behalf?
VWP entrants probably should not file unless and until there is greater clarification from USCIS. The Visa Waiver Program (VWP) allows citizens of certain countries, mostly Western Europe and other close allies of the U.S. to enter the country as tourists or short-term business travelers without first applying for a tourist visa (B1/B2) visa. The “waiver” portion of the entry means that the individual waives certain rights including, generally, the right to apply for a green card from within the U.S. (adjust status.) One exception to this general waiver is for spouses of U.S. citizens who may apply to adjust status even though they entered under the VWP. Spouses of LPRs cannot apply to adjust status from within the U.S.
It would be very risky for a USC to file an I-130 on behalf of her foreign spouse who entered under the VWP at this point. Although DHS has said that it is currently holding marriage cases in abeyance, we don’t know how long this policy will last. One of the rights that a VWP entrant waives when she enters under the VWP is the right to see an immigration judge before being removed from the U.S. (unless she has a claim for asylum.) So a foreign spouse who entered under the VWP faces a risk of immediate removal by DHS if it decides to resume I-130 denials.
If I do file a green card application for my spouse today, will she get work authorization?
We don’t know. Yesterday’s FAQ explained how a marriage-based green card application is a two step process, filing and I-130 and an I-485. For foreign nationals married to a U.S. citizen the two parts can be filed simultaneously. Moreover, once a foreign national files an I-485, she may also apply for an employment authorization document (I-765).
It is not clear from the DHS statement yesterday whether they are holding I-130s and I-485s or whether they are only holding part of the application. (Though, frankly, it would be illogical to deny the I-485 if there was no decision made on the I-130). So, we honestly don’t know what will happen with applications for work authorization.
It costs $420 to file an I-130 and $1070 to file an I-485, so, along with all the other legal considerations involved in choosing to file (or not), it is expensive, and DHS may decide to deny applications rather than hold them. There is no refund for a denial. An I-765, work authorization application, is free when submitted in conjunction with an I-485.
I am a lawful permanent resident (LPR) not a U.S. citizen (USC), can I file for my spouse?
It probably would not be helpful to do so at this point. When the petitioning spouse is an LPR and not a USC, the marriage-based application falls under the family preference system (category F2A). This means that the LPR spouse can file the I-130, but the spouse cannot file the I-485 until the I-130 is approved and the “priority date” is current. The waiting period between an approved I-130 and when the foreign spouse can file an I-485 is at least four years.
Since the clock doesn’t start to tick until the I-130 is approved, and since the best case scenario is that DHS holds the I-130 in abeyance, there would not be any immediate tangible gain by filing an I-130. Complicating matters further, the spouse of an LPR, unlike the spouse of a USC, must be in lawful status in order to adjust status from within the United States.
However, if an LPR becomes a citizen (usually LPRs can file to naturalize within 5 years of gaining LPR status), the I-130 then falls within the immediate relative category rather than the family preference system, and the foreign spouse can then submit an I-485.
Can I now apply for a fiancé/ee visa for my partner or spouse?
Unfortunately, a policy of abeyance will not help you if your partner or spouse is outside the U.S. It is extremely unlikely that the U.S. government would actually grant an application based on a lesbian or gay spousal relationship until there is a final resolution of DOMA. Holding applications in abeyance means that until there is resolution of DOMA applications won’t be denied -- but they won’t be granted either. So if you’re outside the country and the application won’t be granted, filing a fiancé/ee visa (K visa) application will not allow you to enter the U.S.
More News from DHS for Married Couples
By Victoria Neilson on 03/28/2011 @ 06:30 PM
As the situation for our families continues to change rapidly, please see the additional FAQ: More on Marriage.
Our legal team is fielding 20 times as many calls and emails as usual, and we are updating and expanding these FAQ's very frequently. Our counsel is always free to the community thanks to the thousands of people who donate to the organization. Please keep in mind that the surge in demand means we cannot answer every email and phone call immediately.
What does this mean going forward?
It is still hard to know exactly what this means until USCIS issues its final guidance. Nonetheless there are some frequently asked questions which we can answer now.
What does “hold in abeyance” mean?
The legal term “hold in abeyance” means that USCIS will hold spousal green card applications that is, the applications will not be granted, but they won’t be denied either for a period of time. USCIS has done this before for widows of US citizens while litigation was pending and for HIV-positive green card applicants before regulations lifting the HIV ban were finalized. At this point, we are not certain whether the abeyance policy will last until there is a final outcome in the DOMA litigation, or whether the abeyance will be more short-term.
For additional information about abeyance and specific answers related to various situations, see our full FAQ.
Who would not benefit from an abeyance policy?
If USCIS holds green card applications in abeyance, couples living in exile, or foreign spouses who are stuck abroad would not benefit immediately. If the green card application is neither approved nor denied, spouses who would need the application approved to immigrate to the U.S. would not be able to do so. Moreover, filing an immigrant visa petition would show evidence of an intent to immigrate to the U.S. permanently and would likely make it more difficult to obtain a tourist visa or student visa to the U.S.
Also, since abeyance would only apply to spouses who could adjust status but for DOMA, if a foreign spouse entered the U.S. without inspection (EWI), that is by crossing the border without a visa, then he or she would not be eligible to apply for a green card from within the U.S. (adjust status) and could face a 3 year/10 year bar if he or she leaves the country. This is the same law that applies to opposite sex married couples.
Should we be marrying now?
One of the most significant advantages to applying for a green card based on a marriage to a U.S. citizen is that so long as the foreign spouse entered with a visa, even if he or she overstayed, his or her unlawful presence here is “forgiven” and the spouse can still proceed with a green card application from within the U.S.
Should we be filing I-130s now?
Please consult an attorney first, but as we explained in our prior FAQ, the scales in favor of marrying have definitely tipped in most cases.
Don’t do anything without speaking to a qualified immigration attorney. The answer to this question will depend on your individual situation and what the DHS final guidance says.
Would a civil union or domestic partnership be the equivalent of marriage for immigration purposes?
No, unfortunately, one of the reasons that LGBT rights organizations have been fighting so hard for full marriage rights is that there are many benefits that married couples receive that other couples do not; the Immigration and Nationality Act recognizes “spouses” as immediate relatives but not “domestic partners” or “partners in civil unions.”
Could you explain, briefly, how marriage-based petitions work?
For many LGBT people who have been shut out of the marriage-based immigration system, this whole concept is completely new. Briefly, a U.S. citizen (USC) or lawful permanent resident (LPR) may file an immigrant visa petition (I-130) on behalf of his or her spouse. Spouses of USCS may also, simultaneously or at a later date, file an application for lawful permanent residence (I-485) and an application for an employment authorization document (I-765). For opposite sex couples, USCIS schedules a “green card” interview within a few months of the filing of the I-485 to determine if the marriage is bona fide, that is to make sure that the couple married out of an intent to share their lives and not just to receive immigration benefits.
Couples who are married for fewer than two years receive a “conditional green card” if all goes well after the interview. The conditional green card is valid for two years, after which time the couples must apply to remove the condition, that is to prove that the marriage is still valid.
I still have questions ...
LPRs may also sponsor their foreign spouses, but the process is more complicated. These applications fall under the “family preference system” which means that the I-130 must be approved first and the foreign spouse must wait, generally for several years, before filing the I-485. If the LPR’s spouse is in the U.S. without lawful status, he or she may not apply for the green card from within the U.S. (at least not until the LPR spouse naturalizes.)
If you have further questions about your situation, please contact Immigration Equality’s legal department.
March Madness at Immigration Equality
By Stephanie Harig on 03/24/2011 @ 03:40 PM
You may not care if Tennessee and UConn finally meet up in the Final Four (and we’re talking women’s basketball here — I am officially boycotting the men’s tournament, but that’s a different story), but you have to admit that the spirit of March Madness is everywhere. And even though March is almost over, the fact that the championship game is in early April means we’ve all got (at least!) a few more weeks of this madness.
Immigration Equality has not been immune from the infectious madness of March (and early April). As you probably know, we’re working on a DOMA challenge in the courts and calling on the Obama Administration to stop deporting married, binational LGBT couples. But we are also in the final stages before reintroduction of the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) in both the House and Senate. Getting relief for binational families is a priority, and Immigration Equality is working on all fronts to make that happen.
Now, in an ideal world, more people would care about the women’s NCAA tournament AND policymakers would just do the right thing: pass UAFA and extend to LGBT citizens and residents of the U.S. the right to sponsor their partners for immigration. But the political world is much more complicated – even more complicated than an NCAA bracket! Policymakers need to be convinced to do the right thing. And that means they need to hear from you.
Luckily, constituents such as yourself have more say in the democratic process than just trying to predict how far Green Bay will actually go in the tournament or whether UAFA will be passed. Our elected officials – Representatives, Senators, and the President – are supposed to be responsive to us and our needs. But they can’t do that effectively if they don’t know what your needs are.
So if you want your Senators and Representatives to support UAFA, tell them! Immigration Equality has made contacting your Members of Congress really easy! Just click here to tell Congress to support LGBT families! (See? Much easier than predicting if Baylor has enough talent around Brittney Griner to vie for the title!)
One last thing though: letters to Members of Congress are much more effective if you personalize them. So take a moment and add a personal touch to the language that Immigration Equality has provided. And once you’ve sent your own letter, tell a friend to do the same!
As March winds down, and both the NCAA tournament and the drive toward UAFA reintroduction heat up, Members of Congress need to hear from you. Neither Maya Moore nor Immigration Equality can do it on our own – we need your support and your advocacy to make sure all of UAFA’s co-sponsors return and then some!
So what are you waiting for? Click here to send a letter of support for UAFA to your Member of Congress.
We can’t win this without you!
Stephanie Harig is one of our public policy interns. She's a 2009 graduate of Miami University in Oxford, Ohio and is pursuing a masters in public policy and women's studies at George Washington University. She's originally from Ohio and likes sports metaphors.
Additional Concerns for LGBT Binational Couples in Japan
By Christopher Edwards on 03/18/2011 @ 04:35 PM
News and images of the destruction and uncertainty left by March 11 earthquake and tsunami near Sendai, Japan continues to pour in. Fridae reports on the situation for Japanese LGBT and PLHIVA (people living with HIV/AIDS). Writing on the "specific challenges for the LGBT community", Fridae notes specifically the challenge faced by binational couples in Japan:
During crisis times such as this, LGBT people may face additional difficulties. Azusa, who’s the co-founder and editor of GayJapanNews, says LGBT people especially those living at evacuation centres may have to keep their relationships under wraps and not be able to draw on the support of his/her same-sex partner despite the trauma they are going through. Additionally, a LGBT Japanese national who is in a relationship with a foreign partner who is evacuated may have no recourse to be reunited if their relationship is not recognised by immigration authorities overseas.
The entire piece, like much of the news from Japan, is a mix of heartbreaking and hopeful. Several of us have close ties to Japan, including family and family of loved ones. Regardless of specifics, all of Immigration Equality have our thoughts and prayers with the Japanese right now.
400 (And Counting) Faith Leaders for UAFA
By Steve Ralls on 03/18/2011 @ 11:51 AM
In an overwhelming show of support for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Americans with partners from abroad, a coalition of more than 400 faith leaders have called on Congress to pass the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA). The letter, first reported by Sarah Posner at Religion Dispatches, comes as Congressional leaders prepare to re-introduce UAFA, which would allow LGBT Americans to sponsor their partners for residency in the United States. Under current immigration law, tens of thousands of families face separation and exile because of discriminatory immigration laws.
The letter, released as part of the Faith Coalition for UAFA assembled by Immigration Equality, includes signatories from virtually every denomination, including Catholic, Episcopalian, Jewish, Methodist and Unitarian clergy and leaders, as well others. The statement is endorsed by faith leaders in red states and blue, and includes individuals from congregations in nearly every region of the country.
"Our diverse faith traditions," the coalition writes, "teach us to welcome and care for our neighbors with love and compassion. Of the many great injustices in this broken immigration system, family separation is one of the most egregiou s .... Immigration policies should make expeditious family reunification a top priority and should include all families as part of that foundation. For us, this is a clear matter of simple justice."
"We endorse the Uniting American Families Act," they conclude, "which upholds the fundamental value of keeping families together."
The coalition's letter follows endorsement of UAFA from groups such as the American Jewish Committee, Call to Action, Methodist Federation for Social Action, the North American Old Catholic Church and the United Methodist Church General Board of Church and Society, among others.